Census Participation Requirements?
CWLee
(I'm aware that the Federal Government is required to
conduct a census every 10 years, and that requirement not
what I'm asking about.)
What is the legal requirement of an
individual/homeowner/renter/adult/etc. to reply to any and
all questions asked by someone employed by the Feds to
assist in completing the census? If the person who is asked
the question, at his doorway, merely replies "I'm not
legally required to respond to your questions. Goodbye" and
closes the door - is he likely to be
arrested/cited/indicted/etc for breaking some law? Are
there typically escalating levels of persuasion applied,
including appeals to one's patriotic duty, civic pride, etc.
before citations are issued or arrests made?
Enlightenment appreciated. (This is hypothetical to me, but
there is an active discussion going on in the neighborhood
about these issues, and one or more people down the street
may take this beyond the hypothetical realm and into a real
confrontation.)
--
----------
CWLee
Former slayer of dragons; practice now limited to sacred
cows. Believing we should hire for quality, not quotas, and
promote for performance, not preferences.
LDC
<cdub...@post.harvard.edu> wrote:
>
>What is the legal requirement of an
>individual/homeowner/renter/adult/etc. to reply to any and
>all questions asked by someone employed by the Feds to
>assist in completing the census?
If you google the term "law requiring census participation"
you will get lots of answers.
(HINT: Title. 13 section 221 of the United States Code)
slide
> (I'm aware that the Federal Government is required to
> conduct a census every 10 years, and that requirement not
> what I'm asking about.)
>
> What is the legal requirement of an
> individual/homeowner/renter/adult/etc. to reply to any and
> all questions asked by someone employed by the Feds to
> assist in completing the census?
Title 18, Chapter 7 Subsection II of USC says refusal to answer is
unlawful and can result in a $100 fine. A false answer can result in a
$500 fine. If your intent is to distort the enumeration, you can be
fined $1000 and thrown into the pokey for a year.
Just do it.
deadrat
>
> (I'm aware that the Federal Government is required to
> conduct a census every 10 years, and that requirement not
> what I'm asking about.)
>
> What is the legal requirement of an
> individual/homeowner/renter/adult/etc. to reply to any and
> all questions asked by someone employed by the Feds to
> assist in completing the census?
The legal requirement is to answer truthfully. "Any and all
questions" may not comprise anything about religious beliefs or
affiliation.
> If the person who is asked
> the question, at his doorway, merely replies "I'm not
> legally required to respond to your questions. Goodbye" and
> closes the door - is he likely to be
> arrested/cited/indicted/etc for breaking some law?
I have no idea what's likely to happen. The person who is asked and
refuses has broken 13USC221(a); the person who asks and lies has
borken 13USC221(b). The penalty for the former is $100; for the
latter, $500.
> Are
> there typically escalating levels of persuasion applied,
> including appeals to one's patriotic duty, civic pride, etc.
> before citations are issued or arrests made?
The census bureau prides itself on appealing to reason and civic
pride. It seems that there's a core 20% of the population that are
impervious to such arguments.
Census workers have no police powers, so they won't be making any
arrests.
Theoretically, they can keep asking the USA to take your neighbors to
a federal court that will impose fines at $100 a clip until your
neighbors are broke. And of course, refusing to pay a fine is its own
offense.
> Enlightenment appreciated. (This is hypothetical to me, but
> there is an active discussion going on in the neighborhood
> about these issues, and one or more people down the street
> may take this beyond the hypothetical realm and into a real
> confrontation.)
It's been a couple of decades since the law provided for jail time for
not cooperating, and the census takers will just report that your
neighbors are idiots. Census takers won't get into a "confrontation."
Ever since the ban on the importation of slaves was made moot in 1865,
participating in the decennial census is as close as a private person
can get to shouldering a Constitutional duty. What kind of
unpatriotic, seditious person would shirk such a duty? I guess one
who doesn't want his share of federal taxes or his fair representation
in the federal legislature. The wages of stupidity are probably
punishment enough.
Have you considered moving to a smarter neighborhood?
d...@practical.org
>(I'm aware that the Federal Government is required to
>conduct a census every 10 years, and that requirement not
>what I'm asking about.)
In addition to being superfluous, since your questions below
presumably can be analyzed and answered without regard to this
parenthetical introduction, this is a confusing and, to the extent not
incomprehensible, apparently also an essentially incorrect
introduction since all your questions below are about the conduct of
the constitutionally and statutorily required U.S. census unless you
would arbitrarily define "about" in the context of the conduct of the
census to exclude what a person asked to answer a U.S. Census Bureau
questionnaire or Census Bureau authorized oral questions in connection
therewith is obliged by law do and say in response to such a request.
>What is the legal requirement of an
>individual/homeowner/renter/adult/etc. to reply to any and
>all questions asked by someone employed by the Feds to
>assist in completing the census? If the person who is asked
>the question, at his doorway, merely replies "I'm not
>legally required to respond to your questions. Goodbye" and
>closes the door - is he likely to be
>arrested/cited/indicted/etc for breaking some law?
Assuming that the "any and all" questions posed are only those
pertaining to the person being asked or to the family to which s/he
belongs as stated in a Census Bureau questionnaire or are posed orally
by an agent of the Census Bureau acting within that bureau's validly
promulgated guidelines and schedules, 13 U.S. Code � 221 directs that
a person over age eighteen who refuses or deliberately neglects to
answer to the best of his or her knowledge shall be fined up to $100
for such refusal or neglect and/or to be fined up to $500 if s/he
gives a deliberately false answer.
Such a violation ordinarily is deemed a federal misdemeanor in
the "petty offense" category. Depending however on the particular
facts, the offender might be subjected to a larger fine and maybe also
to prosecution for relatedly alleged offenses in addition to only an
alleged Sect. 221 violation - and it is you who suggests at least such
a possibility by your reference below to a "real confrontation" which
you do not otherwise factually describe.
> Are
>there typically escalating levels of persuasion applied,
>including appeals to one's patriotic duty, civic pride, etc.
>before citations are issued or arrests made?
The Census Bureau's agents participate in required training
sessions in which they are provided with guidelines about how much
discussion to engage in and not to engage in with recalcitrant
persons, how to document and report what they deem to be Sect. 221
and, if appropriate, related violations of law, and how to communicate
about these matters with their superiors or other appropriate
authorities.
Generally speaking, the Census Bureau's interest in these
contexts is confined to obtaining answers to its questions authorized
by law in a not confrontational and otherwise apolitical manner
whenever practicably able to do so.
>Enlightenment appreciated. (This is hypothetical to me, but
>there is an active discussion going on in the neighborhood
>about these issues, and one or more people down the street
>may take this beyond the hypothetical realm and into a real
>confrontation.)
Unlike what you seemed to suggest earlier, your concluding
parenthetical suggestion that there might be a "real confrontation"
reintroduces the possibility of offenses of law in addition to a
garden variety violation of Sect. 221 and related Tit. 13 provisions.
Gordon Burditt
>individual/homeowner/renter/adult/etc. to reply to any and
>all questions asked by someone employed by the Feds to
>assist in completing the census? If the person who is asked
>the question, at his doorway, merely replies "I'm not
>legally required to respond to your questions. Goodbye" and
>closes the door - is he likely to be
>arrested/cited/indicted/etc for breaking some law? Are
The guys coming around to the door are not going to call the police,
and that particular guy shouldn't come back again. The case might
be reassigned to someone else. If YOU refuse, your wife or college-age
son who answers the door might not. A neighbor might be asked for
(possibly incomplete) information.
I've never heard of anyone actually being arrested for refusing to
answer the Census. That doesn't mean it can't happen, but I suspect
they don't have nearly enough jails. If people WERE arrested and
fined or jailed, I suspect I'd see it on the evening news. They just
LOVE reporting on tax evasion arrests just before April 15.
>there typically escalating levels of persuasion applied,
>including appeals to one's patriotic duty, civic pride, etc.
>before citations are issued or arrests made?
If you refuse, the guy at the door might try to persuade you to
answer, citing confidentiality of the information for 72 years given
under Title 13, even from other government agencies like the IRS,
the FBI, and Immigration. He may also bring up that the census is
used to allocate funding for things like roads, schools, homeless
shelters, etc. (This is also mentioned on some recent Census
commercials.) Being counted may get you more representation in the
House of Representatives (but whether this is a good or bad thing
is debatable). Selfish personal interest often works better than
appeals to patriotism. If you ask him to leave, he should leave
immediately. A report of the refusal will be made on the census
form, via the same channels as reporting your answers if you did
answer (which essentially amounts to "information unknown" vs.
"nobody's gotten to this address yet"). The guys in the field have
no control over fines or jail time, unless you actually assaulted
one of them.
If you claim you mailed your information in shortly after April 1,
and it never showed up in the Census data, how can anyone prove
you're lying?
>Enlightenment appreciated. (This is hypothetical to me, but
>there is an active discussion going on in the neighborhood
>about these issues, and one or more people down the street
>may take this beyond the hypothetical realm and into a real
>confrontation.)
A census worker is not supposed to turn an interview into a
confrontation, even if the occupant wants one. He may try to
persuade you to answer, but if you won't, he should leave. He is
not supposed to figure out what size dog you have and show up with
a meaner, bigger dog and bigger, meaner cops.
The questions asked by the 2010 census for each person are:
Name
Relationship to head of household
Sex (this is not a yes/no question)
Age as of April 1, 2010 and date of birth
National origin (Hispanic)
Race
Do you sometimes live elsewhere (for various listed reasons like
college housing, the military, child custody, and prison) (mostly
used to reduce double-counting)
Decidedly NOT on this list are questions about citizenship, immigration
status, whether you have a job, disabilities, your credit card
number, income, whether this house is used as a meth lab, etc.
There are some other Census operations that may ask about some of
that kind of stuff from a sample of the population.
It would be interesting to watch a trial of someone for "lying" on the
Census for putting down a race of "human".
Census workers are not supposed to judge correctness of the answers,
or guess the correct answer. If someone says his age is 17 as of
April 1, 2010 and he was born in 1947, that's what they should put down.
If someone named Susan says he's male, 17, and black, that's what
gets written down, even if the Census worker thinks she's female,
70, and Asian. They are not supposed to engage in debates over the
sex of transsexuals in various stages of their medical treatment.
Does anyone know where to find the racial makeup of the United
States from the 2000 Census, including *ALL* of the answers (not
personally identified, just counts) to the "race" question? Yes,
you can get statistics for the top 10 races or so listed and a big
"Other" category, but I want the bottom 50, and I'd like to know
how many people answered "Klingon" or "Vulcan" or "50-yard dash",
perhaps along with "Sri Lankan". It's hard to believe that *nobody* did.
Keith
Hash: SHA1
On 5/7/10 11:11 PM, CWLee wrote:
> (I'm aware that the Federal Government is required to
> conduct a census every 10 years, and that requirement not
> what I'm asking about.)
>
> What is the legal requirement of an
> individual/homeowner/renter/adult/etc. to reply to any and
> all questions asked by someone employed by the Feds to
> assist in completing the census?
There are a lot of these types of discussions. Basically if the
law/constitution doesn't disallow questions during the census then it is
allowed. If the constitution said, Congress shall conduct a Census every
ten years and not ask any questions, then we wouldn't have to answer in
questions. But the law doesn't disallow questions so Congress may ask us
a question about anything.
- --
Best Regards, Keith
http://home.comcast.net/~kilowattradio/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin)
iEYEARECAAYFAkvlnJQACgkQgvlh1smTcVVy9gCgkvP4guZadfP+uykBYyCSn/V8
LnEAn2lxUc/pGG0+/Ach1MTPi5ee81qD
=u3St
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
D.F. Manno
"CWLee" <cdub...@post.harvard.edu> wrote:
> (I'm aware that the Federal Government is required to
> conduct a census every 10 years, and that requirement not
> what I'm asking about.)
>
> What is the legal requirement of an
> individual/homeowner/renter/adult/etc. to reply to any and
> all questions asked by someone employed by the Feds to
> assist in completing the census? If the person who is asked
> the question, at his doorway, merely replies "I'm not
> legally required to respond to your questions. Goodbye" and
> closes the door - is he likely to be
> arrested/cited/indicted/etc for breaking some law? Are
> there typically escalating levels of persuasion applied,
> including appeals to one's patriotic duty, civic pride, etc.
> before citations are issued or arrests made?
13 U.S.C. �221:
Refusal or neglect to answer questions; false answers
(a) Whoever, being over eighteen years of age, refuses or
willfully neglects, when requested by the Secretary, or by any
other authorized officer or employee of the Department of
Commerce or bureau or agency thereof acting under the
instructions of the Secretary or authorized officer, to answer,
to the best of his knowledge, any of the questions on any
schedule submitted to him in connection with any census or survey
provided for by subchapters I, II, IV, and V of chapter 5 of this
title, applying to himself or to the family to which he belongs
or is related, or to the farm or farms of which he or his family
is the occupant, shall be fined not more than $100.
--
D.F. Manno
dfm...@mail.com
"Quid lucrum istic mihi est?"
NadCixelsyd
> Title 18, Chapter 7 Subsection II of USC says refusal to answer is
> unlawful and can result in a $100 fine. A false answer can result in a
> $500 fine. If your intent is to distort the enumeration, you can be
> fined $1000 and thrown into the pokey for a year.
I told the census worker, "Two people live here. I do not wish to
make any other statements. Have a nice day." and I closed the door.
I never refused to answer any questions as I did not give him any time
to ask any. And even if I did, to whom do they assess the $100 fine?
David Chesler
> > Title 18, Chapter 7 Subsection II of USC says refusal to answer is
> > unlawful and can result in a $100 fine. A false answer can result in a
> > $500 fine. If your intent is to distort the enumeration, you can be
> > fined $1000 and thrown into the pokey for a year.
Those who believe the Constitution is what creates the powers of the
federal government would ask what gives them the power to demand the
useful answers not necessary for the decennial counting.
I filled in the short form with what they needed. I saw the billboards
that they won't know how many buses to run or hospitals to build. I only
care about how many representatives in Congress they allocate, so they
don't need to know anybody's race. And if the POTUS isn't white than
neither am I so I didn't check anything.
> I told the census worker, "Two people live here. I do not wish to
> make any other statements. Have a nice day." and I closed the door.
>
> I never refused to answer any questions as I did not give him any time
> to ask any. And even if I did, to whom do they assess the $100 fine?
I am house-watching for a family who has been out of the country for
just over a year now. Before they left they got the long form. I think
they sent it back indicating only how many people lived there. They got
a bunch of notices, mostly hand-delivered. I made one call on their
behalf but I never got called back. I saw the same $100 penalty and
didn't worry about it. The head of household said "OK, if they don't
like that number it's zero" and I think that's it because I never got a
census in their forwarded mail, and the truth is nobody slept there on
April 1, 2010. It's too bad, because unlike my state-of-residence,
Massachusetts, the representatives and electoral college votes from
where he lives actually represent his political views.
--
- David Chesler <che...@post.harvard.edu>
New York's home, but it ain't mine no more
slide
In theory you can be arrested and fined, I suppose. In practice, I doubt
it will ever occur.
Stuart A. Bronstein
Sorry, but no matter how clever you think you are, the courts will
look through such a transparent attempt to skirt the law.
By your statement to the census worker you clearly knew there were
more questions coming. And saying you would not make any other
statements in conjunction with closing the door is just as clearly
a refusal to answer questions you know were coming but had not yet
been asked.
nos...@isp.com
> Those who believe the Constitution is what creates the
> powers of the federal government would ask what gives
> them the power to demand the useful answers not necessary
> for the decennial counting.
An "executive summary" form of an answer to those who would ask this
question would be:
The U.S. constitution, Title 13 and some other related provisions of
the U.S. Code, and these laws' implementing regulations subject to
congressional legislative action and, as regularly occurs,
communication/negotiation between the Census Bureau and the
appropriate congressional committees of congress, as also provided by
federal law, and also to review by the federal courts including
ultimately by the U.S. supreme court in actual cases/controversies in
which the plaintiff(s) establish(es) standing to sue and a cognizable
claim.
As of course you know already.
A response to those who would ask the question you posit might also
appropriately include questions to the questioner himself (here,
presumably and so implicitly, you) of which two pertinent ones might
be:
- What would he say is the basis in law for him to claim
that he has the power to decide which questions promulgated
by the Secretary of Commerce acting through the Census
Bureau as pre-approved by congress (as required by Tit. 13
and as, historically, has occurred) are not necessary or useful?
- In light of the reality that, although originally established
only for the purpose of congressional representation
apportionment, the U.S. decennial census has been extended
considerably by federal during the nation's history to serve
as a legislatively commanded linchpin of the federal statistical
and related demographic systems for collecting and analyzing
data on the characteristics of (among other things) individuals,
households, and housing units throughout the country to
enable and facilitate determining the scope of and to
implement numerous provisions/programs required by U.S.
law (re. which, see, e.g., 13 U.S.C. 141), what would he claim
to be the basis in law for an implication, such as that you
seem to be attempting, that he has the prerogative to
determine what is/isn't needed or useful for such federal
law mandated decennial counting for these purposes?
Timothy
>
> I told the census worker, "Two people live here. �I do not wish to
> make any other statements. �Have a nice day." and I closed the door.
>
> I never refused to answer any questions as I did not give him any time
> to ask any. �And even if I did, to whom do they assess the $100 fine?
They need a little more information than that. And Title 13 of the US
Code allows them to ask.
The first option is to go back and ask the second person, who may not
be as a big of a butthead as you are. The second is to see if they
can catch you on a better day. The third is to see if they can get
you to mail in a form (if the problem is that you just don't want to
talk to the census enumerator.) The fourth is to get the information
from a reliable secondhand source. The neighbors may know your name
or how old you are or what race you appear to be.