« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Returning the Census is Our Constitutional Duty

I’m worried about this year’s census.

I’m not worried about ACORN rigging the count – we already succeeded in kicking them out of the census. I’m not worried about the President’s attempt to run the census out of the White House – we beat that power grab back last year. I’m not even worried about privacy – this year’s 10-question census form is the shortest in memory.

No, what worries me is blatant misinformation coming from otherwise well-meaning conservatives. They are trying to do the right thing, but instead they are helping big government liberals by discouraging fellow conservatives from filling out their census forms.

Early census returns are showing that conservatives have been measurably less likely than liberals to return their census forms. A recent article in the Houston Chronicle points out that conservative Texas is way behind the national average in returning census forms and some of the lowest rates are in Texas’ most conservative counties. [Update: Since the Houston Chronicle article was published, the average national census participation rate has increased to 52 percent and the rates in each of the counties mentioned in the article have increased to the following, still very low, rates: King County, 25 percent; Briscoe County, 33 percent; Culberson County, 22 percent; Newton County, 30 percent.]

Few things make will make Nancy Pelosi happier than large numbers of conservatives failing to respond to the census. If we do not respond, we will not be counted and if we are not counted, then we effectively will not exist. That would reduce conservatives’ power in elections, allow Democrats to draw more favorable congressional boundaries and help put more tax-hiking politicians in office.

Boycotting the census also offends me as an American patriot. Our society spends too much time talking about what government owes us; and not enough on the duties of citizenship and the hard work required to keep our freedom. Filling out the census is one of the few things our Constitution specifically asks of U.S. citizens and it is our duty as Americans to take that responsibility seriously.

Anyone who tells you that this year’s census is unconstitutional and that you are not required to fill out the form completely is flat out wrong. They argue that because this year’s census asks for more than a simple count of how many people live in your home, it is unconstitutional and therefore should not be completely filled out. That argument doesn’t stand up to either history or the Constitution’s text.

Let’s take a look at the Constitution’s wording on the census:

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. (Article I, Section 2, Clause 3)

That last part, “in such a manner as they shall by law direct,” gives Congress the power to determine how the census will be conducted and what questions will be asked. A lot of what the federal government does relies on an utterly contorted reading of the Commerce Clause. Not the census. Writing census questions is one of the few things the Constitution explicitly gives Congress the power to do.

History also makes clear that this argument is completely unfounded. Every census in U.S. history has asked for more information than a simple count. In fact, the most private question on this year’s form asks for an individual’s race and that question has been asked by every census since the 1790 census conducted under then-President George Washington. To suggest that this question or others like it make this year’s census unconstitutional is absurd.

No one has advocated a direct boycott of the census but there have been calls to only partially fill out census forms – even though that would be a direct violation of federal law. Those calls are the problem. They feed a climate of mistrust in the census and need to be refuted. Unless conservatives understand how important it is to participate in the census, that climate will result in fewer conservatives being counted and hand Nancy Pelosi more congressional seats.

I and other conservatives have worked hard to fight off the Obama Administration’s harmful census plans. We fought off their attempt to run the census directly. We fought off ACORN’s attempt to participate and we fought off ill-conceived statistical sampling schemes that would artificially inflate the number of Democrat voters. We have been largely successful in keeping this count apolitical and it would be a tragedy if some of our ill-informed friends handed Democrats a victory at the last minute.

Tags:

COMMENTS

  • http://hillbillypolitics.com Steph C

    the only questions I object to on my on my census form are those dealing with race and culture. If we are all created equal, why does it matter what race I am or what culture I look to?

    If we are to be treated equally then let us do away with such questions and let us truly be equal in deeds, words, and actions.

    In this day and age, many of us are bi-cultural/racial, even multi-cultural/racial; our private lives having taken the best of our ancestors and incorporating them into our own uniquely American culture. Why can’t we just be American?

    • http://www.hopeychangemas.com VizBiz

      I agree that the race question is offensive. I have filled out my form completely, although reluctantly.

      The thing that offend me the most however, were all the commercials saying “to get our fair share”. That is such a statist statement and suggests that the federal gov is responsible for the number of “buses” in a community. It’s sickening that now our local gov has the entitlement mentality and the Feds feed it.

      • RedBeard

        Main Entry: enu?mer?ate
        Pronunciation: \i-?n(y)?-m?-?r?t\
        Function: transitive verb
        Inflected Form(s): enu?mer?at?ed; enu?mer?at?ing
        Etymology: Latin enumeratus, past participle of enumerare, from e- + numerare to count, from numerus number
        Date: 1616
        1 : to ascertain the number of : count
        2 : to specify one after another : list

        ? enu?mer?a?tion \-?n(y)?-m?-?r?-sh?n\ noun

        ? enu?mer?a?tive \-?n(y)?-m?-?r?-tiv, -?n(y)?m-r?-, -?n(y)?-m?-r?-\ adjective

        ________________________________________________________

        Congressman, your point about proper representation is well taken. That has to do with true enumeration, as defined in rather clear terms above.

        But I’m having difficulty seeing how the word “enumerate” can be elastic enough to include racial makeup, let alone all those other intrusive questions.

        Back in the day, of course, there was an issue with all those troublesome 3/5ths of a person needing to be counted differently, but today we really are all supposed to be equal. And we supposedly also have a right to privacy, as we’ve been told repeatedly.

      • conservos

        From the Chron:

        “Polling by the Pew Research Center finds Democrats are more likely than other Americans to view the census as ?very important? to the country. **Seventy-six percent of Democrats call this year’s count very important, compared with 61 percent of Republicans and independents”

        http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/6932410.html

        The Original PEW Research:

        ” ** Slightly higher numbers of REPUBLICANS (90%) than Democrats and independents (85% each) say THEY INTEND TO PARTICIPATE, *** but more Democrats than Republicans or independents think the census is very important for the country (**76% among Democrats, 61% among Republicans and independents).

        The ratfinks at the Chronicle didn’t merit this apology, Rep McHenry.

        And guess what demographic PEW anticpates will be the true hold-outs on turning in the Census?

        The same group of volunteer, non-prof, zombie-Obamaites Obama just volunteered their parents to cover on their healthcare for until they’re 26.

        http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1538/young-people-make-up-large-proportion-census-hold-outs

        We’re law-biding, we say we’re law-abiding, we INTEND on being law-abiding.

        We’ll be filling in and returning that census, Sir.

        There you go, Daily Kos. Keep whinnin’ while we keep law abidin’.

        http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/3/29/852025/-The-Teabaggers-Self-Fulfilling-Prophesy-(U.S.-Census)-

    • The_Gadfly

      while it is evident that the first census under George Washington was required to collect race information because of the 3/5 compromise, it also seems to me that with the adoption of the XIV amendment, section 2 that all cause for the constitutional mandate to collect that information as part of the census ceased.

      By all means, all conservative should fill out and return the census forms for enumeration purposes. After that I do not concur on the Constitutional mandate for completing the form. I see no reason to prohibit the Census from asking people to voluntarily provide additional information, but absent the same standard applied to impinging on the protection of explicitly guaranteed rights, see no reason for it to be compulsory.

      • http://hillbillypolitics.com Steph C
        • Bill S

          But if you don’t, they’re going to come around and get the answer. As streiff pointed out in his earlier diary, the Census will send door-to-door folks to get the info they don’t get otherwise. By not filling out the info, it just costs the gubmint more money to get the information that they’re gonna get one way or another.

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            They’ll *try* to get it, but they won’t get it all.

          • Bill S

            you’ll note that they’ll just go next door and get it from the neighbors. No guarantee that they’ll answer, of course…but the census folks will try.

            Fact is, there’s very little on those forms to get, other than name, gender and race. The latter two are pretty easy to figure out to a large extent.

          • http://hillbillypolitics.com Steph C

            That’s what I’m counting on. :-)

          • http://thesandsinstitute.org Vassar Bushmills

            Bureaucrats want a blank filled, that’s all.

          • http://hillbillypolitics.com Steph C

            I look white but am almost 50/50 biracial. Besides, I think it would make a nice court case if I get harassed.

          • Bill S
          • eyesopen007

            honestly answer any questions about “race” until there is a legal definition of what “race” is? Can anyone tell me what the legal definition of the “black” race is? How about the “white” race? And if you think there is such a definition, then tell me what the legal definition of the “Hispanic” race is? And even better, the legal definition of the “Pacific islander” race? Of course there ARE no such definitions, and the last country I know of that tried to make such legal defintions was Nazi Germany. Those questions are so obviously unConstitional that I would think even a Congressman would be able to figure it out, but I guess I’m wrong about that.

          • Bill S
          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            So let ‘em try

      • utahrepublican

        What I call the “3/5 Rule” which used to be contained in the third paragraph of Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution was primarily based on condition of servitude, not race (except as to “Indians not taxed”). It applied to every one other than “free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed.” Thus, free black residents were counted a whole persons. And its purpose was not racial segregation or animus, but was a compromise linking the apportionment of the obligation to pay taxes to apportionment of political power in the House of Representatives. (The South wanted slaves counted for representation, but not counted for taxation, with the North wanting the opposite, so they compromised on both at 3/5.)

        The full Constitutional counting requirement would therefore be satisfied by a question determining only whether the respondent was an “Indian not taxed.” If, as I suspect but don’t know, the question on race in the 1790 Census was open ended, it was motivated by something other than the need to determine the application of the “3/5 Rule.”

        I agree that it would be better to eliminate all race questions, everywhere, but I don’t see that as excusing our moral duty to assist the government in carrying out its Constitutionally mandated duties.

      • bantamwait

        I know this is a dormant thread, but running across it I just have to comment. The 1790 census is in fact the only one that does _not_ enumerate by race. The 3/5ths clause did not refer to race at all, btw–only to slave status. Slave states were happy to have free blacks during census time, because they counted as 5/5ths for purposes of congressional representation.

    • smit

      DON’T BLAME CONSERVATIVES YET! Many of us have not gotten a census form yet. Yes, I live in an overwhelmingly republican district.
      I called my congresscritter Friday, the office gave me a phone number to call, also the area director’s phone number.
      Articles last week out of I believe Douglas GA stating large groups have not received the forms.
      We get our mail at the local PO, there was no rural delivery when we moved here and the boxes there now 1/2 mile away and out of our sight.
      BTW now, I work at home, and can assure you NO one came asking us questions. I told my rep’s office I thought Acorn ended up being in charge of census collecting after all, which surprised her as she thought Acorn had dismantled.

    • robp

      Article I, Section 2, Paragraph 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 previous sentence in parentheses was modified by the 14th Amendment, section 2.) 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.

      Amendment 14, Paragraph 2

      2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

      My take: the PURPOSE of the census is for enumeration, for the purpose of representation. This is why I have chosen to fill out the number of people in my household, PERIOD, and send it in. I believe that, and only that, is my constitutional duty.

      Our problem: since when has Congress adhered to the constitutional anything?

      Another problem: “in such manner as they shall by Law direct” gives the Representatives a great deal of wiggle room.

      An amusing aside: “except for participation in rebellion, or other crime”. Does that mean all the people on the Internet mug shots with “Obama wear” won’t be voting? :^)

      • gekster

        I did the same.
        It only calls for the number of persons.
        Nothing else.

      • edintexas

        They already have most of the remaining info somewhere, so why should I give it to them again. Being old enough to remember when the government really only cared whether I existed on April 15th and if I signed up for Social Security, I’m not prone to give them anything more than that which the Libertarian in me thinks they need – how many live in my home. With regard to Congressional representation, what does it matter _who_ lives here, how old, what race, etc.? Since the Constitution stipulates that the purpose is to determine Representation, anything else the Congress decides they would like to know – which does not contribute to determining such Representation, is not – no matter what Representative McHenry thinks the Constitution allows.

        • edintexas

          Add: “is not germane and Constitutionally required” before “no matter what Representative McHenry…”.

  • http://www.twitter.com/AveSharia evanm

    It would help if they counted us in our districts, and not nearby Democratic districts.

    See, e.g. Redford Township, Michigan.

    I filled mine out, anyway.

    • http://www.laborunionreport.comandhttp://www.laborunionreport.blogspot.com LaborUnionReport

      With all due respect, since when do politicians in DC respect the Constitution?

      Yeah, 14 days before April 15th, it’ll do the heart good to fill out the census forms as some form of Patriotic Duty, as Americans continue to get raped by their elected officials.

      Thanks for the reminder, Congressman. I now need to go sign my tax forms to remind myself that we are just grist for the mill of someone else’s entitlement.

      • William_L

        my kids names, my wife’s names.. my phone number? I don’t think so.. I get enough calls and spam as it is, thanks.

        I’m already leery about the feds wanting to know too much about me..

        • Hera

          I think the reluctance to return the census forms has more to do with a lack of trust in the federal government then anything else.We now have elected officials in the federal government who do not respect the Constitution or the law.

        • The_Gadfly

          are defensible as being necessary to eliminate double counting. But not the phone number.

  • dfvazan

    I agree with your argument up to a point. If we are debating conservatives returning the census in a consistently conservatively represented district, I agree. However, as a conservative living in a large, chronically liberal city, how does it make sense for me to pad their representation and funding? If I (and enough like-minded conservatives) do not return the census, my city of New York will be under-counted and, thus, under-represented and under-funded.

    • kyoufuu

      Granted it’s more likely that in densely populated areas liberals dominate, but if you use that logic it would be easy for liberals to say that if they live in small, rural states they should not fill out their census.

      I agree with Rep. McHenry here. The census is constitutionally required, and most of the questions are fairly benign, even if we see them as being inappropriate.

      The battle to fight is not in the fact that the census exists. The battle is in how the data is treated after it is counted.

      • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

        Do as you will with the rest.

        But fill out the enumeration. That’s a constitutional matter.

        • youthgrunt

          argument that “in such Manner as they shall by Law direct” means that Congress can determine the questions on the Census form?

          • RedBeard

            Congress may determine the manner of doing the enumeration. Count. Period.

          • youthgrunt

            that in order to have an accurate count where no one is double-counted you must record their Social Security Number?

            The following questions were asked on the 1790 Census: Name of the head of household; How many free white males age 16 and older; How many free white males under age 16; How many free white females; How many of all other free persons; How many slaves.

            Granted these are all counts, but a lot of demographic information is being passed along as well–and a name! Clearly the founders intended more information than simply a count of who was in a location.

          • The_Gadfly

            The questions listed as you presented establish a count, and given the customs and mores of the times, establish the means by which you ensure each person is counted only once. They are clearly necessitated to achieve an enumeration.

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            Or are you just guessing and shifting goal posts for fun?

          • youthgrunt

            I am not shifting anything. I am trying to figure out the pushback on what Rep. McHenry has argued. His argument is that the Congress has the constitutional authority to regulate how the enumeration of the country via the census is taken and therefore has the authority to create the questions on that census.

            I’m not saying he is right or wrong. But there is clearly an opposition here to his interpretation, but the response seems to be “clearly the constitution only authorizes the enumeration of people, so that is all that can be constitutionally asked.” I’m not sure that I buy that argument–particularly in light that the very first census asked more information than was required to fulfill the information necessary for determining representation in the House of Representatives.

            I would like for someone to better explain why we should observe this “enumeration only” approach rather than the approach suggested by Rep. McHenry.

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            I’m dealing with the law and the Constitution as written.

          • youthgrunt

            as to why anyone should only answer the “enumeration” question (i.e. how many people live here) rather than the entire list of 10 questions.

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens
          • youthgrunt

            to the historical precedent that more was asked than was needed for the Constitutional imperative even in the first 1790 census?

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            That more was added to the Census does not address the question of what is the Constitutional imperative.

          • youthgrunt

            The first census, created by those who also created the Constitution, included more than required for the “imperative” and therefore THEY considered it constitutional to do so.

            If it is constitutional to ask additional questions on the census, and the law governing the census calls for those questions being included, then those questions hold the same constitutional weight as the simple count.

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            I said they aren’t part of the Constitutional imperative, which is an enumeration.

            For the nth time.

          • youthgrunt

            that we have to answer is the enumeration question. But the constitution is providing to Congress the right to legislate the census. If they use that constitutional power to ask additional questions and IF the law requires that we answer the questions, then those questions are just as much a part of the Constitutional imperative.

            Said another way, a law written in accordance with the Constitution holds the same weight as the Constitution.

            Looking at the Census site and Factcheck indicates that answering these questions are required by the census law.

            http://www.factcheck.org/2010/03/census-nonsense/

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            That’s where you’re wrong.

          • eburke
          • youthgrunt

            As long as the law is in alignment with the Constitution, it has the same effect (what I call weight) as the Constitution. It is just as binding as the Constitution. If the Constitution gives Congress the right to make a particular law and the Congress executes that right, then We the People are as bound to that law as to the Constitution.

            That is ultimately my point. The Constitution gave Congress the right to make laws regarding the collection of information on the Census. They have done so and made it legally binding to answer the questions. That means if we intend on being “law abiding citizens” then we answer the census.

          • The_Gadfly

            I answered your question in the post directly before Neil’s. They were NECESSARY to determine the enumeration. They were not mere statistical inquiries for planning other government activities.

          • http://www.BTWsociety.org racvt

            I declare myself a multi-cultural citizen of the US
            That’s what I put on my census.
            How about you?

          • saltlick

            That’s what I did, too. Nobody has the right to tell you what your race is. Maybe once the whole nation is “multicultural” (which most of it is in fact), then maybe we can move past race discrimination by government.

          • rwb_hoosier

            With all due respect, Congressman, you need to get out of Washington DC more and spend time in the real world. We don’t see things out here the way you see things there.

            We know that it doesn’t matter in the slightest if or how we fill out our census forms. It is a rigged system and the democrats own and control that system. The census is going to show what they want it to show – nothing more and nothing less.

            Like most of the conservatives I know, I resent the race question. I resent it because I know that it is the only piece of information that really matters on that form. Washington doesn’t care how many people live in my house – they care what color those people are.

            No one is going to lose out because people don’t send their census forms back. You can stop that scare tactic. There will be as many people in my district as the census bureau wants there to be in my district – forms or no forms.

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            No we all don’t believe “it’s a rigged system.” Maybe you do, but don’t presume to speak for all of us.

          • rwb_hoosier

            We just had a bill passed with official stamps and seals and certifications that the healthcare bill is going to reduce the deficit by $133 billion in 10 years. This is the same government people trust to accurately and honestly report the census numbers?

            Maybe I’m just paranoid. Maybe I’m tired of being called a racist every time I oppose something Obama does. Maybe I don’t want those same people who call me a racist be the ones who decide what they are going to do based on my race.

            I haven’t said I am not going to send my form in. I just haven’t decided whether to leave the race section blank or put a checkmark in every box. If they aren’t going to make race based decisions, then why do they make it a crime to not tell them what race we are?

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            Facts don’t matter, only what you believe to be the truth.

          • devan95

            Most of the questions asked are not that much different than those asked in 1790, 1800, 1810, in other words the one’s closest to the Constitution, before the Civil War and the 16th Amendment(1913) Obviously they did not ask for telephone number (which is a question I will not answer) but much of the rest is similar. Even if you own your home, your net worth, occupation, place of birth & names. If you want a bit of a shock, look up the 1790 census form to see a question they DON’T ask anymore……

          • Lloyd Davis

            arriving within a week.

            Still waiting!!!

          • ihateliberals

            and I have filled out my Census form and returned it a few weeks ago. Eric i wish that you had published this article earlier. I think the Liberals are just thrilled that the conservatives are not returning our forms. It is our civic and constitutional duty to do so. If we don’t then the liberals gain valuable ground on us in redistricting and they gain power over the elections. It’s like stacking the deck in their favor. While i think the form is intrusive so what? there is nothing in the form they can’t find out in any number of ways. conservatives out there if you don’t send your form back quickly then you are part of the problem with Democrats staying in power. the only question that i objected to was the race question. One of the problems in this country is we continue to break things down in to racial information. for that question the answer to me was obvious. I answered it by checking Other and put in big bold letters the word “American”. If we would start looking at ourselves in this manner the segregation of our races in this country would come to an end. We as citizens are no longer Afro-American or Native American or any other break down. the problem with this is that the Liberals would lose power by keeping us divided. as long as we allow ourselves to be classified into a category then racism will continue to be a problem and the liberals wit\ll continue to keep us divided and the y will continue to win elections based on racial issues. This nation has been here for over 400 years now ans the last 200+ years as the United states. Anyone born here now is a Native American. So that category is the only one that could have any validity other than the category of American. sorry i digress form the real problem here and that is that as Americans we need to get the census form in ASAP.

          • kyoufuu

            Or are you just being paranoid?

            The concerns are certainly understandable, but to claim that the census is a rigged system requires some burden of proof in order to be more than just a paranoid theory.

            If, after the census, we find the census bureau claiming that largely Democratic states or districts have experienced increases in population while Republican states and districts have shrunk, then there might be a problem. But to believe this is going to happen and thus refuse to participate only serves to turn it into a self-fulfilling prophecy.

          • wolfster38

            Will you come be here again to answer any questions? I notice that you’ve been a member for three years and this is your only post. You come here and try to dictate how we should act and what we should do but you are not a true member of this community. This is once again Washington telling us what we should do as Americans as they (Washington) act like Cubans.
            One other thing, can you take the Washington out of Washington DC and just call it DC because I’m sure the Father of our Country would not want his name on a place with all the corruption, bribes and lies!
            Washington DC is a DISGRACE and it’s not the people who made it this way!

            214 days to election 2010
            949 days to election 2012

            Have a nice day! (In your own little world outside ours!)

          • RedBeard

            No question that their close relationship with ACORN was likely to have resulted in some questionable tactics, but as the congressman said, ACORN is out of the census picture now.

            Always wary, yes. The Dems have earned that suspicion. Chicago graveyards come immediately to mind. But absent any proof of shenanigans…….

          • http://milowent.blogspot.com milo

            we are darned if we do and darned if we dont. they will abuse that race information and gerrymander us so we can’t speak.

          • davesinsanantonio

            work to put honest conservatives in the legislature and the governors mansion. It is the state legislature that determines the congressional districts, and the governor who signs the bill. And while paranoia doesn’t mean nobody is really out to get you, it is hardly a strategy for success. Trust but verify, or distrust and verify. Either way, keep your eyes and ears open and report facts. That is a better tactic than burying your head in the sand and weeping that there is no way out.

          • RedBeard

            Some Americans were valued at only 3/5ths of a person. Not the moral highlight of American history, but a fact.

            Now that we have moved past that rather dark agenda, one might assume that race should no longer matter when counting Americans.

          • youthgrunt

            But the only difference that would be required are:

            1. the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years
            2. excluding Indians not taxed (not even asked on the census record)
            3. three fifths of all other Persons (i.e. slaves)

            There is no requirement for differentiating by age or gender.

            My point is that at the earliest census, the government was gathering other useful information from the census and this was considered constitutional by those who wrote the constitution.

          • Tbone

            DataStar running on CP/M to manage all that valuable demographic info.

          • billybee

            I’m not turning my data over to ACORN census takers. The extra data obviously only exists for some some social program overtones.

          • youthgrunt

            That is one of the reasons that I immediately sent my form in. I want to limit the number of these census takers have to be hired. If the response was 90%, then they wouldn’t need many of these people.

            The ads from the Census department make it clear that the additional questions are for various program reasons. But the only solution for this is to get the size of government limited so it makes no sense to ask those questions.

          • The_Gadfly

            That was the way you determined the whole Number of free Persons in 1790.

      • dfvazan

        Let me preface this by saying I have no objection to the census in principle. The information collected is exceedingly unrevealing and the processes is wholly constitutional. My argument is more along the lines of political strategy.
        You are correct; the proverbial sword does cut both ways. And that is exactly why we must assume liberals are using the same logic in rural conservative districts. They have proven themselves capable of much worse tactics to pad their representation (voter fraud, voter intimidation, ballot box tampering), this is mild compared to those. I’m not saying this is going to tilt the country significantly our way. But every bit counts, particularly if we don’t counter them when we can.

        • The_Gadfly

          the usefulness of the tactic is irrelevant. Your tactic does not support the overriding strategy of upholding the constitution. Period! End of discussion.

          • http://hillbillypolitics.com Steph C

            not that I’m going to use it as a reason for not sending in my census but…

            The reason for the census was done away with when representation was locked into the 435 member House of Representatives and 100 Senators.

            The enumeration included in the census for 3/5 persons was for the purpose of representation.

            If that part of the reasoning behind the census has been done away with, why comply with that constitutional mandate since it is now useless? Well useless except for getting our “fair share” from the federal government which we wouldn’t have to do if it had followed the Constitution in the first place…

            You know, just a thought…

          • kyoufuu

            If a previously underpopulated area experiences a sudden population explosion, it’s representation has to increase via apportionment. Or, say a large city like Los Angeles suddenly were to depopulate due to excessive taxation. It stands to reason that they would need fewer representatives.

            The number may be fixed at 435, but it’s not fixed as to where and how they are apportioned.

          • The_Gadfly

            Nobody anywhere on this thread has claimed that the census has been done away. I did post that the 3/5 clause has been eliminated. Before it was eliminated there was a constitutional reason for asking about race. Absent the 3/5 clause, there is nor enumerative reason to ask about race. Locking the count in the House did not change the need for the enumeration, only what the results of the enumeration would affect. As a result of the enumeration, seats will be re-apportioned. Some states will gain, some others will lose and some will remain the same. Then the whole gerrymandering game kicks off, but that’s another topic.

          • http://hillbillypolitics.com Steph C

            If I thought it, sure as shootin’ somebody else has and might use it as an argument.

          • dfvazan

            Taking the moral high ground and strictly following the constitution are all well and good, and I advocate both when possible, but it’s this kind of logic that has pinned our backs against the wall. I don’t condone skirting the constitution for political gain, but when the opposition brazenly uses such tactics to advance their agenda I think we should reciprocate accordingly.

            Not returning the census if you live in a heavily liberal district to manipulate representation seems to me the weakest example of an unconstitutional act. If the left plays games like this on a much worse scale, then we should fight fire with fire.

            The moral high ground is pointless if we become a permanent super-minority party as a result. This is one area I think the rules can be bent with minimal consequence and modest benefit.

          • The_Gadfly

            I’m calling Troll!

          • davesinsanantonio

            then we must needs be on a low moral plane. We do not believe in the ends justifying the means, that is the mantra of the left. We cannot convince people we are morally right if we are morally wrong. Two wrongs never make a right. So, since the enumeration is required by the Constitution, and since the Constitution states Congress can direct the manner of the census (meaning they can say what questions to ask) then let us do what the Constitution says. Again, we cannot fault others for violating the Constitution if we ourselves also violate it. Then, when we return to power we can get a conservative Congress to ask only the questions we deem appropriate. Until then, let us follow the Constitution as an example to others, and do not violate it as the hypocritical left does. We cannot win if we are as hypocritical as they are!

  • raginpatriot

    Yesterday I posted this on Redstate regarding the census (Dear Mr. Census: Aren’t We All African Americans?”:

    http://www.redstate.com/raginpatriot/

    Heck, if you can beat the racial preferences charlatans, might as well join them! ; -)

    • Richard Mullins

      and I’d rather have a space for American instead of your race. I mailed my census form last week or the week before, so I’m not worried. I’m a little worried that some others in North Harris county areas Kingwood haven’t gotten there forms yet. The same for those in Montgomery county. I certainly don’t want Spring and Harris county to get under reported.

      • Common_Cents

        I’m not sure of the past examples of cenus forms and what questions were asked.

        I’d like to know if this one is new and different by asking race information, phone numbers etc???

        • davesinsanantonio

          the census has had in decades. In times past they had very long forms for some percentages of the population that asked such things as how many toilets were in the house, how many goats you owned, etc. This is because by the Constitution the Congress gets to decide the “manner” in which the census shall be conducted. The Department of Agriculture convinced the Congress they needed to know about the goats (and other farm animals) The Department of Defense wanted to know how many young men were coming into draft age. The Corps of Engineers wanted to know about the volume of waste water. (Also, in this case the states also wanted Congress to authorize this question for the same reason.) Etc, etc. Be thankful they are asking so few questions this time around.

  • wolfster38

    Here you can find Rep. Patrick McHenry voting record.

    http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=21031

    Not saying anything bad not saying anything good, just for knowledge.

    214 days to election 2010
    949 days to election 2012

  • Christine (Trelaina)

    and should fill out and turn in the Census forms (or wait for the worker to knock on your door if that’s your preference).

    I for one will be going the “American” route. I will probably fill out the rest accurately, however I will not contribute to the continued race discrimination that our government happily encourages and participates in.

  • Michael Dugas

    The census shouldn’t be politicized but the reality of the matter is that it is. From my discussions most of us really only have a problem with the race questions. I wrote Human on mine and tough you know what if they don’t like it. I also didn’t give them my phone number, again too bad.
    Here you say, “Boycotting the census also offends me as an American patriot.”
    You know what who cares if you are offended or not. Our country and our constitution are under attack from within and we’re supposed to care about you feeling slighted by a boycott that you later state no one has actually advocated for, “No one has advocated a direct boycott of the census ….”
    Then you go on to tell us about all your efforts to keep ACORN out of the Census and “battle” (is that a Freudian call for violence?)
    against the Obama Administrations harmful Census plans…..ok here’s an “Attaboy!” for you. You feel better now.
    I know actually doing your job can be trying but you better get it through your head that the Republican party bears some of the responsibility for the situation we find ourselves in fiscally and politically.
    Popping out with lessons about the Constitution will mean a lot more once the government of this country starts following it on a regular basis and not just when it suits their own selfish needs.
    Also calling conservatives liars is not going to help sway their opinions. Here you say, “No, what worries me is blatant misinformation coming from otherwise well-meaning conservatives.” You realize the definition of blatant right? You are saying they are intentionally lying about the Census.
    bla?tant

    ?/?ble?tnt/ [bleyt-nt]
    ?adjective
    1.
    brazenly obvious; flagrant: ie: a blatant lie.

    Also you need to take into account that their are a whole lot of people who feel threatened and helpless over the actions of their government and may be feeling uncooperative at this time and that the decision to comply or not with the Census is the only voice they may feel they have at this time.

  • RedBeard

    The Constitution isn’t a vague outline of government, nor a procedural manual. It is the instrument by which the states granted to the federal government only certain very specific powers, and prohibited the federal government from usurping additional powers from the states and/or the people.

    Until Congress, the Supreme Court, and the White House begin acting within constitutional boundaries, there will be continued distrust in the motives of all three branches.

    In this specific matter, enumeration means counting. That is all the Constitution allows Congress to do. It’s not an open door through which nosy social engineers may extract all manner of private information.

    • Scope

      We were told by our postmaster that if you have a P. O. Box address, you are not mailed a Census form. They then pay you a visit. If they know my physical address, to come and visit me, then why couldn’t they mail me a Census, which I would have picked up at the post office, and, mailed back. They mailed me the tax forms, why not the Census?

      • RedBeard

        I mean, sure, they can’t get this paperwork deal right, but when you need an apendectomy, no problem.

        • davesinsanantonio

          “Bureaucracy at its worst is better than bureaucracy at its best”

    • davesinsanantonio

      The Constitution states that Congress shall by law direct the manner of the census. That means Congress gets to determine what questions shall be asked. It doesn’t get any plainer than that. All your wishing it says something different doesn’t make it so. Your ignoring the very wording of the Constitution is as bad as that of those on the left! Please stop bending the Constitution to your way of thinking and follow what it SAYS.

  • whiskey_sierra

    Sorry, the Constitution argument does not mean a hill of beans to me anymore.

    No one follows or cares what the Constitution says anymore. Your ‘interpretation’ of the clause is different than mine, so I will fill it out however I want. There are no absolutes, there are not specifics, there are NO rules anymore.

    That’s pretty much where we are in the US today, so deal with it…..if your not willing to take up arms and defended the Constitution from those willing to destroy it from within, then don’t try to get preachy with us about it.

    The government can try and FORCE me to follow the Constitution because I have become little more than a slave, but the “contract” has been totally broken since its now a one way street.

    • realamerican78

      neither does my phone number or the kind of housing I stay or my gender. The purpose is to count people so that all districts can be drawn to include approximately the same number of people so that representation is equal in numbers. There’s no way in hell that one’s race should constitutionally be a factor in doing that (not that the activists on the courts haven’t required it). Nor does one’s age or in what kind of structure they reside have any relevance to COUNTING.

      If they’re counting all that stuff to determine what federal goodies to hand out then it’s not constitutionally mandated. Once you’ve told them how many people there are (helping them enumerate) you’ve fulfilled your duty.

      On the other hand, if we’re playing politics then the people of Texas and other Red areas should fill out as many census forms as they like.

      • jmimac351

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BiLWfZUK4uU

      • davesinsanantonio

        to direct by law the manner of the census. That means they get to determine what questions will be asked. All your wishing it wasn’t so does not erase that phrase from the Constitution. So, get over your whining and follow the law. If you don’t like the law, work to elect senators and representatives who agree with you. But, until then, lets follow what the Constitution says, not what you may wish it said–that is what we complain about the left doing. Why would you want to follow their example?

    • davesinsanantonio

      shall we just throw out the Constitution and revert to mob rule? There must be at least one person in the United States who is following the Constitution, so your whole argument falls apart with you hyperbolic statement. Even if it were true, do we get others to begin following the Constitution by breaking it ourselves? Since you are upset that someone else is not willing to defend the Constitution by force of arms, what exactly are you trying to accomplish? Do you just want to stop the preaching? Or, do you want to compel others to preach what you want to hear? Do you really want others to start following the Constitution or do you just want to grab your gun and start killing somebody? What do you want? When you figure it out, then start working to achieve it. After all, if you don’t know where you are going you will probably end up somewhere else. If you want to get others to follow the Constitution, the best starting point is to support it and follow it yourself. If you think no one follows the rules, then you start following them and give other people an example of what it is like. After all, actions speak louder than words, even harsh angry words.

  • http://www.hopeychangemas.com VizBiz

    I can appreciate your voting record (for the most part), but this is a sore subject for a lot of folks who feels our Government is completely out of control.

    Folks are just starting to become civilly disobedient. Expect more to come.

  • Scope

    considered the Constitution to be any thing other than TP? Yes Rep McHenry, that includes many Republicans as well.

    BTW, has anyone bothered to try to correct all the problems with the Census software?

  • http://www.scragged.com petrarch

    There was a very good reason the 1790 census asked about race: it was essential and directly related to both taxing and representation, thanks to the 3/5 Compromise. Yes, technically that applied to slaves and not specifically to a race, but in most states, that would be pretty close to interchangeable.

    Today, there’s no legitimate reason for our government to ask about race. But there’s also nothing to prevent a patriot from fully completing and returning their census form: just check “Other Race” and fill in “American”, which is every bit as much a race as is Hispanic.

    Rep. McHenry is correct: we need to fill out our census forms.

    • southernilpat

      Honestly, do you think the feds need this little paper form to know anything about you? Anyone really think that the government doesn’t already know everything about you? That they don’t know your phone number? Where you live? Who lives with you? Where you work and how much money you make? If they want to know, they do.

      Fill it out. Send it in. Let them continue to think we are stupid enough to believe they don’t know about us unless we tell them.

  • conservos

    Beginning with the Houston Chronicle?

    Dunham, from your article states:

    “There is a reason for the enthusiasm gap on the census: A number of prominent conservative and libertarian Republicans have been blasting the census for months.”

    As though is the absolute truth, Representative.

    1st – Right before that, the article states “Most other counties near the bottom of the list are heavily Hispanic counties along the Texas-Mexico border.” — which would include the heavily Democratic population that *wouldn’t* be responsive to “prominent conservative and libertarian Republicans.”

    2nd – I submit to you liberal California, which is currently below the national response rate. They’re not big, eager fans of “prominent conservative and libertarian Republicans,” either. What other reason would explain their not returning their census.

    3rd – The Chronicle is further disingenuous because this is a dated article, nearly one week old, and it has yet to update it’s information. This misleads the public, espeically when 2010census.gov provides a very handy map that gets updated everyday between 3 – 5p.

    Texas is now at 46%, California’s at 49% and the national rate is at 52% — and none of this came about by die-hard conservatives begrudingly deciding to “do their duty.”

    We are law-abiding citizens, sir.

    It’s a mischaracterization of the conservative patriot to say Texas’s “low” — and other states’ — rates are low because we are considering boycotting or a partial fill-in. Where are the sources and the stats to support this, aside from some rhetoric the liberal mainstream media selectively choosess to overblow?

    Many of us know about the $86 million price-tag that accompanies each percentage point if the response rate isn’t dropped.

    It’s our money that’s going to be spent, and it behooves us to not do what is required of us.

    Whatever you’re describing, it ain’t us.

    Someone should be out there talking to the slackers.

    You’ve come to a place of movers and shakers and you’re preaching to the choir.

  • Menlo

    They are sending government workers to everyone’s house (all one billion plus of them) to take pictures and fingerprints for national ID cards and a centralized database. They are collecting information about their phone use, internet use, and more.

    It certainly helps put things in perspective.

  • Ausonius

    He famously wanted only Americans, not Afro-Americans, Italian-Americans, or even, I would assume, Native Americans.

    This attitude has been lost, because of the political hay that can be made – by Deem-ocrats today – by advancing the proposition that all humanity MUST be made equal in ALL aspects of life, and that therefore the idea of race or ethnicity can be used to show an economic or intellectual inequality, which government must – somehow and illogically – resolve, in order to make life fair.

    • badgerbyte

      Surely you jest. Ever since ACORN and CENSUS was used together in one sentence I knew that accuracy would be the last thing this would convey.

      Okay now folks, get ready for the jobs report tomorrow. This report will include the 1.3 million temporary census workers so the left is going to be banging the pots and pans that the recession is over. Just a heads up…

      • davesinsanantonio

        those temporary census workers are let go? I believe most thinking people have learned to take government or media numbers with a ton of salt. Mark Twain said: There are three kinds of lies–lies, damned lies, and statistics. Let them lie, then state the facts, explain them if you have to, and thinking people will understand what is what. The people on the left will not be swayed by facts, understand that and accept it. They do not know how to think, only how to connive. They do not want the truth, they want government pablum, or they want to control our access to the truth. Either way, we will use the truth to get to thinking people, and then we will take back our government and put the ship of state back on course.

  • RedBeard

    …I’m beginning to feel sorry for Rep. McHenry. I’ll bet he wonders who shook the hornet’s nest.

    In truth, the nest was shaken by a great many politicians over the years, but never so hard as Obama/Reid/Pelosi have shaken it. People are awakening, taking to the streets, and trying to reclaim the America that has been eroded over the last decades, and which is now in danger of destruction at the hands of this Congress and this White House.

    This mass awakening is going to be a bit unpleasant even for those on “our” side of the aisle. Some, those who wear the “R” badge but act like Lite Democrats, deserve the pain. Others, those who generally understand the limited constitutional role of government, are still going to get hit with an occasional pie, just by virtue of being in a legislative body with a lower approval rating than Tony Soprano’s family. Collateral damage, if you will.

    Understanding the quickly rising distrust, fear, anger, resentment (and the vigor of the new drive to reclaim the country from the radicals) is going to be imperative for any member of Congress who really wants to be the a representative of the people. I hope Rep. McHenry is one who does understand, and will work with us.

    • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

      We need to make these guys feel welcome so they’re more likely to engage, not get nasty with them and drive them away.

    • davesinsanantonio

      For a long time most of us were pretty vigilant to the threat from outside, but were negligent toward the threat from within. Now that the hornets’ nest has been bashed hard several times by the statist troika in D. C., the hornets are angry and ready to attack. However, it is needful to remember that hornets do not attack each other, but the threat to the nest. Even weak hornets, slow flying ones, can defend the nest. The fast flying strong ones do not sting other defenders who happen to get in their way. Now, before anyone misunderstand this analogy, let me say that Rinos are not hornets. But, it is better to let the Rinos alone for a while so that we can attack the weasels that are banging on the nest. Primaries are the time and place to get the Rinos away from the nest. The general election is for the weasels.

  • Bill S

    (The comments, that is….not the original diary)

    Folks, go back and read streiff’s diary about the Census. The guy worked for them in 2000. He knows of what he speaks.

    Sheesh. Maybe it’s just April Fool’s day or something.

  • cabanon

    I want to give Obama the least amount of information on me and my family that I can. I do NOT trust them, you all should NOT trust them. If we all hold out on the census then they can’t track us and it’ll send a a clear message that can not be ignored!

    • davesinsanantonio

      you think they can’t find you if you do not send in your census form. They already know all about you. You are right to not trust Obama or his followers, but come on! The way to not be ignored is to send in the form and be counted and get more representatives for your state and then work to get conservatives elected to fill those seats. Then, maybe you and I can begin to place some trust in our government again. But, remember with trust must come verification! We will keep an eye on them, even if they are conservative when we elect them.

      • cabanon

        Obama and the government can NOT be trusted with anymore information. I should be able to NOT do something in this Country if I decide not to. and if anyone else feels that they wish to send a message to Washington you can start be boycotting this BS cenus to collect more of my personal info.

  • jmimac351

    and if the Census worker shows up asking additional questions ask by “penalty of law” ask for your Miranda warning… Your “Right to Remain Silent” and not answer their questions. HA!

  • http://www.theprecinctproject.wordpress.com ColdWarrior

    Print out this Public Servant’s Questionnaire and demand they sign it before they ask you any questions:

    http://nonais.org/techdocs/PublicServantQuestionnaire.pdf

    Undoubtedly, they’ll refuse and leave.

    Thank you.
    ColdWarrior
    No More Scozzafavas!
    Act! Become a Republican precinct committeeman. NOW!

  • E Pluribus Unum

    I don’t.

    They have many faces, many names, and the clowns in charge of this are all in bed with them.

    • http://hillbillypolitics.com Steph C
  • Don T.

    We as Americans are understood by the Constitution to have the right to be left alone. Judge Napolitano had it right: I want my Miranda warning and then, the option to exercise my right to remain silent.

    Others here have eloquently described what the purpose of the census is: to enumerate citizens in order to determine apportioned representatives in Congress, from the various states. That is what is required by the Constitution. Everything else is superfluous, beginning with the 1790 census onward to today. Now, those extra questions in 1790, 1830, etc., up to today, were added for some good reasons, perhaps, some added for not good reasons at all, but that does not stand in the way of the fact that they have nothing to do with the enumeration.

    Personally, I have no problem with the short census form, except for race (American, thank you…any thing else is none of the gummint’s bizness), and birth dates. Why birth dates? I was quite generous and gave out the ages of all in my household – why give out a birth date, personal info that isn’t needed and doesn’t need to go out on the grid any more than it already is? We know about identity theft, don’t we? I gave out my phone number, because maybe they will call me to get the answers out of me, rather than send a useless, overpaid worker to my door.

    I think I’m hoping for too much of a hopelessly inefficient, fairly stupid gummint bureaucracy.

    But if I get one of the ACS long forms…look out. I am going to be refusing to answer the majority of the questions, exercising my 4th amendment rights against illegal searches.

  • http://www.helpawhiteguy.com livefreenh

    The reason I was waiting to return my census form is because the questions had to do with occupancy on April 1, 2010. It would have been inappropriate for me to answer such a question until that date had arrived.

  • http://guyaverage.blogspot.com guyaverage

    …and will still be rigging the results in order to foster everything from gerrymandering to “Stimulus Funds” to be redirected into slush projects. Representative, stop patting yourself on the back and calling yourself a Conservative just because you have an “R” next to your name. You and other “conservatives” have fought off exactly ZERO of the policies and projects that the Current President and Democrats have proposed and enacted. I understand that taking credit for doing nothing is the standard operating procedure inside the beltway, but you need to understand that outside the beltway we are no longer buying that kind of claptrap. Never Again.

  • witsend

    Maybe the reason fewer conservatives have not yet returned their census forms is because they are more honest than liberals. Anyone who returned the form before April 1 runs the risk of giving misinformation. How does one know on March 15 who will be living at the household. I know I have read obituaries of people who have died during those last two weeks of March. Are they in the April 1 count? They probably are if that household returned the form before count day!

  • 4life

    once at home and once on vacation. I threw out the second form I received at the rented condo, but that seems like it opens the door for corruption.

  • bobmontgomery

    …is a prime example of the problem conservatives have with the Republican Party. He says things that are politically correct without realizing it and he assumes things that are not true and he is deathly afraid of confrontation.
    The Census Form is addressed to “Resident”. Not “conservative”. Apparently, my six year old, who is a “resident” and quite liberal, is obligated to fill out the form and tell the census bureau what race I am. I wonder if he knows I consider myself a Pacific Islander. “Let’s get our fair share” mentality is offensive. There is no question on the form about conservative.
    The race question is repeated over and over and over again. It is “White or Black” Those are COLORS. Pacific Islander is not a race.
    The constitution gives Congress the power to make an enumeration. It DOES NOT “explicitly” or implicitly give Congress the power to ask questions. So go ahead and oppose Obamacare if you want, McHenry, but your interpretation of the Constitution doesn’t jibe with your stance.
    And finally, Rep. McHenry, the REAL problem is with the ACS survey. Pay no attention to THAT man behind the curtain, huh? What is Constitutional about the ACS survey, which is an operation of the Census? How many times per day do you flush your toilet and how much money do you make, Rep. McHenry?

  • rightwingmom52

    covered the return envelope with God Bless America, Don’t Tread on Me and Vote Conservative stickers. If they can’t figure out I’m conservative from that, they’re dumber than I thought.

    • mschmitt

      … by a census worker IRS agent.

  • http://opinerlog.blogspot.com jdelaney3

    While it is understandable why so many thoughtful Americans question anything emanating from this Progressive regime, and despite the interpretation of the last sentence of Art 1, Sec 2, Clause 3 being unsettled, my brief analysis (see Opinerlog.blogspot.com) concludes that the census is, is fact, constitutional.

    HOWEVER, it is doubtful iin the extreme that the invasive American Community Survey, an11-pg, 48-question monstrosity which is randomlly mailed to 3 million households, is anything way constitutional. I would suggest no American who values his liberty and confidentiality complete that instrusive and overreaching form. But, again, the census is probably one of the precious few activities of the current socialist regime which is constitutional.

  • kuhnkat

    “That last part, ?in such a manner as they shall by law direct,? gives Congress the power to determine how the census will be conducted and what questions will be asked.”

    The actual enumeration…

    You don’t understand what an enumeration is?? It is certainly not finding out any personal information as the Constitution and 10th give the Fed little reason to have this information.

    Yes, it gives them the right to decide whether they will mail the census, send out people to count fingers and divide by 10, set up call banks or Internet sites… It does NOT give them the right to find anything but the NUMBER of people.

    Under your unbounded definition they could ask whether you are a citizen, your sexual preferences, whether you owe money, have committed crimes, who you voted for… Even you must see that this type of unbounded authority was not granted to the Fed. Your position is even more ludicrous than the Judges who have expanded the Inter State Commerce powers to a ridiculous extent.

    Yes we should return our census forms with a COUNT OF PERSONS AT THAT ADDRESS AND NOTHING MORE!!!

  • whimsley

    The 2010 Form does not ask whether you are conservative. It asks us to number ourselves. This determines each state’s representation in the House of Representatives. Answer it in full or in part.

    I worked Census, last spring and this spring. Otherwise, I am unemployed. I do not want to have to visit you personally (even though it means more pay for me at your expense). I’d rather have a REAL job (wish I could find one).

    Returning your Census questionnaire will GREATLY reduce the amount of Federal funds spent on the Census operations.

    It is just plain worng to think you are making some kind of stand by not returning the questionaire, because we are instructed to complete it by observation if no other means are available. You do not really want Census workers (who are mostly incompetent) answering the questions for you.

  • Tbone

    She said “yes”.

    I asked what she did with it.

    She said she threw it away.

    I said, “What did you think it was, a jury summons?”

  • ConstitutionMan

    I appreciate McHenry’s 100% ACU rating. He’s a conservative’s conservative, BUT his “interpretation” of the Census clause of the Constitution is wrong and I encourage all conservatives to ignore Census form questions unrelated to the number of persons residing legally in their homes.

    Article 1, Section 2 says the ENUMERATION (count) shall be “in such manner as they (Congress) shall by law direct.? In other words, Congress alone will determine how to actually conduct the COUNT – NOT asking about everything else under the sun! Does McHenry’s interpretation mean they can ask about our love lives? I maintain that asking about one’s race or whether his house is owned or rented is no less improper than “love life” questions for the Census.

    The Census Bureau conducts American Community Surveys (ACS), year by year, to ask many more questions just as unwarranted as some Census 2010 questions. I believe our federal Masters know of the growing anger over an out-of-all-constitutional-bounds federal government doing things and asking things of Americans it ought not. Enter the ACS. It permits a “short” 2010 Census form. Our federal Betters are so very clever!

  • Swamp_Yankee

    I can’t believe so many conservatives are short-sighted. For better part of a year, I’ve been trying to get conservatives in red areas to get involved in the census. Liberals have been rigging the game.

    People should stop playing armchair constitutional lawyers. The fact is that liberals have been stacking the deck for urban areas and blue states for decades. My state, for example, shouls probably lose a Congressional seat next year. A state like Texas should add a couple.

    But the liberal activists up here are busy finding mythical illegals in every basement in Boston. While conservatives are worried about an abstract invsation of privacy.

    1. We should be trying to make sure that liberal states are blocked from having control of both state house and the executive to defend against any redistricting schemes.

    2. And we should make sure that number is red areas are sky high so we get the funding we deserve and get more House seats.

    Who could be opposed to this? People want Bostonl New York City, Chicago and Los Angeles over-represented?

    It nuts.

    • Swamp_Yankee

      They are counted by geographic area.

      Obviously, Utah is more conservative then Maine. For example, if Utah population shows an increase, and the Maine population a significant decrease, the House redistricting may take a seat from Maine and give it to Utah.

      We fight this, why?

    • Bill S
  • Common_Cents

    When he had a white mom?

    How is filling it out that way honest?

  • drewwill

    Couldn’t agree more!

  • http://chucksomerville.com/ Chuck From Dayton

    There is a law – Title 13 USC.

    It says they can ask this stuff.

    We’ve got bigger fish to fry – Amnesty, Cap & Trade, Health Care do-over.

  • rmberry

    I’m sorry sir, but I do not believe you are interpreting the Constitution correctly. The pertinent part reads:

    “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 definition of enumeration is “To determine the number of; count.”

    And it would appear to myself that the phrase “in such Manner as they shall by Law direct” refers to the enumeration itself, not a redefining of the word, meaning that the law can dictate how the government goes about the counting. There is nothing there giving them the right to ask any question other than “How many people live at your address”. There is no authority to inquire about my race, my age, or how many toilets I have in the house.

    When mine came I answered the question regarding how many people are under my roof, and that is all. While you are correct that it is our constitutional duty to return the census, it is not our constitutional duty to humor politicians when they go off script.

    • ipunchedhitler

      ABSOLUTELY!!!! You are reading the context of this correctly…unlike Mr. Patrick McHenry! Sad…THIS is who we have in our Congress…a bunch o misfits that can not interpret the CONSTITUTION. SICK!

  • Pingback: YOU WILL NOT BELIEVE THIS !

  • Pingback: kizi

  • Pingback: Google

  • Pingback: http://school.phc.edu.tw/~amps/blog/2010/?attachment_id=14

  • Pingback: http://www.mashpedia.com/Credit_limit

  • Pingback: real estate properties

  • Pingback: levitra

  • Pingback: christian dating

  • Pingback: Otto Gutschein

  • Pingback: Signoeditores

  • Pingback: Signoeditores

  • Pingback: Signo editores

  • Pingback: used ABB robots

  • Pingback: legitimate online business

  • Pingback: Continuar

  • Pingback: Cool music videos

  • Pingback: raspberry ketones weight loss

  • Pingback: African Mango Plus

  • Pingback: personalised mugs for kids

  • Pingback: Recomendado

  • Pingback: silver rings

  • Pingback: view the best bodybuilding pictures

  • Pingback: Teak garden furniture

  • Pingback: job search

  • Pingback: Capsule endoscopy

  • Pingback: The Census and right wing(nuts) | OrthoCuban