Left In Lowell

The Conspiracy Strikes Back

24 Responses to “The Conspiracy Strikes Back”

1. nextyearishere Says:
   March 30th, 2010 at 4:07 pm

   Tracking early returns goes against the instruction to document residents as of April 1st. It only makes sense to wait until that date to complete the form.

2. Lynne Says:
   March 30th, 2010 at 5:47 pm

   It’s more of a relative thing though…in regards to the numbers who have sent their censuses in early. Certain counties are just really far below the national average. I sent mine in early (because I am a notorious forgetter, so I don’t want to waste government money by making them come to my home). But this doesn’t bode well for when the census workers have to go into those counties…I hope no one gets hurt.

3. joe from Lowell Says:
   March 30th, 2010 at 6:42 pm

   Let’s not forget the second, even-more-delicious irony in this:

   In the 1990s, the Census Bureau wanted to use certain statistical analysis techniques to correct undercounts. Professional statisticians were completely united in their support for this effort, repeatedly assuring Congress that doing so would provide a more accurate, more complete count.

   The Republican Congress, noting that the undercounts were concentrated in areas with a lot of poor people, minorities, and immigrants, gave the Census Bureau the ol’ stiff-arm, passing bills forbidding any sort of statistical adjustment to the count. They deliberately set out to assure a less-accurate census, because they concluded that it would be to their partisan advantage to ensure that the undercount was not corrected.

4. Mr. Lynne Says:
   March 31st, 2010 at 10:43 am

   LOL. Who are you kidding? It got sent in early because I filled it out for us.

5. Lynne Says:
   March 31st, 2010 at 10:47 am

   You might have filled it out, dearest heart, but I was the one that had to put it in the mail. Which meant remembering to bring it with me to work…

   This is one thing I miss about rural mail delivery. You just stuck your outgoing mail in the box and lifted up the little flag thingie, and no worries. Now, I have to find a mailbox or go to the post office to drop it off…ug.

6. Lynne Says:
   March 31st, 2010 at 10:48 am

   Um, that’s supposed to be a thbbbbth! smiley??? Meh. :-/

7. Paul@01852 Says:
   March 31st, 2010 at 11:20 am

   If you put stamped mail in your mailbox with an edge sticking out or poking out your mail slot the route mailperson should take it for delivery. Works for me all the time.

8. Lynne Says:
   March 31st, 2010 at 11:48 am

   Yeah, we have a mail slot in the door though…

   I really should go get a mailbox and close up the slot. I like the security of my mail going through the door, since no one could possibly reach it, but the cold air comes through it in the winter, and for the reason of sending outgoing mail and all, it seems more convenient and better for the environment.

9. tim Says:
   April 1st, 2010 at 8:41 am

   Isn’t that the official Republican party platform - “We are, ultimately, going to hurt the most vulnerable among us. Vote Republican.”

10. Kim Says:
    April 2nd, 2010 at 12:22 am

    Just leave a little corner sticking out of the mail slot and your mail man will take it. I also thought the same thing when I moved to Lowell and ran around looking for a mailbox. At our new house we got rid of the mail slot and put up a box. I still need to leave a corner sticking out or they will not take it. I also sent ours back right away because I am forgetful and because it was postage paid. The local one was much harder for me because I do not own stamps so there was some delay.

11. Publius Says:
    April 2nd, 2010 at 9:40 am

    I tore mine up. The census is used for unconstitutional purposes. Using federal money for local purooses, is not a federal responsibility. Rather than receiving federal grants to fund police dispatchers, the money should come from Lowell itself. The census form asks for more than a household count which mnakes the whole form unconsitutional.

    Further, why should I help keep more Democrats in office? Democrats want to confiscate my hard earned and meager wealth. More Democrats mean more confiscation. By not sending it in I reduce the number of Democrats inoffice and reduce the amount of money sent to Massachusetts, which the Democrats then take credit for. I cannot ask for a much larger win.

12. joe from Lowell Says:
    April 2nd, 2010 at 11:45 am

    …and all I had to do was make my own city a weaker, poorer, more vulnerable place!

13. Lynne Says:
    April 2nd, 2010 at 12:36 pm

    Wow, they exist even among us. Thank god most of Lowell isn’t dumb enough to follow suit. We mostly have a, I dunno, smarter populace who knows a stupid conspiracy theory when they see one.

14. Thom Says:
    April 2nd, 2010 at 1:34 pm

    Unlike Publius I did not notice any black helicopters overhead when I retrieved my census from the mailbox. I did not tear it up but I did choose not to answer a number of questions. My phone number? I don’t think so. Race? None of your business. Maybe I should have checked Other and written in Human.

15. Mr. Lynne Says:
    April 2nd, 2010 at 3:47 pm

    The only reason they want your number is so they can call in case they didn’t understand an answer.

16. Christopher Says:
    April 2nd, 2010 at 8:04 pm

    Hey Publius,

    Your namesake, the authors of the Federalist Papers, probably wouldn’t appreciate your trashing of the government they helped create and promote. While apportionment is the only constitutional requirement of the census, the constitution in no way prohibits the collection of other information. Can you cite otherwise? Would you rather the government just guess as to how and where to spend our money? That sounds wasteful and thus contrary to the claimed Republican position of fiscal responsibility. Speaking of party, shame on you for putting your party and ideology above your state. You may have noticed the census is taken every ten years regardless of who is in power.

17. Lynne Says:
    April 3rd, 2010 at 7:49 am

    You go Christopher!

18. Publius Says:
    April 3rd, 2010 at 10:40 pm

    I never said there was a conspircy theory. I just objected towhat the census is used for. The Founding fathers intended it soley for determining Congressional representation.
    Also, there is a element of civil disobedience in my action. I though the “left” was a supporter of civil disobedience or does civil disobedience only go one way?

19. Jack Mitchell Says:
    April 4th, 2010 at 7:07 pm

    Publius, please clearify soley?

    Bold mine:
    Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons [Modified by Amendment XIV]. 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.

    Goodness gracious, the census is used for determining taxes.

    My o’ my, our Founders used ‘racial profiling’ in the orginal text. They wanted to be able to segregate “free Persons” from “Indians” from “all other Persons.” Publius, would you be OK with segregating “legals” from “illegals?”

    Darn, “in such Manner as they shall by Law direct.” Freakin’ lawyer Founders giving power to other lawyers in perpetuity. And we know who the Supremes are. Another bunch of lawyers!

    I chuckle when folks like our friend Publius conjour our Founders and the sacred writs. So often, they say, “The Founding fathers intended,” as if The Founders were a monolith, speaking with one conjoined voice, devoid of contridiction. Although, when it suits their purpose, they will extract the words of one of the old boys to argue the minority view.

    Next?

20. Lynne Says:
    April 4th, 2010 at 8:36 pm

    Nicely done, Jack.

21. Maria Says:
    April 4th, 2010 at 9:17 pm

    I don’t think anyone would claim the founding fathers were without contradiction or flaw, at least anyone who has education regarding them. At the same time, I do not think that means collecting information is racial profiling. Everyone is clearly aware in this day in age of the wrong that was happening in the ideology of slavery. I think it goes to the same throw with the way the Indians were treated. At the same time, the collection of the information was not what made these things evil institutions come into existence. The only real problem in that statement to me, is the part where they refer to slaves as only three fifths of a person. This was the real problem. Even when counted, they were alloted less value and less representation, power, privilege, etc.

    In my opinion it is fine for the government to collect information and to use it to figure out representation and taxes etc. I believe that this act in itself is not evil but it could be used for good or for bad, as can anything.

    I also believe the brilliance of the founding fathers is that they put into motion a system of tension. I don’t believe that they were perfect, as I don’t believe any president, administration or government since them has been perfect. What they did do though, was create a frame work for the give and take of tensions to take place.

22. Maria Says:
    April 4th, 2010 at 9:40 pm

    A also think it’s obvious the ‘lee way’ that has been left in the constitution, thereby assigning to states to conduct the census “in such a manner as they by law shall direct.” I think this gives us a lot to work within. I think democrats should really push forward for changing policy to get more accurate counts for underrepresented people. There is nothing constitutional against it, so I think it should be pursued. I don’t think that just because it’s not what takes place now makes it something to be disheartened by. I can only imagine what people must have felt like in attempting to abolish slavery or move women to be able to vote.

    I think the fact that a republican will state that they are able to play a political game by withholding their own information from the census, gives democrats all the more reason to push for this change. It is clearly stated on every census report that is mandated by law that people submit their census information. I think provisions like ‘other’ are there for the people who do not wish to share certain information, similar to what was stated above.

    On the other hand, I can understand a republican who would hold a view saying that we should have the right to privacy of our affairs etc (to a certain point) and should not be patrolled by government. If though this is their argument, then they need to have the current policy changed in that it is expected for every citizen to submit census information to the government. If you disagree with that process, it shouldn’t be matter of not sending in your form, it should be a matter of getting the bigger picture changed into a system you feel would be representative of a successful balance between governing and freedom.

    It is always easier to see the loop holes or problems in any system (or person for that matter.) We point fingers and criticize easily. It is harder to sort out solutions and accept that we live in an imperfect world, with imperfect people and share a complicated existence.

23. Jack Mitchell Says:
    April 4th, 2010 at 10:03 pm

    Maria,
    I like the “tension” metaphor. It connotes a process where logic and reason mix with passion, all ruled by law. Yes, that seems to be what we have here in the US. With the glaring Bush v Gore exception, of course.

    That said, my response regarding race was pointed at melonheads that opt to fill in the race question with, “Other-American.” That, in and of itself, is only mildly irksome. I tend to chaff at racial labeling. What gets my goat is the redneck yahoos that think we are stacking the deck for “brown” people, aka welfare recipients.

    I hate loud mouth, flag waving bigots. These “real Americans” need to go back across the pond, imho.

24. Mr. Lynne Says:
    April 4th, 2010 at 10:40 pm

    “I don’t think anyone would claim the founding fathers were without contradiction or flaw, at least anyone who has education regarding them.”

    I’m reminded recently of the point that someone on Ezra made regarding the ridiculousness of espousing fidelity to the founders’ vision while decrying the ’sleazy deals’ that were made during the HCR debate. How quick we forget that the founders compromised on slavery and enshrined the relative worth of Africans in the constitution.

Leave a Reply