Skip to comments.The Census and the Welfare State
Posted on 03/18/2010 6:14:57 AM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
The letter that Ralph Groves, director of the U.S. Census Bureau, recently sent to the American people reflects what America has become under the welfare state. Here is what the letter states in part:
"Your response is important. Results from the 2010 Census will be used to help each community get its fair share of government funds for highways, schools, health facilities, and many other programs you and your neighbors need. Without a complete, accurate census, your community may not receive its fair share."
In that one paragraph lies the plunderbund society in all it majestic glory. Everyone is supposed to feel morally obligated to answer all those intrusive questions in order to ensure that his community receives its fair share of the loot forcibly collected by the Internal Revenue Service during the course of the year, but especially on April 15.
You see, all that IRS-collected money goes into a gigantic pool that the president and Congress then have at their disposal to distribute to people.
As Groves points out, some of that IRS-collected money is sent to your "community." What does "community" mean? Alas, it doesn't mean you. If it did, that would mean that the federal government would simply be returning your hard-earned money to you.
No, by "community" Groves means your state and local elected and appointed politicians and bureaucrats, who send complicated and expensive proposals to Washington begging and pleading for help to construct some new highway, health-care facility, school, recreational facility, or some other project or program.
Federal grants are announced with tremendous fanfare. The distributing federal agency issues a press release announcing that the city has received a grant of several million dollars to build, say, its new recreation center. The congressman for that district humbly takes credit for the grant. Area newspapers publish editorials extolling local officials for their genius is securing the grant and effusively praising the effectiveness of their congressman.
In the process, most everyone forgets where the money originally came from, or they simply don't care. All that people focus on is that they're receiving free money that is coming from the federal government, the all-good, all-caring, all-compassionate entity whose job it is to take care of the citizenry.
A particular sign oftentimes is posted on the project site for passersby to see: "Jobs for your community!" Not only has the federal government provided free funds for your community, it also uses local people to help build the project.
It's all so grand, so glorious. Who could possibly object to such a process?
Well, that's where libertarians come in. Libertarians object to the process because it is immoral, crooked, corrupt, fraudulent, and destructive to the core.
The process entails an all-out battle between public officials in different states and cities to get their dirty little hands on as large a portion of the money that has been forcibly taken from people as they can.
Millions of people across the country are struggling financially, but does anyone suggest a moratorium on the payment of income taxes to the IRS? Of course not (well, except for libertarians, who call for a permanent moratorium on income taxation). Nothing must be permitted to interfere with that giant pool of IRS-collected money that federal officials have at their disposal to send to grateful state and local officials.
And no, the process does not create jobs, it simply redistributes them from productive, private-sector projects to politically motivated projects. You see, all the money that the IRS took from people would have brought jobs into existence if people had been left free to keep their own hard-earned money instead of sending it to the IRS. Since those jobs were never permitted to come into existence, you don't see them. All you see is that "free" health-care facility which federal, state, and local politicians and bureaucrats can point to and say, "Here it is -- your free facility that has provided free jobs for your community."
The sad part of all this is that all too many Americans continue to play right into the celebration and even praise it. Failing to think through what has been done to them and their fellow citizens, they haplessly and pathetically play the role of a theft victim celebrating what has been done to them.
Jacob Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation.
If we weren’t taxed by the fed, ALL of the money would be in OUR communities.
Who would have guessed.
Thanks for posting — deserves wide audience.
No mention of the Constitutional reason for the census,
just “getting your fair share” of tax dollars.
I answered question #1 and the rest was answered with “none of you f-—ing business!”
I answered number, sex, age - the rest I answered: “I prefer not to answer”
I received the short form. I went ahead and answered after reading the questions and deeming them relatively unintrusive. I would have had some serious problems with the “Community Survey” long form, however. You know, questions like “How many colon polyps do you get in a year?” and so on.
The question about whether I owned a home free and clear, or had a mortgage, was the most obnoxious one, but I figured, what would they do, drown me in a blizzard of Fannie Mae solicitations?
I received mine in the mail Tuesday. I opened it, filled in 05 to answer #1, put it back into the prepaid envelope and one the kids ran it out to the mailman. All done. I’m looking forward to them coming to the door to question us. I’ll let Cletus the wonder rottie answer it with me. :-)
That takes balls. Good on you.
I haven’t got mine yet, don’t know other than N/A on all but the constitutionally required answers.
A little off-topic, but I spent some time at a state gaming conference recently where the justification for the adoption of casino gaming was “to keep ‘our money’ from leaving the state.” I’m not an anti-gambling zealot, but all I could think of is “what business is it of yours what the citizenry does with their disposable income?”
Ringing the dinnerbell for the conditioned rats to come runnin for their free cheeze.
Cletus the wonder rottie! LOL!
He looks like a rottie, but he’s a special doggie. My husband says he would ride the short bus. His bark is a good deterrent to those I’d rather not have around, though, better than Buster the basset. He’s just lick them to death. :-)
It's pretty long, so I hope that doesn't offend anyone. And I hope some of you will write to me when I am in federal prison ;-)
Attachment to U.S. Government Form D-1 United States Census 2010
March 15, 2010
Attn: U.S. Department of Commerce
This attachment to Federal Form D-1 is provided to explain the methodology utilized by the residents of this home in providing the information which the United States government is constitutionally empowered to require of us and in declining to provide any information which the United States government is NOT constitutionally empowered to require of us.
Form D-1, Page 1
Question 1 How many people were living or staying in this house, apartment, or mobile home on April 1, 2010?
This question is absurd on its face. You used the past tense to ask about the future. However, in an effort to assist congress with the actual Enumeration they are charged with performing every 10 years, we have counted the people who live in this home as of today, March 15, 2010. Please keep in mind that we are making NO assertions or guarantees regarding how many people WILL live here ON April 1, 2010. It is possible that some unforeseen misfortune may befall some member or members of our extended family or one or more of our friends. Such occurrence might cause us to invite additional people to move in with us between now and April 1, 2010, thereby resulting in an INCREASE in the number of people who WILL reside here on that date. It is, of course, also possible that some time between today and April 1, 2010, a horrible tragedy or tragedies may befall one or more of the people currently living here, meaning that FEWER than 3 people COULD reside at this address on April 1, 2010.
Regardless of what the future may bring, we think you will agree that it is VERY unreasonable of our government to demand, under penalty of law, that we answer past-tense questions about the future.
Question 2 - Were there any additional people staying here April 1, 2010 that you did not include in Question 1?
This question also uses the past tense to refer to the future. Since this was discussed at length in our critique of Question 1, we will not delve further in to it here. Question 2 refers to any additional people staying at this residence. Do you mean additional people APART from the all of the people including babies who were already enumerated as part of our answer to Question 1? If so, perhaps you would be so kind as to explain what other kind of people besides all of the people including babies one might expect to find living in ones home. Of course, if this is some round-about way of trying to find out whether we are harboring zombies, vampires or other denizens of the un-dead in this house, then we can categorically state that we are NOT. Although, by providing that information we are already telling you more than you are constitutionally empowered to ask of us.
Question 3 This question makes inquiries regarding the ownership status and/or rental arrangements of our home.
There is NO Article in, nor Amendment to, the United States Constitution, which empowers or directs the United States government to ask for this information or to keep records of such information. Hence, we decline to answer Question 3.
Question 4 What is your phone number? We may call you if we dont understand an answer.
What could possibly be misunderstood about the number 3?
There is NO Article in, nor Amendment to, the United States Constitution, which empowers or directs the United States government to ask for this information or to keep records of such information. Hence, we decline top answer Question 4.
Question 5 Please provide information for each person living here. Start with a person living here who owns or rents this house, apartment or mobile home. If the owner or renter lives somewhere else, start with any adult living here. This will be Person 1. What is Person 1s name?
There is NO Article in, nor Amendment to, the United States Constitution, which empowers or directs the United States government to ask for this information or to keep records of such information. Hence, we decline to answer Question 5.
Question 6 What is Person 1s sex?
There is NO Article in, nor Amendment to, the United States Constitution, which empowers or directs the United States government to ask for this information or to keep records of such information. Further, various federal laws forbid discrimination based on sex. What possible reason could the federal government have for needing to know the sex of every individual in the country, unless one or more federal agencies INTEND to use the information for purposes of sex discrimination? We decline to answer Question 6.
Question 7 What is Person 1s age and what is Person 1s date of birth?
Although not specifically directed or empowered to collect this information by the United States Constitution, that document does require persons to be of certain ages in order to vote, or to run for various elected offices. For that reason, the birth date for Person 1 is provided on the Census Form, although we still contend you are on shaky constitutional grounds by demanding it of us.
We have NOT provided Person 1s age on April 1, 2010 because, as discussed in the critique of Question 1, above, said information will be incorrect if Person 1 dies before that date. Having been previously advised that providing incorrect information on the Census Form is a crime, we do not want to risk running afoul of the law. However, even a federal employee should be capable of using the date of birth provided to figure out the age Person 1 will presumably be on April 1, 2010, so this question has been appropriately answered.
Question 8 Is Person 1 of Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin?
Why in the name of the Creator who endowed us with our unalienable rights would the United States government want to know whether ANY person is of Hispanic, Latino or Spanish origin? What are you, a bunch of racists?
There is NO Article in, nor Amendment to, the United States Constitution, which empowers or directs the United States government to ask for this information or to keep records of such information. To the contrary, our Constitution is widely interpreted as FORBIDDING discrimination based on race. Apart from using the information to initiate or perpetuate the practice of discrimination based on race, there is NO CONCEIVABLE reason why the United States government would need to know this. We decline to answer the question and are, in fact, appalled and offended that it would even be asked of us.
Question 9 What is Person 1s race?
Again, why in the name of the Creator who endowed us with our unalienable rights would the United States government want to know a persons race?
There is NO Article in, nor Amendment to, the United States Constitution, which empowers or directs the United States government to ask for this information or to keep records of such information. To the contrary, our Constitution is widely interpreted as FORBIDDING discrimination based on race. Apart from using the information to initiate or perpetuate the practice of discrimination based on race there is NO CONCEIVABLE reason why the United States government would need to know this. We decline to answer the question and are, in fact, appalled and offended that it would even be asked of us.
However, if you simply MUST have an answer, we suggest going with human. All 3 people who reside at this address are members of the HUMAN race.
Question 10 Does Person 1 sometimes live or stay somewhere else?
Are you asking in a real sense, or in the Metaphysical sense? Metaphysically speaking, anyone who meditates or engages in deep thought sometimes lives within their own mind. Does THAT count as somewhere else?
Seriously, though, this question is, apart from the unconstitutional racist inquiries of Questions 8 and 9, the most insulting on the entire form. We already TOLD you how many people live here. Furthermore, we are intelligent enough to know that IF a person sometimes lives or stays somewhere else then that person should NOT be listed on the Census form for somewhere else.
Please explain whether the intent of this question was to question our honesty or merely to call us stupid.
Form D-1, Page 2
Note: The explanations provided below apply to Questions 1 through 7 for both Person 2 AND Person 3.
Question 1 Print name of Person.
See response to Question 5 from Page 1 of Form D-1.
Question 2 How is this person related to Person 1?
There is NO Article in, nor Amendment to, the United States Constitution, which empowers or directs the United States government to ask for this information or to keep records of such information. Hence, we decline to answer Question 2.
Question 3 What is Persons sex?
See response to Question 6 from Page 1 of Form D-1.
Question 4 What is Persons age and Persons date of birth?
See response to Question 7 from Page 1 of Form D-1.
Question 5 Is this person of Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin?
See response to Question 8 from Page 1 of Form D-1.
Question 6 What is persons race?
See response to Question 9 from Page 1 of Form D-1.
Question 7 Does this person sometimes live or stay somewhere else?
See response to Question 10 from Page 1 of Form D-1.
I put the number of people living in the house and then lined through every other request for information with a black pen with the exception of race which was answered “human”.
Well, you’re not going to end up in the joint. You do, however, stand to have a greater than normal chance of being fined, IMO, because of your detailed response, rather than simply not answering the questions. However, if you refuse to pay the fines, THEN you might go to prison. ;-)
I thought of waiting until April 1 to fill it out, but I figured there's little chance of Mom or me kicking it before then, and the Census Department would probably be dumb enough to follow up before April 1. So I'm mailing it off tomorrow. :-)
I would expect that information about the person’s name, sex, and birthdate could be justified on the basis of avoiding duplication. If the information were only used for that purpose, its collection would be constitutionally appropriate and laws requiring it would be legitimately enforceable. It’s unclear to what extent the fact that information will most likely be used for other purposes would justify a refusal to supply it.
To my great relief, my census questionnaire only asked how many people live here, their race, and ages. Those of us with great-grandparent native american ancestry can’t check two boxes — you have to have registered officially with a tribe.