Posted by
Selfish Rhino on Friday, June 19, 2009 5:11:35 PM
The Washington Times recently covered Rep. Michelle Bachmann's vow to not complete next year’s national census due to concerns that include the potential of ACORN door-to-door information collection efforts. The piece notes the Congresswoman stating that “the Constitution doesn’t require any information” other than “how many people are in (her) home.”
Shelly Lowe, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Census Bureau, was quoted saying that Rep. Bachmann is "misreading" the law. Lowe also apparently sent “a portion of the U.S. legal code that says anyone over 18 years of age who refuses to answer ‘any of the questions’ on the census can be fined up to $5,000.”
This is quite laughable at many levels, as Lowe seems to not recognize the difference between the United States Constitution and statutory law. Perhaps she is a victim of a pandemic that has swept federal bureaucrats into believing that all laws, rules, and regulations are explicitly constitutional.
Let’s see whether she’s right. According to Article I, Section II, “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.”
In light of this, should any reasonable person assume that there is a constitutional rationale to include areas of demography other than a headcount of constituents? I fail to see a basis upon which to ask questions regarding age, gender, race, nationality, socio-economic status, marital status, sexual orientation, hobbies, favorite NFL team, etc., for the exclusive purpose of congressional districting (no vested interest or conflict regarding ACORN’s involvement, of course).
The Times notes that Lowe claimed that the Congresswoman was “misreading the law;” however, Bachmann didn’t claim to have read “the law.” She only made mentioned of that which is she is constitutionally obligated to respond to.
“The law” is 13USC221, which by the way only states that anyone over the age of 18 who refuses to answer census questions “shall be fined not more than $100.” One who “willfully gives any answer that is false, shall be fined not more than $500.”
Where is Lowe’s $5,000 fine mentioned? Oh, here it is. The bureau’s FAQ site claims that 18USC3571 and 18USC3559 “in effect amends (sic)”13USC221 “by changing the fine for anyone over 18 years old who refuses or willfully neglects to complete the questionnaire or answer questions posed by census takers from a fine of not more than $100 to not more than $5,000.”
The bureau is utilizing scare tactics to make one think that Title 18, which refers to maximum sentencing and fines for any potential federal felony, misdemeanor, or infraction actually amends that which has indeed not been amended and is fully intact under 13USC221. Just look at how loose the language is and notice how it only appears as an answer to an FAQ and is not codified as law anywhere. If you don’t believe me, search Title 18 all you want.
On a side note, allow me to point out that 13USC221 also states that “no person shall be compelled to disclose information relative to his religious beliefs or to membership in a religious body.” Good to see that the bureau is required to respect at least some degree of our privacy.
Whether I am part of the sample for the ongoing American Community Survey or the 2010 Census, which will be mailed to every U.S. household in March, I plan to echo Congresswoman Bachmann’s stance, and will only answer that which I am constitutionally obligated to provide a response for. If I face a mere $100 fine, so be it. Privacy is well worth it.