<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: About the 2010 Census Questions</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.plainpunditry.com/2010/03/14/about-the-2010-census-questions/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.plainpunditry.com/2010/03/14/about-the-2010-census-questions/</link>
	<description>Commenting on Social &#38; Political Issues</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 28 Feb 2012 22:08:36 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andy</title>
		<link>http://www.plainpunditry.com/2010/03/14/about-the-2010-census-questions/comment-page-1/#comment-4940</link>
		<dc:creator>Andy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 May 2010 03:24:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.plainpunditry.com/?p=1282#comment-4940</guid>
		<description>The Constitution states that it&#039;s for a head count in order to determine representation. The phrase &quot;in such Manner as they shall by Law direct&quot; means they can use the method they deem best to collect information, not that they can collect whatever information they wish. Collecting statistics on home ownership, age, and race are irrelevant for the Constitutionally stated purpose of the Census (&quot;Enumeration&quot;).

Of course, this kind of information would be handy for those in power if they wanted to reapportion Congressional districts in a way that would be favorable to their party, or if they wanted to effectively direct unspent TARP money in districts they are in danger of losing in November.

But that&#039;s crazy. There&#039;s no corruption in the federal government, right?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Constitution states that it&#8217;s for a head count in order to determine representation. The phrase &#8220;in such Manner as they shall by Law direct&#8221; means they can use the method they deem best to collect information, not that they can collect whatever information they wish. Collecting statistics on home ownership, age, and race are irrelevant for the Constitutionally stated purpose of the Census (&#8220;Enumeration&#8221;).</p>
<p>Of course, this kind of information would be handy for those in power if they wanted to reapportion Congressional districts in a way that would be favorable to their party, or if they wanted to effectively direct unspent TARP money in districts they are in danger of losing in November.</p>
<p>But that&#8217;s crazy. There&#8217;s no corruption in the federal government, right?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: erik</title>
		<link>http://www.plainpunditry.com/2010/03/14/about-the-2010-census-questions/comment-page-1/#comment-4939</link>
		<dc:creator>erik</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 May 2010 02:56:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.plainpunditry.com/?p=1282#comment-4939</guid>
		<description>Actually, the purpose of the census has never been for just a &quot;head count&quot;.  This has been clarified in numerous federal court law.  The key phrase in Article 1 is: in such Manner as they shall by Law direct.  Congress then enacted title 13.  You also forgot to mention that Congress has the power under the necessary and proper clause coupled with Article 1, to ask questions deemed necessary to intelligently govern the population.  Again, numerous cases have declared the race question constitutional, for reasons ranging from compliance with Voter Act to Civil Rights Act.  For reference please read: Morales v. Daley, McCullough v. Maryland, US v. Morarity.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Actually, the purpose of the census has never been for just a &#8220;head count&#8221;.  This has been clarified in numerous federal court law.  The key phrase in Article 1 is: in such Manner as they shall by Law direct.  Congress then enacted title 13.  You also forgot to mention that Congress has the power under the necessary and proper clause coupled with Article 1, to ask questions deemed necessary to intelligently govern the population.  Again, numerous cases have declared the race question constitutional, for reasons ranging from compliance with Voter Act to Civil Rights Act.  For reference please read: Morales v. Daley, McCullough v. Maryland, US v. Morarity.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim Haile</title>
		<link>http://www.plainpunditry.com/2010/03/14/about-the-2010-census-questions/comment-page-1/#comment-4384</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim Haile</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2010 13:26:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.plainpunditry.com/?p=1282#comment-4384</guid>
		<description>Laura Ingraham had a segment on her radio show in which she discussed the race question (# 9) of the census form. Someone suggested that people should answer the question &quot;other,&quot; then write in &quot;American.&quot; Many callers agreed with the idea. The answer would be accurate for most, if not all, people have an ethnically diverse lineage. This answer is also technically accurate, for those born in America are &quot;Americans.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Laura Ingraham had a segment on her radio show in which she discussed the race question (# 9) of the census form. Someone suggested that people should answer the question &#8220;other,&#8221; then write in &#8220;American.&#8221; Many callers agreed with the idea. The answer would be accurate for most, if not all, people have an ethnically diverse lineage. This answer is also technically accurate, for those born in America are &#8220;Americans.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

