The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Politics & RKBA => Topic started by: Hazcat on June 19, 2009, 11:05:43 AM
-
Outspoken Republican Rep. Michele Bachmann says she's so worried that information from next year's national census will be abused that she will refuse to fill out anything more than the number of people in her household.
In an interview Wednesday morning with The Washington Times "America's Morning News," Mrs. Bachmann, Minnesota Republican, said the questions have become "very intricate, very personal" and she also fears ACORN, the community organizing group that came under fire for its voter registration efforts last year, will be part of the Census Bureau's door-to-door information collection efforts.
"I know for my family the only question we will be answering is how many people are in our home," she said. "We won't be answering any information beyond that, because the Constitution doesn't require any information beyond that."
The Washington Times America's Morning News (interview with Rep. Michele Bachmann)
Audio clip
http://media.washingtontimes.com/media//audio/2009/06/17/BachmannInterview.mp3
Shelly Lowe, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Census Bureau, said Mrs. Bachmann is "misreading" the law.
She sent a portion of the U.S. legal code that says anyone over 18 years of age who refuses to answer "any of the questions" on the census can be fined up to $5,000.
The Constitution requires a census be taken every 10 years. Questions range from number of persons in the household and racial information to employment status and whether anyone receives social services such as food stamps.
Mrs. Bachmann said she's worried about the involvement of ACORN, the Association of Community Organizers for Reform Now, in next year's census.
"They will be in charge of going door to door and collecting data from the American public," she said. "This is very concerning."
ACORN has applied to help recruit workers to help conduct the census. Republican lawmakers and some public interest groups have expressed concern over their involvement.
ACORN staffers have ben indicted in several states on charges of voter registration fraud stemming from the organization's efforts to register voters last year.
Mrs. Bachmann, who is in her second term in the House, has become a lightning rod for criticism from Democrats and liberal talk show hosts for her unapologetic conservative views.
She said she considers that "a badge of honor."
"It's clear when a person speaks out against those policies they become a target, and that should be concerning to everyone," she said.
http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jun/17/exclusive-minn-lawmaker-fears-census-abuse/
Lots of comments at site
-
Audio is on the thread.. ( cool huh?)
That audio interview is one that the whole United Sates should listen to and pattern their census reporting after. This could very well be the first step to "THE PEOPLE" standing together! IF........ IF we can get the word out and people will understand what a step it could be to start saying "We've had enough!"
-
Audio is on the thread.. ( cool huh?)
That audio interview is one that the whole United Sates should listen to and pattern their census reporting after. This could very well be the first step to "THE PEOPLE" standing together! IF........ IF we can get the word out and people will understand what a step it could be to start saying "We've had enough!"
Bachmann / Palin 2012 ??
-
Bachmann / Palin 2012 ??
I just want a Republican to win. I just want "Change"..................No not The Won kind.
-
ACORN has applied to help recruit workers to help conduct the census. Republican lawmakers and some public interest groups have expressed concern over their involvement.
Concern? How about outrage!
They will get number of people in my house, and than can piss off.
ACORN, involved in the census, just like the BHO wanted to change the Census oversight to the White House....
The Chicago Political "Stench" that is how BHO learned to "play the game", is really starting to show....
-
Bachman is an idiot. I'm sorry, but she is Ann Coulter/Michael Moore crazy. The difference is that Coulter, like Rush, knows she's an entertainer. Bachman doesn't get that. Someone ought to inform her that lawmakers ought to obey the laws they pass.
The bottom line here folks is that there is no conspiracy to the census. the government needs info to know how many children, seniors, farmers, commuters, un-employed, homeowners etc. are in a given area so that gov't revenue can be distributed effeciently. The census is a cost effective way to do this as the forms have to be sent anyway. Whether these programs should exist in the first place is a whole other question. Given that they do, its best that the money be spent effeciently. Administrators need info. This is a cost effecient way to get it. Thats all this is.
FQ13
-
Hey FQ, have census questions changed over the last 2 or 3? Why yes they have. They have become more personal in nature, and whether Bachmann is an idiot or not is irrelevant.
The bottom line here folks is that there is no conspiracy to the census. Sorry FQ, I am not taking your word for it.
ACORN has snaked their way in and is recruiting "census workers", given that ACORN is CORRUPT founded by a 60's socialist,
and Americorp is another group involved, and a Inspector General was fired for finding misappropriation of Federal Funds, and both org's are HUGE BHO supporters, that received lots of money, etc,....etc,....etc,...
Let's use the 1850 census questions:
The Census of 1850
Go Back to Enumeration Forms Index
Schedule 1. Free Inhabitants in _________, in the County of ________, State of _________, enumerated by me, on the _____ day of ___________, 1850.
___________________, Ass’t. Marshal.
1. Dwelling houses and number in order of visitation.
2. Families numbered in the order of visitation.
3. The name of every person whose usual place of abode on the 1st day of June, 1850, was in this family.
Description:
4. Age.
5. Sex.
6. Color – White, black, or mulatto.
7. Profession, occupation, or trade of each male person over 15 years of age.
8. Value of real estate owned.
9. Place of birth, naming the state, territory, or country.
10. Married within the year.
11. Attended school within the year.
12. Persons over 20 years of age who can not read and write.
13. Whether deaf and dumb, blind, insane, idiotic, pauper or convict.
Schedule 2. Slave Inhabitants in _________, in the County of ________, State of _________, enumerated by me, on the _____ day of ___________, 1850.
___________________, Ass’t. Marshal.
1. Names of slave owners.
2. Number of slaves.
Description:
3. Age.
4. Sex.
5. Color.
6. Fugitives.
7. Number manumitted.
8. Deaf and dumb, blind, insane, or idiotic.
OK, we can leave out the slave section.
http://usa.ipums.org/usa/voliii/items1850.shtml
-
TW
2 points.
Do I want to see my money going to ACORN? No. But the bottom line is that a census, even if all they ask is how many people and of what ages live here, requires $7 an hour grunts to do the work. Whether the the government starts fresh, goes through temp agengies, or uses canvassing firms like ACORN or PIRG is largely irrelevant.
The second is that the 1850 census makes my case. I didn't say that all government programs are justified many, many are not. Bu they have to get info. to administer them. Ask yourself this. If every year there were a multi-milliion dollar bill to check on the number of (choose your fiscally relevant category of persons here) living in each Congressional district would you bitch? Yes. Why? Because you would ask why there wasn't a more fiscally responsible way of getting the data. The census is one of those. That is the extent of my point.
FQ13
-
Okay than, question 13 will have to be added... ::)
13. Whether deaf and dumb, blind, insane, idiotic, pauper or convict.
-
I thought we'd covered this in another thread, but here goes.
The census web site is located: http://2010.census.gov/2010census/ (http://2010.census.gov/2010census/)
This year all the "census" forms will be the "short form". Just the facts, Jack.
http://2010.census.gov/2010census/pdf/2010_Questionnaire_Info_Copy.pdf (http://2010.census.gov/2010census/pdf/2010_Questionnaire_Info_Copy.pdf)
All the other "info" will be collected in a separate survey, called the "American Community Survey". It is an on-going survey, not just once every 10 years. A sample of the population (about 20%) will be poled every year. You can read the ACS survey questions at:
http://www.census.gov/acs/www/ (http://www.census.gov/acs/www/)
The 2009 survey questions are: http://www.census.gov/acs/www/Downloads/SQuest09.pdf (http://www.census.gov/acs/www/Downloads/SQuest09.pdf)
MY OPINIONS:
The lawmaker should abide with the laws passed. Well, unless congress wants to exclude itself from this law like it has with others......cause they're special. (like smoking in federal buildings)
There is a penalty for not filling out the form (either one). And it's not just a one time thing. You can't "opt out" by paying the fine. Reason: They'll just give you another form and then another and then another, until they bankrupt you.
There conceivably could be bigger penalties, as there almost always is, for lying on the form (falsifying information on a federal form).
The government doesn't need to be in a position to have to request this info in the first place. Head count that's all. If we didn't have all the goverment largess then all of this would be unnecessary.
It bothers me that a polar organization, like ACORN, will be in contracted for this work. I don't trust them.
-
+10 Alf, I am in 80% agreement.
FQ13
-
...........The lawmaker should abide with the laws passed. Well, unless congress wants to exclude itself from this law like it has with others......cause they're special. (like smoking in federal buildings)...........
I've got a question Alf, but first several points to consider, then the question.
I agree Congress must abide by the laws of the land.
I don't doubt there is a law stating all this information must be collected.
I don't doubt, I mean, I really don't doubt that there is a fine and penalty that has been established for non-compliance.
Is the law that is enumerated here constitutional?
The key is the final statement above. We don't want to have congress people who are sheep and who will follow laws instituted by promulgation in the CFR in conflict with the U.S. Constitution by some bureaucrat do we? Why would anyone want a lawmaker that is willing to submit themselves to a lesser entity's promulgation of law in conflict with a higher governmental law? There is a lot of bowing down to follow the "almighty law" here, but I have not seen anyone dispute or adequetely discuss the constitutionality of the law. The congresswoman's issue was not that a law existed, it was that the questions being asked were unconstitutional.
There are people we all know in our daily lives on and off this board who have failed to grow up and become real citizens. I guess that's their level of understanding and as far as they can go with what they have available for now. They rush headlong into "law worship" and the "rule of law" diatribe which is putting the horse before the cart. I prefer to take a measured, less rash and irrational jump to a conclusion.
So...I ask the question, are the things that are asked by the census contrary to constitutional limits? I'd really like some good discussion on this Alf, like the type you provide. What I want to dismiss are the "I think that..." or the "This is just like....." or the "I know because my cousin Vinny...." type responses that don't go to the core of the question. Are these things being asked constitutional? I will only answer those things that are constitutionally required, so I want to know for certain what I can exclude.
With everything going on and closing in on and around us, I plan on going to the mat on this one so I need to be confident I know the right answer. It is our duty as U.S. Citizens to not be a doormat to bureaucrats or politicians. If we cave in, we deserve the fruits of the sheep.
-
Rastus,
Read this.
http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_cens.html
-
I have no problem with the Census being taken, it's Constitutionally mandated, it's how congressional districts are established and the questions on Alf links do not seem to be invasive. I have Major objections to the Census being run by the White House instead of under the authority that has managed it for the 200 years, and even bigger objections to involving an organization that has already been convicted of election fraud in multiple States in 2 election cycles.
The answer how ever is not in obstructing the census but the removal by whatever means needed of the socialist, illegal alien, usurping, bastard and his globalist cronies.
Rastus, Don't bother arguing with FQ, He would excuse sodomy as "following to close".
-
The White House gave it back to Commerce BUT, ACORN is still being contracted.
-
Ok Rastus
Here's your raw data:
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. The Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand, but each State shall have at Least one Representative; and until such Enumeration shall be made, the State of New Hampshire shall be entitled to chuse three, Massachusetts eight, Rhode-Island and Providence Plantations one, Connecticut five, New-York six, New Jersey four, Pennsylvania eight, Delaware one, Maryland six, Virginia ten, North Carolina five, South Carolina five, and Georgia three.
This means the ability to conduct a census is not just an enummerated power, BUT an enummerated duty. The question then becomes, what can they ask? Like every law abiding republic (and yes I'm one of those sheep who think the rule of law should mean something) precedent matters. So, how have the the census questions changed since 1790? Should these changes be viewed as legit? Should we pretend we live in the 18th century? What safe guards should be in place to preserve privacy? Should we ignore the fact that the government needs information to do its job? Are you willing to pay to hire Gallup to get that info outside of the census? These are are all valid questions Rastus, and I mean that sincerely. We just need to decide, at the end of the day whether we want to just count heads, or use the opportunity to gather other (under the current and forseeable system) necesary information. If not, how do we get it? A critique is one thing, but without a plan, its just noise.
FQ13
PS As far as administration, it was originally under the judiciary, then then the US Marshalls office, then commerce, then the White House, now back to Commerce.
PPS As far as sodomy, I would chalk it up along with smoking dope, drinking whiskey or not wearing a motorcycle helmet, as no one elses damn business.
-
Simple, eliminate those programs that are necessitating the information. For example Dept of Education. It should be controlled locally NOT by the feds.
-
Is the law that is enumerated here constitutional?
One might argue that it isn't "unconstitutional" for government to ask those questions.
Another might be that once you buy into the "interstate commerce clause" as the basis for most intrusions by the Federal government, then all the questions on the census and ACS just follow as necessary to conduct the programs.
I'm with Hax, it's not a matter of the Census/ACS's constitutionality but that of all the intrusive programs.
-
As far as sodomy, I would chalk it up along with smoking dope, drinking whiskey or not wearing a motorcycle helmet, as no one elses damn business.
When your behavior, whether it be smoking dope, drinking whiskey or not wearing a motorcycle helmet, ends up costing ME money (in the form of higher health insurance or car insurance premiums to pay for the cost of caring for the health problems YOU created for yourself) then it sure as hell IS my damn business.
-
When your behavior, whether it be smoking dope, drinking whiskey or not wearing a motorcycle helmet, ends up costing ME money (in the form of higher health insurance or car insurance premiums to pay for the cost of caring for the health problems YOU created for yourself) then it sure as hell IS my damn business.
Be careful what you wish for tt. As any good anti will remind you, you are far more likely to be the victim of a gunshot wound (with all attendant costs) if you own a gun than if you don't. Should you be required to have a personal injury protection policy to cover me from paying for you, just like with owning a car? Sarah Brady would say yes.
FQ13
-
Be careful what you wish for tt. As any good anti will remind you, you are far more likely to be the victim of a gunshot wound (with all attendant costs) if you own a gun than if you don't. Should you be required to have a personal injury protection policy to cover me from paying for you, just like with owning a car? Sarah Brady would say yes.
FQ13
To bad the statistics say that's bullshit.
-
To bad the statistics say that's bullshit.
Do you have cites for that? If so I would love to hear them. I always thought that they were (semi, sorta, kinda) legit, as they conflate accidents with acts of violence. Its the same thing as saying you're more likely to get into an auto accident if you own a car than if you don't. No S!@# Sherlock. The question is that we wouldn't take that from MADD using it to toughen more illegal searches to crack down on DUI, but people do to tighten restrictions on guns. Elmer Fudd shooting himself in the the foot while hunting Wabbitts is different than a crime victim. The Brady Bunch elides that distinction. If their raw numbers are wrong, even before the sleight of hand that's a great thing.
FQ13
-
We don't need to take a census. Go for efficiency and use the records they already have - The IRS collects this information every year on every one of us. They know how much we make, how we make it, how many in every household, our status as citizens or visitors, and our home ownership status.
Questions that the census asks that the IRS does not already have are genders and race, but as I recall those are unconstitutional items to base any decisions off of anyway.
Quit wasting our time and money, and read the public reports that are current every year!
-
We don't need to take a census. Go for efficiency and use the records they already have - The IRS collects this information every year on every one of us. They know how much we make, how we make it, how many in every household, our status as citizens or visitors, and our home ownership status.
Questions that the census asks that the IRS does not already have are genders and race, but as I recall those are unconstitutional items to base any decisions off of anyway.
Quit wasting our time and money, and read the public reports that are current every year!
Hear! Hear!
And then the money the government distributes will not go to areas of gross population imbalance by undocumented illegal persons if based on tax receipts.
-
Do you have cites for that? If so I would love to hear them. I always thought that they were (semi, sorta, kinda) legit, as they conflate accidents with acts of violence. Its the same thing as saying you're more likely to get into an auto accident if you own a car than if you don't. No S!@# Sherlock. The question is that we wouldn't take that from MADD using it to toughen more illegal searches to crack down on DUI, but people do to tighten restrictions on guns. Elmer Fudd shooting himself in the the foot while hunting Wabbitts is different than a crime victim. The Brady Bunch elides that distinction. If their raw numbers are wrong, even before the sleight of hand that's a great thing.
FQ13
www.gunfacts.info
Pg 17
Myth: You are more likely to be injured or killed using a gun for self-defense Fact: You are far more likely to survive a violent assault if you defend yourself with a gun. In episodes where a robbery victim was injured, the injury/defense rates were:119Resisting with a gun 6% Did nothing at all 25% Resisted with a knife 40% Non-violent resistance 45%
I neglected to post the references, if you want them read the web booklet.
-
www.gunfacts.info
Pg 17
Myth: You are more likely to be injured or killed using a gun for self-defense Fact: You are far more likely to survive a violent assault if you defend yourself with a gun. In episodes where a robbery victim was injured, the injury/defense rates were:119Resisting with a gun 6% Did nothing at all 25% Resisted with a knife 40% Non-violent resistance 45%
I neglected to post the references, if you want them read the web booklet.
Thanks.
FQ13