Fill the swamp. Fill the swamp!
Anyone handing over personal information to a city, state or Federal government entity, and taking at face value assurances of confidentiality and restrictions on usage, is foolish and misguided in their beliefs.
steviedee is supporting the same play that involves the citizen question. If the citizenship question will degrade responses it is because of the perception that it will be shared with other parts of goverment. steviedee is helping this administration realize their goals.
Am I incorrect in my assertion various levels of government commonly misuse or donât respect the privacy of personal information they get from their citizens?
You are working for the current administration.
This is a win-win for them, they donât even have to violate anonymity of the census to discourage people from filling it out.
At this point, theyâre going to have to put high-rise condos in the swamp to accommodate all the creatures.
Wonât people organize campaignsencouraging people to refuse to answer the citizenship question? I know thereâs zero chance of me answering it, and Iâm a 3rd generation citizen.
I kind of wonder if everybody should put ânon-citizenâ in protest. Or write in âcitoyenâ just to mess with them.
Or put in Citroën, explain later you though it was about car ownership.
Wanna bet? Privacy doesnât exist in America.
FUD.
Just like the old IBM, only not as bright.
Organizing might expose you to penalties.
On the other hand, if a lot of people individually happened to forget to respond to the citizenship question, a lot of temporary Census workers would have jobs longer than they expected, because Census would be doing followups to try to get complete responses.
Completing the Census is a legal requirement, but the agencyâs mission is to get complete and accurate data. It will put a lot of effort into getting the information before it gets serious about invoking punitive measures.
Should the administration succeed in getting the question on the census (and I really donât see how they wont, with SCOTUS certain to allow it), the liberal response should be to blanket rural areas with ads featuring liberal âscaryâ folks like Al Sharpton, Nancy Pelosi, Maxine Waters, etc. telling people that they are required to fill out and return the census form.
Correct but unhelpful. We need a good census. We do not need a census manipulated to help Republicans. When people fear to reply to the census, then we lose.
The census, Constitutionally, has to be accurate. That is its constitutional mandate. A combination of legislation and official department legal positions offers secondary defense to this, but the constitutional mandate is the first principle from which those spring. Any use of data from the Census leading to actions against an individual would be subject to challenge (and that challenge would have a very high chance of succeeding) on both constitutional and legislative grounds.
That said, if the DoJ is weakening their official legal position, the logical response is for a Census Privacy Protection Act to be passed in the Democratic House next year and pressure the Senate and President to either sign on or prove it unnecessary because of re-strengthened DoJ âopinionsâ. Or, use this (not supporting the Constitutionâs requirement of an accurate census) as an act of impeachment of the President and Attorney General.
IMHO, most likely Trump will bluster against this and veto such a bill and further say something stupid like there is no privacy of Census answers regardless of DoJ positions, all to poison the 2010 results. And this will affect those results (some damage has already been done and the effect is only growing). But if it is not enforced then when we have a Democratic President in 2021 the first order of business will be to put a firewall between the DoJ and DHS and the Census responses, as well as throwing out any actions which might have started in late-2020 by the fascist regime. It wonât be pretty, but it will be the right thing.
Essentially, the choice the individual has in this environment is to (1) destroy all political power for themselves and their community for the next decade, or (2) have a small-but-not-zero risk of having to go through legal hell while this mess all gets resolved. Not a good choice, but advising them down route (1) is foolish and short-sighted.
Je suis un Citroën du monde!
What if everyone just put âyesâ in the citizenship question â i.e. citizen or not -