POWIP Piece of Work In Progress – Former Abode of Dan Collins

A Clarification and Addendum on the Census

In response to my previous post on the term "Negro" in the census form:

Joseph Copsey says:
January 8, 2010 at 10:57 am (Edit)

The term “Negro” is not being “resurrected.” It has been on every census questionnaire since 1950, the first year that residents could self-identify their race. The term was there in 1960, 1970, 1980, 1990 and 2000. Research shows 56,000 people wrote in “Negro” on their forms in 2000 even though “Black, African Am., or Negro” was already a choice on the form. The research also showed that 75 percent of people who did write in “Negro” were under the age of 65. Survey statisticians continually test survey questions. It is likely that Negro will disappear on the forms, but right now, there is a segment of the population that still identifies itself as “Negro.”

I'll concede the point. I believe it's true. But I wasn't stating that the term had been resurrected from census forms, but from public usage. It may be that including it prevents having to read and record a lot of write ins, but even if it is a vestigial social artefact, that doesn't dissuade me from my point, that the fact that the category resonates in Spanish is likely to drive up its usage.

Yes, yes, I know that there are statisticians who analyze the design, but you have to understand---and since your IP address is traceable to the Census Bureau, I think it's important that you do understand---that Obama's transferral of control of the bureau out of Commerce, read against his record of ideological appointments, makes us very skeptical of the design of the form. It is certain, at any rate, that the dimensions of this behemoth far exceed anything contemplated in the original idea of a census, and I think it more than likely that whatever information that is derived will be used to further identity political ends. We've already seen the extraordinary over-reach of the EPA, and we've already witnessed how the Census Bureau had to end its association with ACORN, which masquerades as a non-aligned entity in some of its organizational manifestations.

I am sorry if that seems insensitive, but there it is. You may recall that in the run-up to "health care reform," the administration was perfectly happy to let the media bruit it far and wide that 45 million Americans were without health insurance, until Obama actually had to give a speech on the matter, and suddenly the number became 30 million. That's because it would have been conspicuous in a matter so costly to count non-citizens. Nevertheless, we now understand that although non-citizens are left out of the bill as it now stands, "immigration reform" and a general amnesty are meant to be the solution to this little problem of terminology.

The census itself, well . . . is it going to count non-citizens? Because that's nowhere contemplated in the Constitution, is it? And if it does, to what end does it? Certainly not to be checked against Social Security.

I honor your defense of your undertaking, and I'm glad that you, at any rate, believe in its integrity. I wish I could say the same from where I sit.

Dan Collins

Dan Collins is a dude who blogs. He used to blog elsewhere. Now he blogs here.

More Posts - Website