Question about the Census

[disorderlyvision]

 

[nateerb]

Got mine.

I hate the Feds enough as it is. So right off, when I get something from them that exclaims in bold all-caps YOUR RESPONSE IS REQUIRED BY LAW they are getting off on the wrong foot with me.

Inside is The Allmighty Census, a Bus. Reply Envelope, and a small note in FedGov's evil Arial-looking font.

The note in there talks about how many reps I get from my state to not represent me, and how whittle-kids and grannies get mo-money if I answer. Then they start with the 'don't worry, it's confidential - see the back'. Title 13 this and Sections 9 that... and no one can FOIA yous! And we release the data after 72 years, so your ancestors can find out about you. Don't you feel guilty not helping whittle-kids and don't yous want to be on teh 2137 family-tree? Still not convinced? We got a webzite on teh Internets.

Anyways...

Made a real nice One with a serif at the top and a footer line - "1", spent some time on it for ole' Uncle Sammy. Mailing tomorrow.

 

[tremendoustie]

Got mine.

I hate the Feds enough as it is. So right off, when I get something from them that exclaims in bold all-caps YOUR RESPONSE IS REQUIRED BY LAW they are getting off on the wrong foot with me.

Inside is The Allmighty Census, a Bus. Reply Envelope, and a small note in FedGov's evil Arial-looking font.

The note in there talks about how many reps I get from my state to not represent me, and how whittle-kids and grannies get mo-money if I answer. Then they start with the 'don't worry, it's confidential - see the back'. Title 13 this and Sections 9 that... and no one can FOIA yous! And we release the data after 72 years, so your ancestors can find out about you. Don't you feel guilty not helping whittle-kids and don't yous want to be on teh 2137 family-tree? Still not convinced? We got a webzite on teh Internets.

Anyways...

Made a real nice One with a serif at the top and a footer line - "1", spent some time on it for ole' Uncle Sammy. Mailing tomorrow.

Make sure and bill 'em for your time

 

[pacelli]

I just checked my mail, cooperated, and filled out every item on the form. Other than the first question, all other questions were answered with, "4th amendment objection, 1st amendment objection".

I also enclosed the following letter in their envelope, with the form:

To: 2010 Census Data Capture Center & Any Employees or Contractors representing the United States Census
8411 Kelso Drive
Essex, MD 21260-111

From: Resident At (redacted)

Regarding: 2010 Census Form.

Memo: There are 2 adults living here. We responded to every item on the form. Pursuant to Title 13, Chapter 7, Subchapter II, subsection 221(c), we are objecting to provide additional information beyond how many people live here, and are claiming a religious exemption as we are Hebrews and are told very specifically by God in the Bible that we are not to be counted. The Mosaic Law citations specific to our objection to disclose certain information relative to our religious beliefs can be found in 2 Samuel 24:15, 1 Chronicles 21:1, and Acts 5:29. Our written objections on the form to many of your questions pertain to information pursuant to our religious beliefs as Hebrews. These written objections are not false answers and are true, accurate, and correct to the best of our knowledge and religious beliefs.

Furthermore we are not interested in receiving any further correspondence from you or your employees or contractors on this matter, either by phone or in-person as we are concerned that such correspondence would be a violation of our 1st amendment right to religious free exercise.

Thank you for your anticipated cooperation and understanding.

Resident at (redacted)

 

[Wineman77]

To Whom it May Concern,

Pursuant to Article I, Section 2, Clause 3 of the Constitution, the only information you are empowered to request is the total number of occupants at this address. My “name, sex, age, date of birth, race, ethnicity, telephone number, relationship and housing tenure” have absolutely nothing to do with apportioning direct taxes or determining the number of representatives in the House of Representatives. Therefore, neither Congress nor the Census Bureau have the constitutional authority to make that information request a component of the enumeration outlined in Article I, Section 2, Clause 3. In addition, I cannot be subject to a fine for basing my conduct on the Constitution because that document trumps laws passed by Congress.

Interstate Commerce Commission v. Brimson, 154 U.S. 447, 479 (May 26, 1894)

“Neither branch of the legislative department [House of Representatives or Senate], still less any merely administrative body [such as the 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.’”

Note: This United States Supreme Court case has never been overturned.

Respectfully,

A Citizen of the United States of America

As a movement, we should print and attach this to our census sheet, with only the number of residents in our house filled out. Legal or not, the "crime" is minor. It's time for simple acts of civil disobedience in defence of the Constitution. Nothing could be more peaceful and simple than withholding unwarranted requests for information.

 

[Number19]

The first census, in 1790, included the name of the head of household, the number of free white males under the age of 16, the number of free white males over the age of 16, the number of free white females of any age, and the number of slaves.

The censuses of 1800 thru 1840 had variations of this format, but listing males and females in specific age categories.

The 1850 census was the first to list the name of every person in the household, including age, birthplace, occupation, value of the real estate, whether able to read or speak English, whether the person had attended school the previous year, and a few other questions.

As someone who has researched the genealogy of my family, I take a position that a census with a limited number of questions, if not too intrusive, is not objectionable. I haven't received this year's, but my understanding is that it is limited to only 10 questions.

How much of the objection is nothing but knee-jerk? Longer forms could be objected to based on the commercialization. I'll have to wait and see if any of the 10 questions crosses an undefined line.

 

[RileyE104]

Can someone please explain...

Why is it a 1st Amendment violation? I don't get it... I understand the 4th Amendment violation, but not the first.

 

[pacelli]

Why is it a 1st Amendment violation? I don't get it... I understand the 4th Amendment violation, but not the first.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;....."

We personally cannot engage in free religious exercise if we were to answer some of the questions on the form.

 

[Anti Federalist]

The first census, in 1790, included the name of the head of household, the number of free white males under the age of 16, the number of free white males over the age of 16, the number of free white females of any age, and the number of slaves.

The censuses of 1800 thru 1840 had variations of this format, but listing males and females in specific age categories.

The 1850 census was the first to list the name of every person in the household, including age, birthplace, occupation, value of the real estate, whether able to read or speak English, whether the person had attended school the previous year, and a few other questions.

As someone who has researched the genealogy of my family, I take a position that a census with a limited number of questions, if not too intrusive, is not objectionable. I haven't received this year's, but my understanding is that it is limited to only 10 questions.

How much of the objection is nothing but knee-jerk? Longer forms could be objected to based on the commercialization. I'll have to wait and see if any of the 10 questions crosses an undefined line.

Incrementalism at work.

 

[Anti Federalist]

Why is it a 1st Amendment violation? I don't get it... I understand the 4th Amendment violation, but not the first.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=235896

 

[Number19]

Incrementalism at work.

Without a doubt, however this was not a problem up through the 1930 census, the last I have info on. This census contained only full name, age, birthplace and relationship. The census is really a very minor problem easily controlled with vigilance. We have the advantage of historical hindsight.

 

[TastyWheat]

Isn't the census pointless, even the "constitutional requirement"? The 435 members of the House was determined in 1911, when our country had about 98 million people in it. We need some more representatives for everyone to truly have representation.

They still use it for deciding how many electors we get in the Electoral College. Otherwise it doesn't really matter. Each state decides how its own district lines are drawn.

 

[kylejack]

The first census, in 1790, included the name of the head of household, the number of free white males under the age of 16, the number of free white males over the age of 16, the number of free white females of any age, and the number of slaves.

The censuses of 1800 thru 1840 had variations of this format, but listing males and females in specific age categories.

The 1850 census was the first to list the name of every person in the household, including age, birthplace, occupation, value of the real estate, whether able to read or speak English, whether the person had attended school the previous year, and a few other questions.

As someone who has researched the genealogy of my family, I take a position that a census with a limited number of questions, if not too intrusive, is not objectionable.

Unless that information is later used to lock you up in a camp, as happened with Japanese Americans.

 

[Agorism]

What type of lawyers is best to consult about these questions and how to proceed?

 

[Number19]

Unless that information is later used to lock you up in a camp, as happened with Japanese Americans.

There's a saying : guns don't kill people, people kill people.

(edit) Having not seen the census, I didn't snap immediately to what you were referring. One of the 10 questions must refer to national origin. Given the political climate as regards Muslims and Mexicans, this information could very well be abused.

Good reason to leave this question unanswered. Also a good reason to have this question raised before Congress on future censuses.

 

[specialkornflake]

I'm going to put a 1 and say I'm human.

I was at my Uncle's place and I remarked when I saw the Census Envelope, "Response Required by Law", and he said here's my response and tossed it directly into the trash.

 

[Brian Defferding]

So which ones do we put the "first" and "fourth" amendment objections?

 

[Free Moral Agent]

delete

 

[Patrick]

sticky

 

[bruce leeroy]

I threw my census form in the trash