Census Info

[elicross]

The 2nd Amendment argument is beside the point in this case, Bill. I own a handgun myself. My dad owns a couple dozen handguns, rifles, and shotguns. I was shooting as soon as I could hold up a single-shot 20-gauge.

I'm not frightened by people who exercise their right to own firearms. I'm not necessarily frightened by people who carry a sidearm in states where it's legal. I'm frightened by people who openly display their sidearm while standing outside a rally where the president is speaking, holding a sign about shedding "the blood of tyrants."

I saw an interview late last year with a man who wrote a book about the Secret Service. He said that, in the months since President Obama took the oath of office, threats on the president's life had increased by 400 percent. The increase in anti-government fervor over the past year or so, the insane rhetoric comparing President Obama to Hitler, the increase in assassination threats, and the appearance of armed protesters at presidential appearances...this is the stuff that scares the crap out of me.

If it doesn't cool down soon, it's going to end in blood. There's going to be a dust-up at a rally, like the ones we've already seen a dozen times over since early 2009, except this time instead of slurs or punches flying, it's going to be lead. That's if we're lucky. I just hope it's not the president or a Secret Service agent who gets shot.

[Wilko]

it's a damn shame.

Most of the people who scream the loudest, are the most ignorant.

The media isn't helping matters either. Instead of actually providing real news, all people are taking in are soundbites and propaganda.

Way too many people are basing all their decisions on fear and paranoia.

[muddy]

it's a damn shame.

Most of the people who scream the loudest, are the most ignorant.

The media isn't helping matters either. Instead of actually providing real news, all people are taking in are soundbites and propaganda.

Way too many people are basing all their decisions on fear and paranoia.

Man that's the scary TRUTH!

The biased right-wing media is treading on very dangerous ground as of late and seems content to insight the lunitic fringe on a daily basis. I'm all for freedom of speech, but the hate-mongering talking heads strike me as unpatriotic and irresponsible.

What's even more scary is the number of folk that take their direction from these propaganda speading windbags. Either they can't or won't think for themselves??

People that are allready on the edge, or are mentally ill sure don't need radio blow-hards bolstering their paranoid delusions.

You wouldn't believe the folk I've talked to lately that swear the black helicopters are coming to get em?!


Anyway back to the census...........so how many others are writing in American?

[Mesotech]

I recall participating in the past 2 Census counts, and I distintly recall only providing the information in the form that was directly relavant to the counting of heads. This time (my 3rd), I'm not doing anything different, and I'm certainly not motivated by what is on TV today causing a sudden shift in my answers. The simple fact is, I recognized early on that "information" can never be ungleaned and it's far better to not lay all of your cash on a table in a crowd. This partly stemmed from my employment in the US Navy, where certain information was considered confidential, other information was secret, still other information considered top secret, and so forth. The "need to know" clause was certainly indoctrinated into me by that experience and training. Later in life, I personally witnessed numerous times many people being taken advantage of simply because they freely handed out too much information to those who had no legitimate business gathering it. This ranged from health insurance agents gathering info on a families past medical history for the purpose of denying insurance to "punk kids" driving around neighborhoods accessing unsecured wireless networks for nefarious purposes. Even the most innocent piece of information in the wrong hands can be used for nefarious purposes. There is an entire realm of "hacking" that is devoted to "social engineering". I've learned that a majority of people are far too free with their personal information. As their reward, they are exploited. Thus, I trust no one, even my government, with information they do not "need to have". I also do not begrudge them for asking, because I do not "have to answer". If they ask, and I answer, and my answer somehow winds up being used against me by some unidentified entity (preson, group, or government organization), I can only blame myself for disclosing the info in the first place.

In my state, it was once common practice to have SSN on personal checks and driver's licenses. It was common for places such as Radio Shack or a local grocery store to ask for a phone number at the checkout counter. Many people would give out that information without regard to the sensativity of that info, or how it could be used against them. I'm not suggesting that Radio Shack or the grocery store themselves used the info against a person, but because the info was gained so nonchalantly, it was safeguarded equally as nonchalantly. Eventually that info would leak out, and the "bell was rung". You can't "unring a bell".

In the world of mass telemarketing, you can ask that your personal info be stricken from a database, and the telemarketer has to abide by your wishes. In theory.... In practice, they will have 365 "copies" of the same database, and when you ask to be removed, they'll remove you from that specific copy, but be well within the law to leave your info on the other copies. If they never had your info to begin with, they wouldn't have it to begin with.

So back to the Census, there may be no real harm in knowing my race, and certainly anyone conducting a door to door census follow-up can ascertain that I am a white American by looking at me, as well as any of my direct family members. The truth of the matter is, there is no real "need" for that information, and it's simply better to not disclose it from the start than it is to try and figure out "what went wrong" in the future. The same holds true for any of the other information, such as age. I really can not determine what relevence whether I own my home outright, pay a mortgage, or rent has to do with how many representatives or electorial votes are allocated to my state.

Also remember, just because you're not paranoid doesn't mean someone isn't out to get you.

[phantomman]

You're a wise man, MT.

Knowledge = power

And the less of that "power" one cedes, the less likely that one will have one of those tragic 'fire-in-the-paint-locker' moments.

As was said in WWII -- "LOOSE LIPS SINK SHIPS!"

[elicross]

Okay, so now the U.S. government conducting a routine census is Nazi Germany spying on the Allies?

Sweet. Keep those incisive analogies comin'!

[Mesotech]

Okay, so now the U.S. government conducting a routine census is Nazi Germany spying on the Allies?

Sweet. Keep those incisive analogies comin'!

Not sure where the Nazi Germany reference came from, or if you were commenting on what I had written, but just to clarify my position just in case...

I'm not insinuating that the US Government would be covertly gathering info with an intent on harming "me". Nothing of the sort. What I am saying is, and you've read the news stories as well as I have, where the IRS lost a laptop that contained thousands of individual's SSN's and other untold related data. The potential that some piece of collected data could be lost, stolen, copied, or otherwise compromised is justificatoin enough for me to feel a need to safeguard my own personal information as I see fit, as provided by law. Now obviously I can't deny the IRS the sensitive information they 'require' to do their job, nor do I attempt to do so. By the same token, I can not control what they 'do' or 'do not do' with that data. Worse still, I have no recourse against them for failing to protect that information. So in that situation, I provide only what is required by law, and keep private anything else. The same consideration is given if I have to submit as a condition of my employment for a routine random drug screen. They always ask for my SSN, which has absolutely no relevance as to whether I test negative or positive. I refuse to give that information. I once learned that the company that does perform the random screening for my company had somehow 'aquired' my SSN (they never were able to say how they obtained it, and yes I still consider that extremely disturbing) but I went in and confronted them about it, albeit politely, and personally witnessed the expungement of that data from their records... ALL of their records, including paper records and each and every electronic data backup medium they had. They were mildly annoyed, but complied with my requests. It didn't help their cause that in the process of this event, I glanced at another document of some other individual and was able to recite the person's name, birth date, address, and SSN just because I walked past and read it at a glance. No matter 'how well' they thought they were protecting this type of data, I was still able to obtain it, and could have used it for harm instead of using it temporarily to prove my point. To me, it didn't matter that I forgot the information before I could walk out of the place. I had no intent of retaining it, but if it were my intent, they didn't prevent it and couldn't prevent it.

[elicross]

Not sure where the Nazi Germany reference came from, or if you were commenting on what I had written

Meso, I was commenting on the post that directly preceded mine. The one that applied the WWII slogan "Loose lips sink ships" to the frickin' U.S. Census.

Somewhere along the line -- some time around November 2008, it seems to me -- certain hearts and minds in this country have gone from "big government is bad" and "government is not the solution" to "Government is the Enemy" and "Government is out to Get Us." From conservatism to paranoid victim mentality, practically overnight. It's disturbing, because fear is not what made this country great...and fear ain't going to save this country from any of its current problems. Fear has never fixed anything.

[muddy]

That's about the way I see it as well.

Perfect example of the black helicopters are coming or a Man in Black is in my backyard waiting to ponce. It's like where were all these people during the last admin? Seems like suddenly the Grand Democratic Illuminati has risen up to take over and destroy America?!

It would be laughable if it wasn't so distrubing and sad??

I don't see anything wrong with conducting a US census EXCEPT categorizing Americans by race and certian titles assigned to said race.
It just shouldn't matter imho and as others stated we (the USA) are for the most part all mutts, ie mixed lineage to some degree (which is a good thing).

I'm guessing if enough people filled out the census and check other or write in American, the next census might possibly be "reworked"?

[melody]

I put human as the *race* for my entire family after all that's what we all are...

[dirtdog]

I put human as the *race* for my entire family after all that's what we all are...

POST OF THE DAY!

[phantomman]

Meso, I was commenting on the post that directly preceded mine. The one that applied the WWII slogan "Loose lips sink ships" to the frickin' U.S. Census.

Tell them whatever you wish, Sensei.

And when you do, think about a year and half ago when thieves broke into a VA office and stole laptop computers containing bio data on some 675,000 US veterans and their families. Or the recent hack job on the Best Western hotel chain's data base, where credit data on some 7,000,000 (yes, that's seven million!) customers was compromised.

You're goddamm right I said "loose lips sink ships". And it's as true now as the day the phrase was coined.

Get a grip!

[NTBluesGuitar]

Or the recent hack job on the Best Western hotel chain's data base, where credit data on some 7,000,000 (yes, that's seven million!) customers was compromised.

Yes...mine was one of them. My bank issued me a new debit card promptly, and luckily, no harm came of it in my case, thank God.

[elicross]

Tell them whatever you wish, Sensei.

And when you do, think about a year and half ago when thieves broke into a VA office and stole laptop computers containing bio data on some 675,000 US veterans and their families. Or the recent hack job on the Best Western hotel chain's data base, where credit data on some 7,000,000 (yes, that's seven million!) customers was compromised.

You're goddamm right I said "loose lips sink ships". And it's as true now as the day the phrase was coined.

Get a grip!

Wow. Get a grip indeed.

Well, let's make this deal, Phantom: If a census form ever asks me for my credit card numbers or my Bank of America password, I'll leave those blanks empty and thank you for your wisdom.

Seriously, Roger, have you *looked* at your census form yet? It doesn't even ask for your Social Security number. Of all the bits of information it does ask for, which ones do you believe could be used to harm you and yours if some nefarious person stole The Census Laptop? And how?

[Mesotech]

Eli, I'm not Roger, but I'll still answer your question as I see the potential for harm.

Let's take stock of the demographic info they're collecting. How many people are living there, what are their ages, are there children, do you own rent or pay a mortgage, what is your race, what is your telephone #... That's enough to stop right there.

So now, you ask, what harm could be done if that info was stolen. Well, in addition to the info provided by me, even though not asked for specifically on the form, they also have my address. A thief could take that database, look for mature middle aged couples with no children (possibly ruling out certain races, possibly not), and begin narrowing out which homes to target. They could be fairly certain that those people living there, especially if they have fully paid for their home and have no children by that age, probably are pretty well off financially (lacking the majority of typical surplus income siphoning life obligations). That home most likely would contain the most expensive toys. Having the phone number, they could make a few "oops wrong number" calls to determine when someone is most likely to be at home, and then determine the best time to break in and clean those people out (emphasis added to highlight the harm you asked to illustrate).

Even the most innocent bits of information are extremely valuable in "social engineering" tactics, be that computer related or not. My opinion still remains that the least information I make public about myself makes it less likely that someone might use that information along with other information they may have gleaned from some other source. For me, the issue isn't me being pariod about the government wanting to break into my home and clean me out, it's about how information (in general) is rarely secure in someone elses hands.

[elicross]

Meso, I'm curious to know if you're simply creating a hypothetical situation for the sake of argument, or if you seriously believe that burglars are likely to steal census information from the federal government (either hacking into federal databases or somehow physically taking a computer on which this data is stored) in order to locate their targets.

Just in general, do you believe that burglars do a lot of demographic research before choosing their targets? Because it seems to me that if someone wanted to rob a house that was likely to have a lot of nice stuff in it, they could just go to the best neighborhood in town, pick out a big, nice house, and watch it until they were fairly sure no one was home.

I don't believe any burglar needs to steal data from the U.S. government in order to pick a house to break into, when all the relevant information can be had by easier means that don't constitute a difficult federal crime. I think it's extremely, extremely unlikely that anyone predisposed to break into a house and steal stuff (most of whom, in the real world, are drug addicts looking for a few bucks toward their next fix) is going to do that kind of Hollywood-style groundwork before committing a burglary.

The idea that filling out your census form somehow makes your home more likely to be burglarized...I don't think that even works as a hypothetical, let alone as a reality.

[NTBluesGuitar]

Meso, I'm curious to know if you're simply creating a hypothetical situation for the sake of argument, or if you seriously believe that burglars are likely to steal census information from the federal government (either hacking into federal databases or somehow physically taking a computer on which this data is stored) in order to locate their targets.

We deal with social engineering issues here all the time. It is NOT as hard to accomplish as you think.

Look back at what Roger pointed out with the theft of all those laptops. There is a lot of money to be made in the sale of personal information...with that comes motive, and with any openly public informational campaign, opportunity.

How secure do you think your medical records are?

[Mesotech]

Meso, I'm curious to know if you're simply creating a hypothetical situation for the sake of argument, or if you seriously believe that burglars are likely to steal census information from the federal government (either hacking into federal databases or somehow physically taking a computer on which this data is stored) in order to locate their targets.

My answer was a purely hypothetical situation to illustrate how such simple data 'could be' used to create harm. I have no doubt that there are far easier ways to go about the same thing. Nor do I suspect that someone would purposefully steal a census taker's laptop simply for the opportunity to conduct a burglary. I do however recognise the likelyhood that a census taker might accidentially leave their laptop at a local coffee house as they took a break, and by the time they realized they had forgotten it, it disappeared, purely for the value of the laptop. Once said pety theif had the laptop, he might realize that even if he couldn't get into the laptop, it might contain some valuable info that someone might be willing to pay for, more than the simple value of the stolen laptop. Once that person obtained the laptop, accessed the hard drive (extremely easy to accomplish with local access to the computer), the info would be exposed. Now that person may not want to expressly conduct a burglary, but he may know someone who's looking for a way to get a big score, and offer to provide the person with some great tips.

This is all entirely possible, not extremely likely, but it's not the 'only' possible scenereo where that same data might be used to create harm. Demographic data of any sort is a valuable commodity, particularily if it is 'verified data'. Having said census data would be a great selling point towards the verification process, because who would really lie about the census info? My point is, if the info was simply not harvested, it wouldn't be an issue. The census was devised to count heads to apportion representatives. That is the only data they need to do that.

Now, let me ask you.... What is the government's purpose for harvesting more information than they require to do the job? If that information isn't valuable, then why collect it? Obviously the info they are collecting has some value to them, above and beyond their legal charter or they wouldn't be collecting it. Now ask, did you grant the government permission to do more than the initial census intended? Have they been transparent in disclosing their goals and their perceived value for collecting this extra data? No, they haven't. That very nature makes them distrustful.

[elicross]

Now, let me ask you.... What is the government's purpose for harvesting more information than they require to do the job? If that information isn't valuable, then why collect it? Obviously the info they are collecting has some value to them, above and beyond their legal charter or they wouldn't be collecting it. Now ask, did you grant the government permission to do more than the initial census intended? Have they been transparent in disclosing their goals and their perceived value for collecting this extra data? No, they haven't. That very nature makes them distrustful.

Meso, I absolutely agree that the federal government has its reasons for collecting census data beyond a simple head count. I agree that they find the data valuable and have specific ideas about how to put that data to use. I'd never dispute that.

Where we differ, apparently, is that I don't believe there's any reason to assume the government has a secret, hidden agenda to use this data to harm U.S. citizens or restrict our civil rights.

Again, it's the frickin' U.S. census! It's been taken every decade for 220 years, and it hasn't been used for nefarious purposes in 70 years. The FBI can't even access it. They were briefly able to during WWII, but that hasn't been the case since the late 1940s. They tried in the 1980s, and the courts told 'em "tough sh*t."

Why this sudden fear that it's dangerous to give the U.S. government your phone number? I don't get it. I've been alive through five censuses now, and I don't recall ever seeing this level of fear and paranoia about it. Don't you wonder where it's coming from? And why? 'Cause I do think there's an agenda here...but it's not the current government's.

[Mesotech]

As I said, I've participated in 2, this year being my 3rd, and been alive for 4 (but my parents filling in that one) and I've always filled mine in the same way as this time. There is no sudden shift on my part, and there is no hidden agenda either. For the record, I've never had a census taker come visit me afterwards to gather the missing information or try to find out why I only gave the information I did.

As for the government being able to use any data that they gather without first gaining a court's permission, I doubt seriously that would stop them if they really wanted to use the data that was in their systems. I've seen far too many instances of plausable deniability (from nearly every elected official) for me to be able to take them for their word on anything they say. When plausable deniability doesn't seem to fit the situation, they'll use the non-denial denial approach. I'm not particularily convinced that there is a single politician (local, State, or Federal) that I feel is completely upfront and candid, not to mention honest. You also have to keep in mind I live in a state where the "Political Hall of Fame" is also know as prison. To me, the issue is not whether they "will", it's that they "can".

[elicross]

Given that outlook, I have to wonder how you fill out your taxes every year.

Talk about invasive...your tax forms contain most of the information the census asks for, plus your SSN, your income, information about property you own.... It's interesting to me that people are so wary this year about the innocuous questions asked by the census, and yet where are the people complaining about all the info their 1040 form requires? Sure, we've got teabaggers out the wazoo complaining about having to pay a federal income tax, but where are the claims that the form itself is intrusive and dangerous? If the census came around every year, like tax returns, I'll bet it wouldn't be the political/ideological football it's become over the past year or so.

[dirtdog]

Meso, I absolutely agree that the federal government has its reasons for collecting census data beyond a simple head count. I agree that they find the data valuable and have specific ideas about how to put that data to use. I'd never dispute that.

Where we differ, apparently, is that I don't believe there's any reason to assume the government has a secret, hidden agenda to use this data to harm U.S. citizens or restrict our civil rights.

Again, it's the frickin' U.S. census! It's been taken every decade for 220 years, and it hasn't been used for nefarious purposes in 70 years. The FBI can't even access it. They were briefly able to during WWII, but that hasn't been the case since the late 1940s. They tried in the 1980s, and the courts told 'em "tough sh*t."

Why this sudden fear that it's dangerous to give the U.S. government your phone number? I don't get it. I've been alive through five censuses now, and I don't recall ever seeing this level of fear and paranoia about it. Don't you wonder where it's coming from? And why? 'Cause I do think there's an agenda here...but it's not the current government's.

Well, unless you buy the data from the Census Bureau. There's more than a few for-profit companies that are contracted by other private sector businesses that utilize this census information and other public opinion/open source information for competitive intelligence purposes. That's how the Radio Shack flyer ends up in your mailbox.

I'd be less concerned about what you *think* the government knows about you (if they had the wherewithall to actually link the information together in the first place and the budget to make it happen) and start worrying about what even the most half-assed corporation knows about you.\

And, hoo boy! Some of you guys will LOVE this:

http://motherjones.com/politics/2010/03/oath-keepers

[elicross]

Well, unless you buy the data from the Census Bureau. There's more than a few for-profit companies that are contracted by other private sector businesses that utilize this census information and other public opinion/open source information for competitive intelligence purposes. That's how the Radio Shack flyer ends up in your mailbox.

General demographic data is available to the public for free as soon as the census is finished. But specifics -- like the names, ages, genders, and phone numbers of people at any given address -- are kept secret by federal law for 72 years.

The Radio Shack flyer in your mailbox is addressed to "Resident." If it's addressed to you by name, that's because you can't buy a frickin' 9-volt battery at Radio Shack without them asking you for your name, address, and phone number. Radio Shack doesn't buy those specifics from the Census Bureau. They can't.

[dirtdog]

General demographic data is available to the public for free as soon as the census is finished. But specifics -- like the names, ages, genders, and phone numbers of people at any given address -- are kept secret by federal law for 72 years.

Nothing a little bit of good HUMINT can't solve. Start shredding your garbage, people...and stop using your credit cards. Those companies sell customer lists for millions!

The Radio Shack flyer in your mailbox is addressed to "Resident." If it's addressed to you by name, that's because you can't buy a frickin' 9-volt battery at Radio Shack without them asking you for your name, address, and phone number. Radio Shack doesn't buy those specifics from the Census Bureau. They can't.

Agreed, but this gets you pretty close:

http://www.environicsanalytics.ca/da...states_us.aspx

It doesn't take much ingenuity to cross reference this stuff.

Ok, I'll just shut now....I feel like I'm starting to troll!

[Bill Moore]

Back to "La Raza" subject, I filled out my first census in 1970, onboard ship with my best friend filling out his, (the captain told us it was important). I recall discussing what to check, I told him he wasn't really black, but more of a milk chocolate color. He told me that I definitely wasn't white, more of a beige. We both wrote in American.

[elicross]

Nothing a little bit of good HUMINT can't solve. Start shredding your garbage, people...and stop using your credit cards. Those companies sell customer lists for millions!

See, that's exactly why I don't get the paranoia over the census. Every bit of information collected by the census can be had by legal means from dozens of sources. If you're going to subscribe to the idea that it's dangerous to give your phone number to a federal government agency legally required to protect it, then you need to think about all the other private companies you give much more information to, which aren't required to protect it in any way.

Anyone who thinks it's risky to fill out their U.S. census form had better take himself completely off the grid...no credit cards, no utilities, no cable, no Internet access, no eBay, no PayPal, no health insurance, no medical care, no mortgage, no hotel rooms, no airline flights, no car loans or leases, no rental cars, no car title, no driver's license, no license plates, no voter registration, no business license, no gun license, no permit to carry...

...and no 9 volt batteries from Radio Shack.

Seriously, if you're worried about who's got your personal info and what's being done with it, the federal government and its routine census shouldn't even rank in the top 100.

[rudutch]

if there is a way to misuse the information, the federal government will be 1st to figure it out.
Yes, I do have a healthy dose of sceptism based on my 48 years

[Mesotech]

Eli, of the list you provided, I've pretty much done that already with the exception of the legal items (income tax, insurance "now a government mandate", voter registration "needed to at least try to get this fiasco reversed", utilities "but they have no information about me other than my name and address", the same with cable and internet access, and I'm still very careful about my true identity online "except where I know the info is already exposed and unrecoverable". I don't have a mortgage, I don't have a credit card. I drive a company furnished vehicle registered to the company with insurance provided by the company. I haven't flown since prior to 9/11, nor stayed in a hotel room, rented a car, signed a lease, or taken a loan. The only guns I own don't require registration, nor a permit to carry. I don't buy on ebay, nor have a paypal account. Most importantly, I know how to say "no thanks" to the Radio Shack folks. Even when filling in some form or another, and a phone number is required, I give my employers number. I never give my cell number, even though it's also provided by my employer as part of the equipment necessary to perform my job. I DO pay taxes, and dont NOT try to falsely report my income in order to cheat the system. Most importantly, I'm not hiding from anyone. It's just that I have no NEED for any of those things that I don't participate in, and they have no NEED for any of my personal information.

[elicross]

Meso, you pretty much prove my point that even someone as determined to be as "off the grid" as you are can't get rid of *everything* I listed and stay legal. So you're already giving other government agencies much more information than the census asks for -- and if you're prone to fears about giving out personal information, filling out the census should rank way, way down on your list of worries.

[Mesotech]

Eli, you're right. It does rank way, way down on my list of worries. There are some things I can't control and still abide by law. There are other things I can control and still abide by law. I'll control what I can, when I can, regardless of how far down the list it is. It is my opinion that when you give up and reserve yourself to the ideal that you can't win so you may as well give up and let anyone do anything to you, then you've just become a singular in the collective. That is not the way I was taught that America was envisioned to be. Apparantly for some, it's fine. For me it's not.

[muddy]

I didn't fill in the phone # either. I'm cell only, no landline and I generally do not give out that number.

[NTBluesGuitar]

There are some things I can't control and still abide by law. There are other things I can control and still abide by law. I'll control what I can, when I can, regardless of how far down the list it is. It is my opinion that when you give up and reserve yourself to the ideal that you can't win so you may as well give up and let anyone do anything to you, then you've just become a singular in the collective. That is not the way I was taught that America was envisioned to be. Apparantly for some, it's fine. For me it's not.

That, sir, is very astute!

[Bill Moore]

Amen!

[elicross]

Meso, I think we're running the risk of going in circles here. I believe we both understand what the other is saying and where he's coming from...we just fundamentally disagree.

Personally, I'm pleased the debate has gone on this long without anyone accusing the other guy of having his "panties in a bunch." It's a first!


(I am still interested in seeing the video Roger says he saw, of union members "mercilessly beating and kicking a wheelchair bound black man" at a health-care reform protest. But that's looking less and less likely to happen.... )

[CzarSketch]

Hmm, I run the risk of igniting a fire with all this dry tinder laying around, but I think despite the passion, this is a pretty sane and well-reasoned discussion. Kudos.

I'd like to address something about the issue of writing in your race, though. I love that so many people on this forum have made the assumption that we are beyond race in this country. In your communities, I hope it is true, because no one deserves to be treated unequally due to the color of their skin or their family history. Period.

As a younger fellow, and recently in college, where I learnded myself some big words and challenged a lot of professors on their views of societal organization, etc, AND having traveled around the world observing with great interest the way in which other societies organize themselves, I have to say, after careful thought, and with profound emphasis, WE DO NOT LIVE IN A POST-RACIAL SOCIETY!

I can provide evidence if you like, but I want to address the fact that while the government's use of said racial info is confusing and possibly suspect, that this information is INVALUABLE for non-profits and the growing community of web-savvy charities whose databases link to powerful tools for understanding demographics and racial/social inequalities. For instance:

http://www.openaction.org/
http://www.npmapping.com/
http://www.mapfornonprofits.org/

I'm personally a founding member of that second one, and I'm severely disappointed to hear that so few people will be filling out anything other than the number of people in their household. Our future (we just started out in 2009) depends on reliable data. It may not matter for you if you're relatively well-off and not in need of any sort of assistance, but the general sentiment is that the information will be used for schemes to exclude people, and this is just not true. In order to create a world in which our children and our children's children can be truly color-blind, we need to address what amounts to a huge number of systematic inequalities inherent in our government and social fabric. I don't expect anyone to help if this is not their personal viewpoint, but I would hope that you would not actively hinder the honest and passionate efforts of others who envision a more positive future for the least fortunate among us.

Thanks for listening.

[muddy]

The way I see it is we now have a "man of color" in the White House and is the leader of the free world. This proves that color can no longer stand in your way in America - the end.

A certain amount of people of all colors and races are prejudice, blacks, whites, indians, asians, etc. For the most part these folk represent a minority of said race across the board. I suspect it will be this way for some time to come. Heck people are prejudice for other reasons as well, not just skin color; political party affilliation, geographical, class, sports, religion, and on and on....

If we as a nation truely want to move forward it's past time to classify people in X category.

Again, I have a mixed lineage, who decides what "race" I am? Really we'd need to do a DNA test on most every American to figure out exactly what predominent race they are.

But again....to what end?

[elicross]

The way I see it is we now have a "man of color" in the White House and is the leader of the free world. This proves that color can no longer stand in your way in America - the end.

I think millions of people in America would beg to differ.

The fact that one black man has risen to our highest office doesn't magically make us a post-racial society. The November 2008 election didn't erase all the inequalities minorities were subject to in October 2008...those inequalities still exist.

[NTBluesGuitar]

... I'm severely disappointed to hear that so few people will be filling out anything other than the number of people in their household. Our future (we just started out in 2009) depends on reliable data.

If you go back earlier in this discussion, you'll see where we elaborated on the reason for the US Census; which has nothing to do with demographical studies for community development and projects.

The Census is, constitutionally-speaking, a head count to establish how many representatives a state gets in the U.S. House of Representatives.

That's it.

"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents... If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the General Welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one..." -James Madison

Nothing against your goals or efforts, either.

It's just the census is not about them at all unless you (the infinite 'you', not you personally) MAKE it about them. As long as the census or any other public programs focus on race, especially under the pretense of helping one race out, you're going to propagate that racial society you're working hard to prevent by singling a race out for special attention.

Why not focus on being an Un-hyphenated American instead?

[muddy]

I think millions of people in America would beg to differ.

The fact that one black man has risen to our highest office doesn't magically make us a post-racial society. The November 2008 election didn't erase all the inequalities minorities were subject to in October 2008...those inequalities still exist.

I beg to differ and for the most part these "inequalities" are self-imposed now-a-days. Time for folk to start owning their plot in life.

I agree with one of the prior posts and have always understood that the purpose of the census is a head count for representation. If this has changed I'd like to be enlightened.

[elicross]

I don't think you can say the census focuses on race just because it asks the question -- nor does it ask the question under any sort of "pretense." It just asks.

Unless you believe no good can come from the U.S. government knowing what the country's racial makeup is, where the minorities are living, and how they're living...then why not fold the task of collecting that data into the census? Why spend more taxpayer money creating, distributing, tallying, and recording a separate survey when the census already exists?

Of course the purpose of the census is to get a head count for the purposes of representation. Everyone understands that. But I don't believe the Constitution says the census should never be used for any additional purpose.