36 Comments

1. Marc Malone:

Poor Obama. He found one guy who had no ethics or tax problem. Unfortunately, it was a Republican, of course. Lo and behold, the Pub resigned in protest. Dirty rotten ethical guy! Why didn’t he just take the danged bribe? What a danged Boy Scout! Then, he had the nerve to do it in an understated way, so he couldn’t be targeted by a narrative. Dirty, rotten so-and-so. Now, he’s addressing the issue the same way, and still avoiding the narrative. Curse him!

As for filing a grievance, Gregg himself could file. He resigned in protest. It had to cost him in salary and perks. Although, I don’t understand why anyone has to file? Isn’t the court supposed to rein in this kind of power grab on its own? Checks and balances.

Feb 14, 2009 - 12:46 am 2. Angelo Falcon:

The White House “Takeover” of the Census:
The Critics are the Partisans
by Angelo Falcón
National Institute for Latino Policy (NiLP) (February 7, 2009)

The controversy over White House plans to play a more direct role in overseeing the operations of the US Bureau of the Census as some sort of “political grab” reflects, more than anything else, an astounding ignorance of how the Census operates. The charge is that by having the Census Bureau Director report directly to Rahm Emmanuel, Obama’s Chief of Staff, that this would allow him to manipulate the 2010 population count for partisan advantage in reapportionment and redistricting. This is contrasted with the situation under President George W. Bush where he kept the Census Bureau “independent.”

This became an issue when President Obama surprised most with his nomination of Senator Judd Gregg (R-New Hampshire) to be Commerce Secretary a little over a week ago. This was surprising because Gregg has in the past voted to eliminate this Commerce Department and has been a strong opponent of providing needed resources for the 2000 Census. This raised serious concerns by Black and Latino leaders working for an accurate count of their communities and all Americans by the 2010 Census. The Gregg nomination, given his track record, is grounds for reasonable questions about the appropriateness of his candidacy for the Commerce post.

The reactions, largely by Republicans, to the White House response by announcing plans to play a more direct role with the Census are either totally political or based on a total ignorance of the way the federal government works. The Census Bureau (or any other agency under a full department, in this case Commerce) is overseen directly or indirectly by the White House. When the Census Bureau ran into problems last year with its management of its failed handheld computers program that would have automated the population count, the Bush White House set up a special group inside of Commerce to directly oversee this problem. The Commerce Secretary under Bush was also in no way an independent player “protecting” the Census Bureau from partisan influences. Accepting these assertions would be tantamount to making up history from scratch.

It is also not possible by the White House or anyone else to easily manipulate the 2010 population count to rig reapportionment or redistricting in favor of one party or the other. The Census Bureau has a well developed set of protocols and procedures to assure as objective a population count as possible. No one, whether it is a powerful figure like Emmanuel or even the President, can manipulate this process.

Finally, influencing broader policy issues on the use of Census data, such as with the issue of the use of sampling to adjust the population counts, is most definitely a political process beyond the purview of the Census Bureau. This would not be affected by who the Census Bureau reports to, since whether it is the White House or the Commerce Secretary, this is an issue that would be framed by whoever is President. The use of sampling for adjusting the Census numbers was something that is ultimately under the jurisdiction of the federal courts. In addition, the political redistricting process is something that is overseen by the Department of Justice in its administration of the Voting Rights Act. And as we have seen with the Bush Administration, the Justice Department has certainly not been kept “independent” of politics.

The fact is that by taking a direct interest in the 2010 Census, President Obama will be assuring that this population count, which is only 15 months away, would get the attention and resources needed to make it accurate and assure that hard-to-count populations get counted. Currently, there are thousands of Census staff working hard to make sure that the 2010 Census is the most accurate and fairest possible. President Obama is telling them and the American people that he supports them fully and understands the importance of the 2010 Census to the country. It is the critics who seem to want to politicize this situation, at the cost of turning the 2010 count into a disaster and tremendous waste of money.
________________________________________

Angelo Falcón is President of the National Institute for Latino Policy )NiLP), based in New York City. He is Chair of the Latino Census Network, a member of the Census Advisory Committee on the Hispanic Population, and a member of the National Steering Committee of the Census Information Centers Program of the Census Bureau.
________________________________________

Feb 14, 2009 - 12:53 am 3. RW:

Hey Rahm, “Can you hear me now?” Judd didn’t want to be a figurehead to this political ploy. Good for him and maybe the US Constitution.

Feb 14, 2009 - 4:22 am 4. Jo:

Guess we will all have to watch these scoundrels like hawks to see what they get up to next.
Obama and Emanuel! Two Chicago pols!

Feb 14, 2009 - 6:07 am 5. Ed Lilly:

A war with the GOP? That same stalwart band that stood up and said, “None shall pass” when confronted with Hillary Clinton at Sec State, Eric Holder at DOJ, and Tim Geithner at Treas?

Yeah, color me unimpressed at the possibility that “war” with the Republican drips in Congress will mean anything at all for the prospect of stopping Obama’s complete politicization of the census and all the destruction that will cause.

As Bob Knight tried to explain to Connie Chung, when it’s inevitable….

Feb 14, 2009 - 6:43 am 6. Aureliano:

The post at #2 of Angelo Falcon’s missive written for the NiLP can be parsed from top to bottom, but really, all one needs to do is to parse one statement in his partisan nonsense masquerading as ‘concern’:

“It is also not possible by [sic] the White House or anyone else to easily manipulate the 2010 population count to rig reapportionment or redistricting in favor of one party or the other.”

That’s an interesting sentiment given that Falcon had already stated that his concern with Senator Gregg was that he would have politicized the Census process by not providing enough resources to establish an accurate count in, as Falcon put it, ‘their’ communities (nice phraseology), and then immediately turned around and said it’s NOT POSSIBLE for the White House or ANYONE ELSE to easily manipulate the 2010 population count to rig reapportionment or redistricting.

If that’s the case, ‘professor’, what’s the problem? Is it or is it not possible to manipulate the population count?

Think about this for a second: Angelo Falcon has spent his entire life in race activism and race ‘scholarship’, and theoretically he has an elite intellect, and yet he contradicts himself within, let’s count em … one, two, three, four, five sentences.

Oh well. To solve this unfortunate incoherence he’ll undoubtedly form a new organization made up of the same individuals who are members of the same other dozen organizations of which he’s a member, dub it Organización para la Eliminación de los Justos Desacuerdo Acerca de la Superioridad de la Raza Latina, and assign it a mission of stamping out mean ol’ poopy heads on the Net who make fun of race activists masquerading as intellectuals and non-partisans. The NYT will then write a story about him, thereby proving the righteousness of his cause.

The only thing Falcon cares about is manipulating the Census to ensure Democratic control, preferably Latino Democratic control, with the goal of wealth transference to Latino constituencies. Nothing more, nothing less.

I don’t mind the activism, but I can’t stand the lying, especially from an adjunct professor.

Baby Boomer Leftists really just can’t help themselves, can they? All he had to do was avoid saying “And as we have seen with the Bush Administration, the Justice Department has certainly not been kept “independent” of politics”, and he had an outside chance of fooling somebody somewhere. Instead he blows it with MSNBC-quality (i.e., TV-quality) partisan nonsense about the Department of Justice, as if those kinds of accusations can’t be ripped to shreds or neutralized*.

Oh well. Time to get busy making our political landscape look like any in Latin America or the Caribbean. What could be more admirable, or desirable?

* By the way it’s not ‘Justice Department’, it’s Department of Justice. A minor error, I know, but you’d think a proclaimed ‘expert’ in how the federal government works would get that correct. The guy should have seen the acronym DoJ so many times that getting it correct should be second nature. And yet it isn’t. I wonder why?

Oh well, it’s not like you have to be intelligent or correct about anything to be an activist … just noisy and … active.

Feb 14, 2009 - 6:44 am 7. Bilgeman:

Angelo Falcon:

You want it both ways, don’t ya fella?

Here you offer:

“The Census Bureau has a well developed set of protocols and procedures to assure as objective a population count as possible. No one, whether it is a powerful figure like Emmanuel or even the President, can manipulate this process.”

So why do you seem to indicate that more direct White House meddling in their vital work would be desirable?

You also state:

“Currently, there are thousands of Census staff working hard to make sure that the 2010 Census is the most accurate and fairest possible.”

So then LEAVE THEM ALONE to do their jobs.

But then, come 2010, I wonder that organizations like yours won’t turn around and criticize the Census Bureau for allegedly undercounting your particular pet minority.

You’re a fraud, sir.

You are dismissed.

Feb 14, 2009 - 6:45 am 8. polkabout:

“HARD TO COUNT POPULATIONS” – What a joke. If you are a legal resident of the US, you have a valid Social Security number. Your age & other pertinent information is available from this. The only other information needed is where you reside. Any other information that’s gathered is to fodder the socialist.

Feb 14, 2009 - 6:52 am 9. Mari:

This is being cast as a battle between agencies when that is not the issue. What is dangerous about the census is the information it gathers, not who controls it. I don’t want George Bush’s administration to have that information, either. Have you seen it? It’s 14 pages long.
They want to know how many bathrooms you have and what you majored in in college. Change the census back to only the barest essentials. Mandate that it count how many people are in your home at that moment, period. Then you’ve de-clawed the whole thing. The lawsuit has to be about the citizen’s right to privacy. Not which department gets to run it. This step would go a long way towards shrinking government, as well.

Feb 14, 2009 - 7:32 am 10. Ted:

Obama’s stealing the census from Congress has suddenly awaken and enraged the Republicans. Maybe this will arouse them as well to challenge Obama for stealing the Presidency itself. They surely know he is not an Article 2 “natural born citizen” (which is more than merely being a 14th Amendment “citizen”) by virtue of either Obama’s birth to a dad of Kenyan/British citizenship or birth in Kenya itself — as manifested by his unwillingness to supply his long form birth certificate now under seal.

Feb 14, 2009 - 7:42 am 11. Popcorn:

#2 Falcon,

Nice try. Thirty seconds of deconstruction is all it takes to do your argument in, but I guess you had to make the effort.

Feb 14, 2009 - 7:47 am 12. reliapundit:

PREDICTION:

Obama appoints Bill Daley or some other member of the Chicago Machine to Commerce and leaves the Census at Commerce.

Feb 14, 2009 - 7:51 am 13. AlexinCT:

The reason that the WH has grabbed control of the census is the same reason they passed this patronage bill: democrats have decided that now that they have control of government, unlike the republicans that came before them, they will certainly rig the game completely and utterly in their favor. First you pass a massive bill that borrows tons of money and then places it in the hands of operatives, lobbyists, and donors so they can all hand you hundreds of millions of dollars come election time. Guaranteed bigger take over in the next election cycle with a complicit MSM to help push your agenda – or so the democrats think. Then you jury rig the census results to drastically favor democrats in things like district restructuring, guaranteeing more democrats win the future elections. Finally when you really control everything you can shut down this idiotic power thing and focus it all in people with the right ideology.

The left accused republicans of being fascists, but what democrats are doing now is exactly the kind of power grab that the fascists in Europe did back when. We will end up with a massive and overbearing government that runs every aspect of our lives. For our own good, of course. Anyone that dares stand up or question the new order will also be dealt with. I guess one should find the irony in the fact that the idiots that accused Bush of being a fascist have empowered democrats to do a real fascist take over. If you wonder how America would be toppled, the answer is from within. Power hungry leftovers of the collectivist era will turn us into a banana republic. Hang on to your guns people: the reason for the second Amendment is about to be proved.

Feb 14, 2009 - 8:06 am 14. lester tobias:

I wonder if the fact the Gregg once called for the elimination of the Department of Commerce played a cynical role in his nomination by Obama. I mean, if you’re gonna put a republican in your cabinet, and you want to gut the Department of Commerce so that you can control the Census, why not nominate the republican that apparently wouldn’t have a problem with it?

Feb 14, 2009 - 8:10 am 15. comatus:

“If you are a legal resident…you have a valid Social Security number. Your age & other pertinent information is available from this. Any other information…is to fodder the socialist.”

Wow just wow. The Amish, to grab an easy one, do not have SS numbers. Many others don’t; it’s legal. And .Gov solemnly promised never to use that ID# to do anything at all, you must have forgotten. Then, of course, the final indignity: Social Security is the socialism. Jeeze.
With friends like you…

Feb 14, 2009 - 8:14 am 16. lester tobias:

to Angelo Falcon,

There should be no foxes, of ANY type, in the census henhouse. You are a fox, Rahm Emanuel is a fox, and I am sure that there are plenty of republicans (and other democrats, african americans, asians, latinos, eskimos, caucasians, etc) that would also classify as “foxes”.

The census needs to be impartial. figure out how to do that and I’ll support you 100%. But don’t try to convince me that Rahm Emanuel would be less impartial than the Commerce Department.

Feb 14, 2009 - 8:17 am 17. lester tobias:

Ooops! I think I meant “less partial”..
Sorry about that!

Feb 14, 2009 - 8:19 am 18. Peg C.:

Angelo, you are Hispanic. You are incapable of being unbiased. Go away.

Feb 14, 2009 - 8:23 am 19. Peg C.:

Mari, lie on the census. We did in 2000 and will again.

Feb 14, 2009 - 8:25 am 20. Meryl:

Every 10 years, I for one diligently answer every question as inaccurately as the options allow, except for “how many people live in your house”. As far as I’m concerned, THAT is a census: counting the people. Once they get beyond that, they’re meddling and I don’t need to know the reasons why to reject it.

In 2000, after I waded through about 5 of their pages, I scrawled across the form that most of this was none of their business. Of course, I got a brown shirt phone call about 4-5 weeks later. I hung up the first time. Second call was a trainee along with a supervisor. (Apparently my attitude provided a teaching opportunity or something…)

So I was congenial and gave them the forced information, under duress. At the beginning, I made them listen to my objection, and then we went from there.

The trainee at one point said, (in her PC PR tone), “Ma’am, I certainly understand your point of view and your objection.” I interrupted her in my “I’m about to explode on you and you really don’t want to go there”-voice and said, “No. You don’t. If you had the faintest clue what I’m talking about you would not be working for them and making these kinds of phone calls. Now ask your questions.”

I detest what they have already done and what they are doing. Maybe there will be some way that a groundswell protest can be mounted through the census process. However, mind your manners! If you read the paperwork carefully, you will see that they already choose to inform the countees that there IS a Federal mandate to count and that we are obligated by Federal law to answer questions honestly.

But maybe that’s not that big a deal any more. As I understand it, there are also Federal regulations about paying taxes and if we’ve learned nothing else from bambi’s bunch, we HAVE already learned that paying taxes is completely optional, and there’s no penalty for not doing so. So maybe can ignore the census this time around. Shall we?

Feb 14, 2009 - 8:31 am 21. Ed:

Excerpt from Article 1, Section 2 of the Constitution.
“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.”

Congress has directed that the enumeration known as the census be conducted by the Department of Commerce. If Congress does not change the law to have the census run by the President or White House staff directly then census takers sent by Rahm Emmanuel will be operating illegally and nobody will be compelled by law to answer their questions.

In other words, if Congress doesn’t change the law and Obama doesn’t have Commerce conduct the census then we the people can simply tell the census takers “Thanks but no thanks.” The census will lack legal authority.

Feb 14, 2009 - 9:28 am 22. flownover:

So the point man for the census argument sent out to the rightwing blog forest has some credentials ? And the credentials are a “national steering committee”, humm…. how long had this coup been in the planning ? With a couple billion headed to ACORN, with vast pools of slushfund money hidden in the stimulus bill, there is gonna be a discretionary payout that will tilt the demographic so far out of proportion (keyword) that all the ads on TV will be in a foreign language. Advertisers beware, the data is bad ! Unless of course, we get the daily sustenance vouchers for McDonald’s printed in many languages as a California ballot. Markets ?!? We don’t need no stinkin’ markets !!
Why market when you can mandate ? Doesn’t Commerce Dept run the foodstamp program ?

Feb 14, 2009 - 9:35 am 23. ked5:

@2

Well, how ignorant is your polictial hack.

The 2000 Census was under Clinton. Bush wasn’t sworn in until January of 2001, and the counting was over.

The constitution itself, states the census is to be the purveiw of Commerce. So, again, obie is showing his contempt for the constitution.

Feb 14, 2009 - 9:36 am 24. dagwud:

Excuse me, but Rahm Emanuel is no fox. Olivia Wilde is a fox. Kandyse McClure is a fox.

Rahm Emanuel is a hound dog. What he does best is “lie around”.

Feb 14, 2009 - 9:45 am 25. ked5:

@9

As for “changing the census back to an earlier version”, have you *ever* read previous census sheets? I use them “all. the. time.” The 1930 census was released a few years ago, and 1940 is scheduled to be released in 2011. (Or maybe you’d prefer the 1790 version that had name of head of house, and how many people lived there, only?) I use them *all. the. time.* for genealogy research. questions over the years have varied with most censuses, and have included: year of immigration, are you naturalized, native language, birthplace (country or state), how many children this mother, how many children this mother currently living, age at first marriage, occupation, did you attend school in the last year, relationship to head of house, . . .

Maybe with obie in until 2012 (I dont’ see him being reelected, though I do fear him copying chavez and trying to make himself pres. for life – that’s assuming there is anything left of this country), we may all wish this census has the same fate as the 1890 – it was destroyed by fire, with only tidbits surviving.

Feb 14, 2009 - 9:58 am 26. Gekkobear:

What? The census is traditionally run by mathematicians and statisticians and now it will be run by Rahm Emanuel… he’s a politician, but that’s close enough isn’t it? It’s one of those “-ians” after all.

Mathematicians and statisticians work with numbers, when given a question they try to find the answer.

Politicians also work with numbers. They determine an answer and try to massage the question to match it.

Lets not quibble over minor differences. I’m sure the Census will come up with the required results; and that is more important than things like accuracy.

Feb 14, 2009 - 10:37 am 27. dagwud:

@23: The Constitution makes no claim about who will do the legwork for the Census, just that it will happen within 3 years of Congress first meeting and then every 10 years after that. It then continues to state that it will be done “in such Manner as they shall by Law direct”. The “they” here is “Congress” not “Commerce.”

The Census Act of 1840 established a central office for the census. Prior to that, it was conducted under the Judicial branch by US marshals. It wasn’t called “Bureau of the Census” until 1903. And it wasn’t until 1903 that the Department of Commerce and the Interior existed.

Feb 14, 2009 - 10:49 am 28. BD57:

#2:

If the census is so bulletproof, why in the world would the White House want to pull the census under its control?

Stop shoveling the bovine excrement.

The White House is a political operation; the only plausible explanation for the White House wanting to supervise the census is to influence the results.

Feb 14, 2009 - 11:12 am 29. Mark:

By law, the Census falls under Commerce, and the Director of the Census reports to the Secretary of Commerce, and takes his orders from same, and no one else.

The only Presidential action authorized by law is for nomination of the Director of the Census to the Senate for confirmation.

What the White House is doing is blatantly illegal.

Feb 14, 2009 - 1:26 pm 30. 888:

Clinton & Carter created the economic & financial disaster we’re in, all to get votes. Now, this arrogant, elitist, authoritarian charlatan will usurp the Census, again, just to get votes.

Does anyone see that what these extreme and dishonest Democrats are doing, and have done, is irresponsible, unfair, illegal, immoral and downright wrong for America and the world? Are Americans so stupid and gullible, that they would give this new generation fascist and pathological liar, a pass for this new ‘obamanation’? PLEASE, wake up, America.

Feb 14, 2009 - 2:55 pm 31. Hyphenated American:

Now that Gregg is out – does it mean that Obama will seize all the attempts to have his personal friends control the sensus? Don’t think so….

Feb 14, 2009 - 5:20 pm 32. Elaine:

@21

With both houses of Congress firmly controlled by the Democrats, isn’t it likely that they’d just rubber-stamp Obama’s desire to have Rahm Emanuel oversee the census? It seems to me that’s all they have to do…

I fear this is a losing battle for the Republicans; though making a big deal of it will at least bring this matter (and other Obama grabs for power leading us inevitably into facism) to the attention of the voters. Unfortunately for us, it won’t matter if congressional districts are redrawn and more added through this fiddled with census.

Feb 14, 2009 - 7:30 pm 33. JoeS:

Why don’t the democrat senators from the states that will be negatively impacted speak out? Their states will lose representation because of their representatives who will not speak out against Obama.

The large ghetto-ized states will get millions of new statistical “population” and ACORN, with its $1 billion grant from the stimulus will register all these statistical “citizens” to vote.

“To secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity…” I sort of hope my children and grandchildren will live in a free country. Vote fraud, like Chicago politics, on a national scale.

Rahm Immanuel, David Axelrod… all Chicago politics. Blago is not the worst.

Feb 14, 2009 - 7:37 pm 34. kdman:

Angelo

“The reactions, largely by Republicans” just shocking that no Dems would have objected! We’re not as stupid as you think. And clearly YOU have no agenda here. Go away.

Feb 14, 2009 - 9:01 pm 35. myth buster:

I don’t care if Obama does declare himself President-for-life, because as long as the military does not recognize his claim, come Jan. 20, 2013, his successor can simply order the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs to, “Get that man out of my office.”

Feb 14, 2009 - 10:56 pm 36. Genecis:

“The House Democrats’ trillion dollar spending bill, approved on January 21 by the Appropriations Committee and headed to the House floor next week for a vote, could open billions of taxpayer dollars to left-wing groups like the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN). ACORN has been accused of perpetrating voter registration fraud numerous times in the last several elections; is reportedly under federal investigation; and played a key role in the irresponsible schemes that caused a financial meltdown that has cost American taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars since last fall.

Perhaps the Democrats just want to ensure ACORN a role in helping out with the 2010 census.

Feb 16, 2009 - 10:25 am