How Does The 2010 Census Plan Compare To 2000?

It is clear that our First Community Organizer-in-Chief is going to give every lefty group under the sun a slice of the 2010 Census budget, rationalized as an attempt to avoid an undercount of people with less structured lives.  Of course, it's also a jobs program, and anyway, lefties feel good giving money to lefties, especially when its other people's money.

Now, sending criminals to canvass door to door may not be a shrewd way to deliver a "Trust Big Government" message, but my question is this - what was done in 2000 when a Dem President had to work in cooperation with a Rep Congress?  I see references to working with community groups and civic leaders in various accounts, but was there a wholesale hiring of lefty organizer?  (Related question would include, what knucklehead mulls on this on a Sunday morning, and why is finding an answer beyond him?)

Anyway, this knucklehead is responding to the call of the great outdoors, but if anyone has a sensible answer I welcome the help.

Comments

[BumperStickerist]

My vote is that we all return to the city of the husband's (or father's ) birth and therein be enrolled.

... it's been done before.

[Frau Skepsis]

What about the city of the sperm donor? Seriously, the last time around, the democratic administration almost pulled off population sampling as its census scam. Look for some form of sampling to be implemented this round; it uses the *con* in consensus ... and it's scientific!

[bgates]

My vote is that we all return to the city of the husband's (or father's ) birth and therein be enrolled.

What fraction of the other party's voters has the slightest idea where that is?

[Porchlight]

Think of it as a giant voter registration drive, with emphasis on Dem and potential Dem voters, and imagine who would normally be called upon to man such drives, and what their methods would be, and you're getting there.

[Extraneus]

Well I tried to post a question twice, but the posts were apparently too long, or had too many links. The question was: What's the penatly for refusing to answer census questions? According to United States Code, Title 13 (Census), Chapter 7 (Offenses and Penalties), SubChapter II, if you're over 18 and refuse to answer all or part of the Census, you can be fined up to $100. If you give false answers, you're subject to a fine of up to $500. But I saw posts which said it could be $100 per question, and something from census.gov which said the fine was raised to $5000 in a 1984 update to sentencing and penalties.

I got The American Community Survey a few years ago, and threw it out after reading some of the questions. I got a call a month or so later from a census guy who told me it was a legal requirement to answer, and I let him ask me the questions one by one.

For each one, I said I didn't think the gov't had the right to require that info, that I wasn't comfortable, it was personal info, etc. Apparently he keyed in my responses and that was the end of it.

So, does anyone know what the real penalty is for refusing more than what the Constitution requres (household head-count) and/or what the likihood is that they'll come after their $100 or $5000?

[flodigarry]

What I'd love to do is run a background check on the census taker prior to opening the door much less providing even the baseline information.

[PeterUK]

Other groups you somehow failed to add to your census list:

Alaska Veterans Foundation, Inc.
American Baptist Churches of the South
American Farm Bureau Federation
American Statistical Association
Association of Gospel Rescue Missions
American Family Life Assurance Company (AFLAC)
Blinded Veterans Association
Boys and Girls Club of America
Boy Scouts of America
Boise Cascade Holdings Corporation

etc.

What a bunch of duplicitous cocksuckers you are.

[Rob Crawford]

Oh, look, semen-boy is sockpuppeting regulars again!

[Ann]

Extraneus,

Maybe we sould all plead the 5th! :)

[PeterUK]

Another thing you might want to check out: the number of census workers associated with each organization since that's a more useful indicator than characterizing the political slant of individual organizations.

But that of course would require some motherfucking intellectual honesty on your part, and the supply of conservative honesty ran out over 40 years ago.

[Rob Crawford]

Poor 'cleo. He's so poisoned his own name with his dishonesty, ignorance, and hostility he can only appear in public as other people.

You're a coward, 'cleo, hiding behind other people's identities. Use your own! Stand behind your own words!

Man up, like your imaginary son!

[I remember when you could light the sky.]

Leo, c'mon we, and I, have all called you on your intellectual honesty over and over and over again and you repeatedly come up short. No one's perfect, but you're really kind of pitiful. Really just a parody of a true believin' moonbat, except for streaks of wit and honesty when the falling stars are just right.
========================================

[Syl]

The only time I ever dealt with an actual census taker was in 1970 in Manhattan. Otherwise it's been a form in the mail, filled out and sent off and never heard from again.