My point is that giving over this information is greasing the wheel of an enormous bureaucracy that claims that it is helping people, but in actuality causes more problems than it solves (IMO). It’s very easy in our society to say, “hey, I fill out the census and pay my taxes…let the government take care of the rest, even if they are going to royally screw it up…not my lookout…I did my civic duty.” No one has to get their hands dirty to do their civic duty anymore.
There’s nothing wrong with an organization gathering or requesting demographic data. Unless it’s the government doing it by force. It’s not one of the proper functions of government and an abuse of power to insist that a citizen must reply.
The constitutionality was upheld in United States v. Moriarity, 106 F. 886 (C.C.N.Y. 1901). The court addressed and rejected the argument that the power of Congress conferred by Article I, Section 2, Clause 3 is limited to a headcount of the population. The Moriarty court held,
In United States v. Rickenbacker, 309 F.2d 462, 463 (2nd Cir., 1962) the court found the census to be reasonably related to government purposes and functions. Rickenbacker was convicted of refusing to answer a schedule entitled “Household Questionnaire for the 1960 Census of Population and Housing.” Rickenbacker told the census enumerator that he did not intend to answer the questionnaire, and he told the Grand Jury that indicted him that the questionnaire represented “an unnecessary invasion of my privacy” and that he desired to “maintain liberties in this country as a constitutional philosophical question.” The Second Circuit found that “The authority to gather reliable statistical data reasonably related to governmental purposes and functions is a necessity if modern government is to legislate intelligently and effectively.”
The constitutionality was upheld again in Morales v. Daley, 116 F.Supp.2d 801 (S.D.Tex., 2000). The plaintiffs argued that their rights under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments had been violated because the defendants (the U.S. Secretary of Commerce and others) could not demonstrate a legitimate justification for census questions beyond those pertaining to the sole constitutional purpose of the census, the actual enumeration mandated by the Constitution. The U.S. district court decision said,
In a footnote, the court added,
Walloon…I am aware the the courts have upheld these laws, and frankly, it doesn’t surprise me in the least. But that’s why I included “IMO” in that statement of mine you quoted. I am not a Constitutional scholar, and maybe you believe that each of us must enthusiastically support every law the courts uphold, but I just can’t work up that amount of faith in the system.
Can you enlighten us on what country has a better system? :rolleyes:
That’s kind of a strange leap to take. We have the greatest system in the world…no one believes that more than I do. But just because it’s the greatest, it doesn’t mean it’s perfect. In my opinion (spelling it out now, just to be sure we’re clear), the courts are too liberal in their interpretation of the Constitution. Especially certain areas that seem so clear-cut that you wouldn’t think they require any “interpretation” at all.
It seems to me that your arguments have passed the realm of healthy skepticism and become irrational, maybe even paranoid, w/ regard to the census. I’m pretty sure that the vast majority of people who post here are strongly opposed to gov’t. abuse of civil rights and the concept of questioning authority is alive and well.
As has been pointed out, the census has stood the test of time for the entire history of this country, despite many legal challenges. Except for a couple of notable abuses, it seems to me that the census bureau has done a credible job, for many decades, in properly handling, and protecting, the information that they compile. I don’t know all the legitimate ways that the collected information is used, but we’ve had a few examples given here and I’m sure there are many more that would surprise most of us.
Having been involved in a census, I can confirm that identities are removed from the process very early on and all the answers given are compiled into statistical form, which is then made available and utilized by many people in many useful ways, to the benefit of us all.
You think the courts are too liberal? I find that astonishing, given your strong stance on the issue of personal privacy. Maybe you could explain what you mean by that?
Privacy is not a left/right issue.
From a purely pragmatic point of view, this is exactly backwards, and is in fact rather a foolish position to take. Apart from certain covert-intelligence branches of the government, when a public agency collects your information, it has books and books and books of laws and regulations about how it may analyze, distribute, and store that information. But when a private company collects your information… it has your information, the end. People who fear the highly regulated authority of the government, but who give a pass to the comparatively unregulated authority of industry, are suffering from selective myopia.
Most of which are routinely ignored or bypassed when the government wants to do something it isn’t supposed to. I would rather trust my personal information to a random person on the street than to somebody from the government who is trying to “help” me. You really want to help me? quit sucking on the Public Teat and go get a real job!
(Yes, I realize my hypocrisy. Bite me. I am large…I contain multitudes.)
Routinely, you say? Then I’ll repeat my question: Can you show any instance in the last 65 years of personal census data being given to another branch of the government, used in a judicial proceeding, or released to the public, without the subject’s permission, before the 72-year privacy period is over?
I have experience with corporate-collected data (in the sense that I have spent the last 25 years in data-collection for the market research industry), and I therefore know that this data is never associated with the individuals it is generated from. When it is collected, yes. When it is analyzed and stored, no.
Government data, on the other hand, I have no idea about, but the fact that they apparently have “books and books and books of laws and regulations about how it may analyze, distribute, and store that information” says to me that I can’t be nearly as confident that the government has that data stored & analyzed anonymously. And no way to find out, because I’m not about to peruse those books and books and books.
But again, this is not the point. I am actually not that worried that the government will “misuse” the information. That is, I believe that they will use it basically for the purposes it is collected, and not for anything else. Paranoia about that isn’t my reason for objecting to it.
I am not using “liberal” in the sense of “leftist.” I am using it in the sense of “using a liberal interpretation.” That is, a loose, non-constructionist way of reading the Constitution. Which often means, in my opinion, reading things that aren’t there.
You trust corporate integrity over U.S. Gov’t. integrity??? You want your privacy protected, but you’re in favor of constructionist courts??? I fail to see the rhyme or reason in your position. It’s obvious that your mind’s made up, and you’re not going to even consider the alternative, no matter how reasonable or logical it might be. I’m done here.
Lots of Americans will subject themselves to all manner abuse from banks and marketers, but get their undies in a bundle regarding wholly unsubstantiated opinions about big government.
In my opinion, wholly unsubstantiated opinions are useless and frankly embarrassing (which is why I don’t visit this forum too often I guess).
Odd. I come across a fair number of unpunished corporate misuses of data in the media. It’s no coincidence that nobody here has documented damage due to census data misuse over the past 50 years (yet, that is, see below) but it’s not exactly common. Otherwise the media would have one of its field days.
Sarahfeena has not let us know how privately constructed stratified surveys could be built without a Census derived baseline. The unemployment rate would presumably be a challenge as well.
Corporate Misuse of Data
Let’s set a little context and look at corporate protection of personal information. Now there are no laws here for misuse, no threats of 5 years in prison, in contrast with Census materials.
The most dramatic cases involve private company’s insufficient security precautions: hackers steal our data and businesses face rather limited liability for their lack of due diligence.
Furthermore, when such breeches of security occurred, standard policy was to not let their customers know about these breaches until laws were passed that required them to do so.
When localities attempt to stand up these banks, instructing them not to share information about their customers with their affiliates without the permission of the account holder, Bank of America and Wells Fargo try to get such laws overturned in court.
Google’s great isn’t it? 
Alas, I see that the Census seems to have misplaced a number of laptops. Luckily, “All the computers containing personal information were protected by passwords or encryption technology.” And let’s face it, the Census doesn’t gather credit card numbers, which is where illegal opportunities arise.
I’ll note that the above are examples of misuse of personal information: sarahfeena may not have access to names and addresses, but whole industries are based upon trade in such specific information. Experion and other credit bureaus make a tiny bundle by supporting the pre-approved credit card nonsense.
I interpret that as an unsubstantiated opinion, followed by an assumption that if somebody does something easy and responsible, they won’t do something more challenging and responsible.
IMO, the idea that the Census causes more problems than it solves is laughable – but that’s my opinion, you see.
It’s an odd argument. And an inaccurate one I think: taxes make up a substantial share of most budgets. In return we receive some of the best physical infrastructure and government-supported universities and research in the world. The combination of federal dollars, powerful microprocessors, deep capital markets, adequate software and a culture of volunteerism even gave us email and the internet. But it doesn’t come cheap, IMO: few things worth doing are.
Then again, the force of law has a lot to do with tax compliance as well.
You don’t understand…I have first hand knowledge of how data is collected by corporations. I have NEVER, in 25 years, seen names, addresses, or other identifying information stored with data. EVER. It is not relevant to what the corporations are doing. Whether it is relevant to what the government does, I don’t know.
Frankly, I DON’T trust corporate integrity over government integrity. I would assume that, given a motivation, either one would misuse the data. The difference is that I don’t see a motivation on the part of corporations, but I do see possible motivations on the part of government.
Again, though (I think for the third time): I do not hold this position because I believe that government will misuse the data. I don’t advocate that people not fill out the long form. I’m not even stating that I wouldn’t fill out the long form if they sent it to me. But I would resent it, and I think it’s intrusive and unConstitutional. It’s a matter of principle. I think income tax is unConstitutional, too, although in that case, there is an amendment, so it’s not likely anything can be done about it, but I wouldn’t go around suggesting people not pay it.
My opinion is that big government spends a lot of money. Do you think that is a wholly unsubstantiated opinion? I also think they waste a lot of money. Do you think that is a wholly unsubstantiated opinion?
I believe I stated that the census long form could still be done, but without forcing people to participate. That’s all. They have the population by race and age from the regular census. They could easily collect the rest of the demographic data randomly, continuing collection until they have the 10% they need, skipping people who don’t care to participate. There is your Census-derived baseline.
(Although I think that if the government didn’t do it, someone would do it in the private sector, and sell the data to the corporations who need it. That would be fine with me, too. More so, because then I wouldn’t be paying for it.)
The examples you gave have nothing whatsoever to do with data gathered in corporate marketing research efforts (that is, opinion and demographic data). The data being referred to is strictly that which people use to steal credit card information for purposes of identity theft. If you can find examples of corporations misusing survey data, I’d love to see it.
Oh, sure, no one ever hacked a password. Come on.
Again, not data collected for means of market research, which is much more analogous to census data than credit card data. And, the misuse is generally being done by criminals who gain access to the data, not by corporations. People can also avoid the whole problem by not doing business with credit cards if they are afraid of identity theft, or if they don’t want to get solicitations for more credit cards.
Well I agree with you in both cases (especially the first). But, er, neither claim was substantiated in this thread, right? Certainly the claim that, “The government causes more problems than it solves” - a more dubious proposition - has been stated without evidence.
I think we misunderstand each other, but you answered my concern anyway. Arguably, information on sex, age, county and race (from the short form) would go a long way towards creating a baseline for a stratified sample. Though religion, occupation, and most dicey income would certainly help – and that sort of info is from the long form IIRC.
Personally, I never share income information with marketers. I see no reason to. Let them impute it from the Census data, on the basis of my other characteristics.
I gave those examples, since it reveals lapse corporate security practices. These practices are demonstrably faulty. That’s really all I have to show for comparison purposes.
At any rate, if corporations don’t care about safeguarding credit card info or even letting their customers know when that data is stolen, I find it difficult to believe that the information on freaking warranty cards is treated with great respect.
---------- Oh, sure, no one ever hacked a password. Come on.
A high security password can’t be hacked. With a quick google search I exposed poor corporate security practices. The higher-profile Census turned up no serious breeches (though I assume they exist).
What we have here are suspicions vs. documented fact.
Now I understand that many may have tossed their Census form without thinking or out of general orneriness. I’m just saying that Census data makes a lot of public and private research possible. Research that saves lives and strengthens the economy.
Something like that might be possible: we’re here to fight ignorance and I don’t want to rule anything out. But that’s not a random sample that Sarahfeena is describing: it suffers from some rather intense self selection bias. That problem might be addressable. But I’m not sure how it would be done and I’m guessing that Sarahfeena uses data but does not engage in statistical survey design (it’s a somewhat narrow niche after all).
Our address was somehow selected for a mandatory Canadian Labor Force survey. This somehow involved someone calling us from a private number, at 9 pm on a Sunday night, to ask very detailed questions about our family. I was not impressed.
I asked him how he could prove to me that he was calling from the government…he couldn’t. He could only rattle off the penalties for me not answering.
I asked if there was a number I could call, to provide my answers…no, and again the penalties speech.
I asked if there was a form he could send…well, I’m sure you can guess the response.
I ended up yelling at him and hanging up.
Now they call and specifically ask for hubby.