2010 Census....Penalties for not participating?

[darius]

After reading up on exactly what questions there were on the census, including name/age/race/etc., I came across this gem from "Census.gov" (specifically, http://2010.census.gov/partners/pdf/ConstituentFAQ.pdf)

32. Is information shared with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the Internal Revenue Service, courts, or the police?

No, individual census records are not shared with anyone, including government agencies or private organizations. It is against the law for the Census Bureau to give personally identifiable information about an individual to any other individual or agency until 72 years after it is collected for the decennial census. After 72 years, the individual census records are sent to the National Archives where they are made public primarily for genealogical research.

My B.S. alarm went off pretty hard. Thoughts?

Supposedly the data becomes raw statistics and is not associated with any one named respondent.

[darius]

And the argument against that is that it would not be constitutional.

People move around a lot and houses are built and some fall down or burn out.  Some structures become businesses rather than houses.  County tax records tend to be out of date. 

I have worked the census and although I do not buy the reasoning entirely  I can see the rationale behind it.  What you folks don't see is that there are census people on special projects nosing into your affairs all year long, year after year, and not every 10 years in April.

I worked last spring with a computer putting all residences on a census map with a map spot location that was provided by GPS.  This past fall I worked on a project to locate and identify group homes, which are handled differently than ordinary housing units.  Currently I am on a project, almost over, that rechecks specific areas where it is normally difficult to reach people via the mail service.  I updated the address lists as needed and left each residence a census questionnaire.

I know it seems to be wasteful but the mailing you folks are receiving help to give advance notice that census workers wil be coming to their area.  We are usually local folks out to make a few bucks and are not wanting to harm anyone so give us some slack.

[darius]

"enumeration ... in such manner as they shall by law direct."

Could you enlighten me?  I see no impediment to an "enumeration" compiled from existing data.   

The existing dat is not current in many cases.

[darius]

Only the ones that are currently talking to you or the ones that want .gov assistance.   

Right, bottom feeders get counted twice.

[Brad Johnson]

Well, got mine in the mail today.  Yippee.

Brad

[darius]

Hey guys and gals, keep things in perspective. Save your ammo for the real threats, if they should come.  By exposing yourself over this silly thing you are becoming a red dot on some lawman's wall chart.   Stay in your fox holes and keep your powder dry, as my boss used to say.

The constitution says we will have a census every ten years and it is left to Congress as to what and how it is done, so get used to it. 

[kgbsquirrel]

The constitution says we will have a census every ten years and it is left to Congress as to what and how it is done, so get used to it.

Constitution of the United States of America, Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3:

"Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons. The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct. ...*"

Before I begin, I would like to remind everyone of the one of the basic tenets of law. Law states what the citizen may not do and conversely the law states what the government may do. With that in mind I would like to draw your attention to the portion of the supreme law of our land, the constitution, that gives the government the authority to conduct a census. This law specifically mentions what information may be collected and what that information may be used for.

The first highlighted portion details that the census information is to be collected in order to allocate the number of representatives that each state of the Union will receive and also for the apportionment of direct taxes. Because the law states what the government may do, but exclusion all things not mentioned are expressly forbidden to the government. To wit, the use of census information to allocate federal funds, welfare programs or any purpose other than direct taxes and allocation of representatives is unconstitutional, or more simply illegal.

Now, the second and third highlighted portions detail the information which may collected. This is brutally simple. The sum of the whole number of free persons. The enumeration (read counting) of all persons in the many states of this Union. No where does it state the ethnicity of the whole number of persons, the address of the whole number of persons, the names, phone numbers, insurance information, income of the whole number of persons, et cetera ad nauseam. Again that nagging little quirk of law comes into play stating that any power or authority not expressly given to the government is verboten.

The explicit writing of this clause of the constitution is very clear and well delineates that the purpose of the census is narrow and only allows the collecting of one piece of information; how many people are in each state. In fact the only discretion that the congress possesses is the "Manner" in which this information is collected, be it person to person, by mail, by telephone. However, that discretion does NOT extend to what other information may be collected or what other purposes it is used for.


*The remaining portion clipped out and represented by "..." details the number of representatives to be allocated to the original states at the time of initial ratification and the minimum population represented by a single representative.

[Desertdog]

I think it might have fallen into the burn barrel, but I don't know that for sure.

Just leave it hanging on the door knob and when they come back to check, it will suggest that no body lives there.

I got my Census form today.  How many people live here I will reply honestly.  The "What is your race, I will also reply honestly with "US Citizen".

I put in "American" last census, but I realized that there is North, Central and South America to choose from.




































































































how many people live th

[Regolith]

I prefer "human" to the "race" question.  And you could argue it fairly effectively, too; race is in fact an artificial construct that has no real basis in biology.  Use their lefty tropes against them. 

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

filled it out at the mailbox drama free experience and is ready for the nice postlady to pickup

[CriticalHit]

I prefer "human" to the "race" question.  And you could argue it fairly effectively, too; race is in fact an artificial construct that has no real basis in biology.  Use their lefty tropes against them. 

The idea of "race," pisses me off... I have no problem with "ethnicity," however. Ethnicity is cultural, regional, traditional, or in some other way and form a demonstrable thing. But "race" has no real measure at all. Okay, I've read that certain genetic markers have differing frequencies between continents, so a guy in a labcoat could reasonably say whether Joe Blow or John Doe has more genetic markers from Africa or not, but that's still kinda weak.

From the colonial days forward, North Americans have generally been lumped into three important "races:" Native Americans (Indians), African Americans (Blacks), and European Americans (Whites). But consider how those categories have been assigned and in many cases still are assigned - with 18th Century concepts like the "one drop" or "mestizo" rules.

Do you have "one drop" of known "Black blood," then you are a Black, regardless of how white your skin may actually be, in the early 20th century, this concept of "invisible blackness" was made statutory in many states.

American Indians got the reverse treatment, in essence, with Indian racial status being defined by a certain percentage of "Indian blood." Too many John Smiths and not enough John Redcorns in the family tree, and you're not an Indian anymore.

The motivations for both rest soley at the feet of the "pure Whites" left over. Look, I hate the school of thought that tries to "blame Whitey" for all the ills of the world, but this stupid race system WAS created by a bunch of (now) dead white men... The goal of such racial designations was to concentrate power, wealth, privilege and land in the hands of Whites in a society of White hegemony and privilege. The 17th, 18th, and 19th Centuries were when most of this thinking originated (the Spainards' "mestizo" rules, the Southern plantation system, and westward settlement) and our society was one of of White hegemony and privilege no matter how much you hate "political correctness." But I digress...

Bottomline, the one-drop rule of Black identity enabled Whites to preserve their agricultural labor force and the pure Indian blood definition of Native American identity enabled Whites to acquire Amerindian lands.

Both ideas are, in essence, racist bullshit.

As too how I'll aswer that question on the census myself... um... ask BridgeWalker.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

you can  and i did check multiple boxes

[darius]

It seems that the following part of the constitution provides some wiggle room as to what info is collected.

"in such Manner as they shall by Law direct. ...*"

[209]

Hah, I ended up using gloves to handle it, filled it out with a new pen that was then thrown away, and used a gloved finger to get water from the tap... 

Well, as long as you used gloves without powder on them and didn't buy the pen with a credit card, you're safe doing both of those.  But, if you used water from the tap in your home, they got you.  It only takes a second to analyze the impurities in the water to be able to pinpoint where the water came from.   

[darius]

We had a woman from the census show up at our door last year asking for information about one of our (long-standing) tenants in a rental property we own across town.  They had dropped something at her door and never got it back, and never could catch her at home when they stopped by the apartment.  The woman at my door was asking me if my tenant still lived at our rental property.

I wasn't cooperative.  She left.

So what have you proven? The census worker was simply wanting to get an accurate assessment of the situation.  I go to the post office for certain things, to the neighbors, and to the courthouse. Most people are very cooperative and are curious about what I am doing but a few are victims of the negative spin put on the process by the media.  I have had to console a number of older widows, and in the end we had a good time of it.  It is all in how you treat people and how you come off to them.  Older people are very helpful because they are lonely and because they see the need to do their civic duty.  Some of the younger ones are uncomfy because they are shacking up or are using drugs.  That is none of my business, technically speaking, as a census taker, but I still have personal convictions about such things.

A funny incident happened to me in 2000.  I was interviewingg this young girl while her smelly kid crawled around over me and she was shacking up with this dude.  Out of the blue she told me her place used to be a cat house.    

[Tallpine]

filled it out at the mailbox drama free experience and is ready for the nice postlady to pickup

No drama here either - I wrote "3" in the box, stuck it in the envelope, sealed it, and left it in the mailbox with the flag up 

"civic duty" done 

[darius]

I don't know what the guidelines are now for an acceptable questionnaire but in 2000 I used to "grade papers" so to speak, and there were certain fields that could be left blank and yet not invalidate the questionnaire.  

I have no basis for this but my gut but it seems if the response was merely the number of people at an address that should be sufficient.  As to the phone number, that is sometimes used by QC people to check and see if the enumerator is actually doing his job or is pencil whipping the returns.

[CNYCacher]

So what have you proven? The census worker was simply wanting to get an accurate assessment of the situation.

Not really sure what you are asking, but I suppose if I've proven anything, it's that I respect the privacy of my tenants.

[kgbsquirrel]

It seems that the following part of the constitution provides some wiggle room as to what info is collected.

"in such Manner as they shall by Law direct. ...*"

Seeing as inflection is so hard to convey with text I would like to point out that the next is an actual serious question put forth without contempt or deprecation. Did you read anything that I wrote?

There are one hundred sixty four words in that clause of the constitution and you have only quoted nine of them without taking any of the others or how they interact into account. Would you please go back and read my previous post in it's entirety and then further explain your position; that those nine words give congress the authority to decide which information to collect and for what purpose to use it.

[vaskidmark]

So how much trouble am I going to be i for using a color of ink that was not blue or black?

I am not tearing the place apart to find a pen of a specific color just to fill out some form.  If the optical scanner cannot read it I suppose I have "created" a job for someone and thus ought to be congratulated by the gooberment.

And yes, I am absolutely, positively, unequivicolably (sp??) pretty much almost sorta-kinda maybe sure about how many of me liver here.  I called a meeting of all the voices, threatening to withhold ice cream until they were all present, so that a count could be conducted.  We then assembled as a consensus caucus to decide on the divisor to use, and then rounded the result to the next highest whole number, which was that number appearing between zero and two in base 10 counting.

Took the envelope to the Post Office to drop it in the mailbox.  I might have accidentally dropped it into the one marked "Stamped".  Our civic duty done for the next ten years the voices and I drove to 7-11 to pick up ice cream.

stay safe.

skidmark

[Tallpine]

base 10 counting

Dang! I just realized that the census form did not specify the base number system 

I should have written down "11"   

There are 10 kinds of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't

[darius]

The idea of "race," pisses me off... I have no problem with "ethnicity," however. Ethnicity is cultural, regional, traditional, or in some other way and form a demonstrable thing. But "race" has no real measure at all. Okay, I've read that certain genetic markers have differing frequencies between continents, so a guy in a labcoat could reasonably say whether Joe Blow or John Doe has more genetic markers from Africa or not, but that's still kinda weak.

From the colonial days forward, North Americans have generally been lumped into three important "races:" Native Americans (Indians), African Americans (Blacks), and European Americans (Whites). But consider how those categories have been assigned and in many cases still are assigned - with 18th Century concepts like the "one drop" or "mestizo" rules.

Do you have "one drop" of known "Black blood," then you are a Black, regardless of how white your skin may actually be, in the early 20th century, this concept of "invisible blackness" was made statutory in many states.

American Indians got the reverse treatment, in essence, with Indian racial status being defined by a certain percentage of "Indian blood." Too many John Smiths and not enough John Redcorns in the family tree, and you're not an Indian anymore.

The motivations for both rest soley at the feet of the "pure Whites" left over. Look, I hate the school of thought that tries to "blame Whitey" for all the ills of the world, but this stupid race system WAS created by a bunch of (now) dead white men... The goal of such racial designations was to concentrate power, wealth, privilege and land in the hands of Whites in a society of White hegemony and privilege. The 17th, 18th, and 19th Centuries were when most of this thinking originated (the Spainards' "mestizo" rules, the way.

My mistake. this needs to be deleted.

[AJ Dual]

Darius, if you came to someone's door doing a Census count, and saw this married couple:



What would you do?

[Scout26]

Filled it out and put "American" as race for all four of us.

I'll be wearing my Red Diaper with Suspenders and Knee High boots when the census person comes to the door.   

[AJ Dual]

Filled it out and put "American" as race for all four of us.

I'll be wearing my Red Diaper with Suspenders and Knee High boots when the census person comes to the door.   

Scout! 

You said you'd let me wear the suspenders this time and you'd wear the dress! You're going back on your promise!