TexasCHLforum.com

Estand wrote:I came across this story later after reading this thread. Came back to post for all.

Census Data Not So Confidential After All
March 8, 2010
http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=2744" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A good read. Thanks for the post!

SQLGeek wrote:Got ours today and filled it out. Evidently my race doesn't qualify for its own category.

Mine either: "human".

this part got me.

Unfortunately, choosing privacy now costs more: legislation recently passed raises the fine for “anyone over 18 years old who refuses or willfully neglects to complete the questionnaire or answer questions posed by census takers” from a limit of $100 to $5,000—a fact not advertised even in the small print.

suthdj wrote:this part got me.

Unfortunately, choosing privacy now costs more: legislation recently passed raises the fine for “anyone over 18 years old who refuses or willfully neglects to complete the questionnaire or answer questions posed by census takers” from a limit of $100 to $5,000—a fact not advertised even in the small print.

Amazing, I just went to look for the form and it appears my wife threw it in the garbage.

I filled it out
I am a family of 8 Eskimos with a Family income of 1 Trillions Dollars!

Census Workers cant get me If I dont answer the door.

Anyone hear about how Census workers will GPS your door if you dont fill out your census
http://www.infowars.com/census-gps-a-mi ... your-door/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
They gonna shoot me!

The first question is:

"1. How many people were living or staying in this house, apartment, or mobile home on April 1, 2010?"

As all of the questions are based on what happens on April 1, 2010 the intent (to me) is clearly that you have to wait until at least April 2, 2010 to complete the form.

Also, I couldn't find any reference to a deadline for submitting the completed form.

Note the extraneous comma after the word "apartment". Is this really the best they could do?

Here's my rant on this: Read it if you're really bored.

<rant>
Persuant to Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution, the only information the census is permitted to obtain is the number of people living in your house. Period!

“Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Number… 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 Supreme Court supports this!

“Neither branch of the legislative department [House of Representatives or Senate], still less any merely administrative body [insert Census Bureau], established by congress, possesses, or can be invested with, a general power of making inquiry into the private affairs of the citizen.” Kilbourn v. Thompson, 103 U.S. 168, 190.

What I'm going to do is answer Question 1. And send this letter in with it.

Pursuant to Article I, Section 2, Clause 3 of the Constitution the only information you are empowered to request is the number of people living in my house. My “name, sex, age, date of birth, race, ethnicity, relationship and housing tenure” have absolutely nothing to with apportioning direct taxes or determining the number of representatives in the House of Representatives. Therefore, neither Congress nor the Census Bureau has the constitutional authority to make that information request a component of the enumeration outlined in Article I, Section 2, Clause 3.

I think I'll also cite the following:

“Neither branch of the legislative department [House of Representatives or Senate], still less any merely administrative body [insert Census Bureau], established by congress, possesses, or can be invested with, a general power of making inquiry into the private affairs of the citizen. Kilbourn v. Thompson, 103 U.S. 168, 190. We said in Boyd v. U.S., 116 U. S. 616, 630, 6 Sup. Ct. 524,―and it cannot be too often repeated,―that the principles that embody the essence of constitutional liberty and security forbid all invasions on the part of government and it’s employees of the sanctity of a man’s home and the privacies of his life. As said by Mr. Justice Field in Re Pacific Ry. Commission, 32 Fed. 241, 250, ‘of all the rights of the citizen, few are of greater importance or more essential to his peace and happiness than the right of personal security, and that involves, not merely protection of his person from assault, but exemption of his private affairs, books, and papers from inspection and scrutiny of others. Without the enjoyment of this right, all others would lose half their value.’” [The bracketed words added for clarification] Interstate Commerce Commission v. Brimson, 154 U.S. 447, 479 (May 26, 1894)

</rant>

I applaud your stance, timdsmith72. Sadly, they'll probably say that since both the paper that the form was printed on and the ink in the pen that you used had travelled in interstate commerce, you have to go to Gitmo.

.....empowered to request is the number of people living in my house. My “name, sex, age, date of birth, race, ethnicity, relationship and housing tenure”

That's the only information Census was asking on my Census form I got in the mail. Oh. They also asked for the names of the other people living in the house with me. That's all. I don't have a problem with that.

timdsmith72 wrote:Here's my rant on this: Read it if you're really bored.

<rant>
Persuant to Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution, the only information the census is permitted to obtain is the number of people living in your house. Period!

“Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Number… 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 Supreme Court supports this!

“Neither branch of the legislative department [House of Representatives or Senate], still less any merely administrative body [insert Census Bureau], established by congress, possesses, or can be invested with, a general power of making inquiry into the private affairs of the citizen.” Kilbourn v. Thompson, 103 U.S. 168, 190.

What I'm going to do is answer Question 1. And send this letter in with it.

Pursuant to Article I, Section 2, Clause 3 of the Constitution the only information you are empowered to request is the number of people living in my house. My “name, sex, age, date of birth, race, ethnicity, relationship and housing tenure” have absolutely nothing to with apportioning direct taxes or determining the number of representatives in the House of Representatives. Therefore, neither Congress nor the Census Bureau has the constitutional authority to make that information request a component of the enumeration outlined in Article I, Section 2, Clause 3.

I think I'll also cite the following:

“Neither branch of the legislative department [House of Representatives or Senate], still less any merely administrative body [insert Census Bureau], established by congress, possesses, or can be invested with, a general power of making inquiry into the private affairs of the citizen. Kilbourn v. Thompson, 103 U.S. 168, 190. We said in Boyd v. U.S., 116 U. S. 616, 630, 6 Sup. Ct. 524,―and it cannot be too often repeated,―that the principles that embody the essence of constitutional liberty and security forbid all invasions on the part of government and it’s employees of the sanctity of a man’s home and the privacies of his life. As said by Mr. Justice Field in Re Pacific Ry. Commission, 32 Fed. 241, 250, ‘of all the rights of the citizen, few are of greater importance or more essential to his peace and happiness than the right of personal security, and that involves, not merely protection of his person from assault, but exemption of his private affairs, books, and papers from inspection and scrutiny of others. Without the enjoyment of this right, all others would lose half their value.’” [The bracketed words added for clarification] Interstate Commerce Commission v. Brimson, 154 U.S. 447, 479 (May 26, 1894)

</rant>

THIS!!! +10000!

Well said timdsmith! I sent mine back two days ago only answering question 1 and writing in American for the ethnicity. I'm anxiously awaiting a knock on the door.

ninemm wrote: Note the extraneous comma after the word "apartment". Is this really the best they could do?

The comma is gramatically correct since each comma enumerates an item in the list. Removing it would structurally change the list.

SQLGeek wrote:

ninemm wrote: Note the extraneous comma after the word "apartment". Is this really the best they could do?

The comma is gramatically correct since each comma enumerates an item in the list. Removing it would structurally change the list.

I suspect you meant grammatically correct.

Really? How would it be different?

man, I feel like I am back in school with everyone correcting each others English and Grammar in all these threads.

pbwalker wrote:man, I feel like I am back in school with everyone correcting each others English and Grammar in all these threads.

boring aint it?

Can I put "NASCAR" for race?