Corrupt Government
See other Corrupt Government Articles
Title: This Is Not James Madison's Census
Source:
USA Today
URL Source: http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinio ... 04-17-schwarzwalder16_ST_N.htm
Published: Jun 2, 2010
Author: Rob Schwarzwalder
Post Date: 2010-06-02 20:30:24 by Murron
Keywords: None
Views: 2168
Comments: 11
This Is Not James Madison's Census By Rob Schwarzwalder Karl Rove is appearing on Census Bureau ads assuring us that "If you've not yet mailed back your 2010 Census form, it's not too late. Please answer the 10 easy questions," Rove adds. "They're almost the same ones that Madison helped write for the first census back in 1790." Well, not quite. The 1790 Census was a bit more succinct than the interpersonal inquisition of the current form. Specifically, it asked the following: the name of the "head of household," the number of "free white males 16 years and upward" and "under 16 years," the number of "free white females," the "number of all other free persons (by sex and color)" and "the number of slaves." That's it. And when Mr. Madison, the "Father of the Constitution," designed the survey, he did so with the Constitution itself as his guide. The Constitution (Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3, to be exact) specifies that every 10 years, America's population is to be "enumerated" for purposes of allocating congressional representation. This is quite straightforward. Over the centuries, however, the Census form has become a means of collecting all manner of intrusive and irrelevant data on American citizens, from birthdates to phone numbers. The 1830 Census wanted to know information about occupations. The 1860 Census requested information about the value of one's "real estate" (property) and "personal estate" (cash on hand, possessions, etc.) and even wanted to know if anyone listed on the form was "deaf and dumb, blind, insane, idiotic, pauper, or convict." Today's America has changed. We supposedly are a colorblind society and one in which "rights" now include "broad penumbras," let alone those listed in the Declaration of Independence. An anachronism Yet the 2010 Census is a sociological anachronism. According to the Census website, "people from many walks of life use Census data to advocate for causes, rescue disaster victims, prevent diseases, research markets, locate pools of skilled workers and more. When you do the math, it's easy to see what an accurate count of residents can do for your community. Better infrastructure. More services. A brighter tomorrow for everyone." Wow — a "brighter future for everyone." And just for filling out a form. Apart from its embarrassing language, however, the questions asked in the Census form are unrelated to the constitutional basis for the form itself: apportionment of representation in Congress. And since when — at least, under a serious reading of the Constitution itself — did the Census Bureau become a national snoop, an insistent invader of one's identity? While the courts (curiously) have upheld Congress's right to ask the kinds of questions the current form contains, they are clearly extra-constitutional. The Constitution requires that Congress count the population every decade to determine the allocation of congressional seats. Nothing more. The Census is not a sociological experiment, nor an aid to businesses to find workers or help combat floods or find the cure for cancer, the common cold or pernicious addictions to caffeinated beverages. Most disturbing is the current Census form's racially obsessive questions. The Census Bureau tacitly acknowledges this by attempting to rationalize the invasive precision of its questions. For example, in explaining why the form asks, "Is Person One of Hispanic, Latino or Spanish origin," the Census homepage answers: Asked since 1970. The data collected in this question are needed by federal agencies to monitor compliance with anti-discrimination provisions, such as under the Voting Rights Act and the Civil Rights Act. State and local governments may use the data to help plan and administer bilingual programs for people of Hispanic origin. This is an almost hilarious study in obfuscation and evasion. First, if a person is subject to racial or ethnic discrimination, his identity will be obvious, thereby making census data irrelevant. Second, the questions about Hispanic and Asian origin are far more exhaustive than the Census Bureau, in its explanatory statement about "Questions on the Form," wishes to acknowledge. Here is the totality of the categories listed: Under Asian and Pacific Islander: Indian, Chinese, Filipino, Hmong, Laotian, Thai, Pakistani, Cambodian, Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese, Native Hawaiian, Guamanian, Chamorro, and "other Pacific Islander." However, in case this listing is insufficiently replete, there is a space for the filer to input another Asian or Pacific Islander "race." Fascinating: I hitherto had not known that Hawaiians, Hmong, et al, were separate "races." But wait — there's more. Hispanics can also be "Latinos and Spanish" and are asked to inform us whether they are Mexican, Mexican American, Chicano, Puerto Rican, Cuban, Argentinean, Colombian, Dominican, Nicaraguan, Salvadoran, Spaniard, "and so on." My limited choices By the way: what am I, chopped Caucasian liver? My ancestry is German, Dutch, French and who knows what else thrown in. But all I get to claim is "white," even though my two "German" grandfathers came from regions of their country so disparate (far western Germany and its geographic opposite, Danzig — now Gdansk in Poland) that they were probably about as bio-ethnically related as a Neapolitan and a Bulgarian. My point is that none of this matters. Ethnicity and race are, aside from possible endemic medical conditions, genealogical parlor games. They define neither humanness nor citizenship, character nor value. America's charter text affirms that "all men are created equal." The Constitution is premised on this assertion, in that it assumes human dignity and the right of representative self-government. Thus, the census is needed to assure that such self-government can be expressed accurately within the context of the U.S. Congress. Instead, the Census form categorizes people not by citizenship and place of residence, but fundamentally by race and ethnicity. This is un-American. Human beings are made in the likeness of their Creator. This, with their citizenship and home address, is really all the Census Bureau needs to know.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Paging war, go65, All (#0)
You two did answer all the questions put to you, and truthfully?
- WHAT IS YOUR PHONE NUMBER - WHAT IS YOUR INCOME - DO YOU OWN YOUR HOUSE - WHAT RACE ARE YOU
According to the MouthBreathers among us those questions are unconstitutional They do more than count but ask SPECIFIC questions about the makeup of the people being counted. This Is Not James Madison's Census Neither was 1790's...it was Thomas Jefferson's. (laughing)
#67. To: war (#48) Keep hiding behind the bozo, bozo. (laughing) You've always been a world class pussy. Badeye posted on 2010-01-14 16:12:48 ET Reply Trace
You're a defeatist war, an older man who's learned nothing in all these years on the internet except stupid gotcha games, and if you've passed on anything to your future generations, they'll be just like you too....and thank you for it too I'm sure!
Neither was 1790's...it was Thomas Jefferson's. (laughing) You really are dumber than a box of rocks, and bone lazy too... James Madison, added Article 1, Section 2 to the U.S. Constitution. It mandated that every 10 years an "actual enumeration" of the nation's population would be made to ensure fair allocation of "representatives and direct taxes." Another founding father, Thomas Jefferson, supervised the first census in 1790. It asked six questions: the name of the head of household, the number of free white males older than 16, free white males younger than 16, free white females, all other free persons and the number of slaves. Ditzy Doodles...do you really believe that you can google something and be smarter than me? You're as bad as Boofer. JEFFERSON - and every Secretary of State until the 1840 census - ran the 1790 census. Your article states that Madison did ["And when Mr. Madison, the "Father of the Constitution," designed the survey, he did so with the Constitution itself as his guide."] There is NO LANGUAGE in article I that determines WHAT FORM THE QUESTIONS ASKED will take.
#67. To: war (#48) Keep hiding behind the bozo, bozo. (laughing) You've always been a world class pussy. Badeye posted on 2010-01-14 16:12:48 ET Reply Trace
Chuckles...they debated the census clause FOR DAYS*, moronette. Determinining HOW representatives would be apportioned was a MAJOR issue to the Annapolis delegates. It wasn't until they came up with the 3/5 compromise that they were able to move forward. Geezus fuck this is USCON 101. *I won't tell what days. Srart at Day 1 and read. You might learn something.
#67. To: war (#48) Keep hiding behind the bozo, bozo. (laughing) You've always been a world class pussy. Badeye posted on 2010-01-14 16:12:48 ET Reply Trace
Nicely done.
For approximately 72K, BP Oil bought Owe-bama. And as President, he let them Spill, Baby, Spill! Its documented.
I filled out 'how many in the household' our names, and that was it.
For approximately 72K, BP Oil bought Owe-bama. And as President, he let them Spill, Baby, Spill! Its documented.
I wouldn't doubt war gave them the exact time and date of his last bowel movement ...for extra browny points...
Conversely, if it was a GOP congress and Whitehouse he'd be screaming bloody murder. You and I have known what he is for years now.
For approximately 72K, BP Oil bought Owe-bama. And as President, he let them Spill, Baby, Spill! Its documented.
"The 1860 Census requested information about the value of one's "real estate" (property) and "personal estate" (cash on hand, possessions, etc.) and even wanted to know if anyone listed on the form was "deaf and dumb, blind, insane, idiotic, pauper, or convict."
#2. To: Murron, war, badeye, whitesands (#0)
"They're almost the same ones that Madison helped write for the first census back in 1790."
#3. To: Murron (#1)
(Edited)
Well, not quite. The 1790 Census was a bit more succinct than the interpersonal inquisition of the current form. Specifically, it asked the following: the name of the "head of household," the number of "free white males 16 years and upward" and "under 16 years," the number of "free white females," the "number of all other free persons (by sex and color)" and "the number of slaves."
#4. To: war (#3)
(Edited)
#5. To: war (#3)
This Is Not James Madison's Census
#6. To: Murron (#5)
#7. To: All (#6)
(Edited)
James Madison, added Article 1, Section 2 to the U.S. Constitution. It mandated that every 10 years an "actual enumeration" of the nation's population would be made to ensure fair allocation of "representatives and direct taxes." Another founding father,
#8. To: Murron (#5)
#9. To: HAPPY2BME-ONLF (#2)
#10. To: Badeye (#9)
I filled out 'how many in the household' our names, and that was it.
#11. To: Murron (#10)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]