Census-WHY BOTHER

[runrussellrun]

come to think of it.....I met Jeff Epstein at a party....

[HooDat]

How do you think these apportionments are calculated to determine how much Federal funding each State gets?

actually I think is it horse trading between congressmen as they attempt to get bills passed. They may use census data to buttress their arguments, but in the end it is politics and negotiation.

I have no clue why you're all this worked up by the Census.

While our discussions have roamed wild and free - I believe the purpose of this thread was actually to talk about the proper ratio of rep to citizen. To summarize:

RR seems to think the ratio should be lower so that people have a better chance of actually having a relationship with their rep, and someone other than the rich dude (or dudette) can have access.

Others (I think afan included) seem to think that the HofR is already a total cluster because there are so many people and so many localized interests that nothing can get done.

I for one think that a lot more localized interest and a lot more forced accommodation, and a whole lot more personal relationships with ordinary "joe's" wouldn't hurt.

But - with that said, the House already has a hard time doing anything other than tote the party line. Would that get better or worse with more reps? Probably worse. Plus more reps will cost more money.....

[a fan]

How do you think these apportionments are calculated to determine how much Federal funding each State gets?

actually I think is it horse trading between congressmen as they attempt to get bills passed. They may use census data to buttress their arguments, but in the end it is politics and negotiation.

It's not. What you are describing are earmarks----line items for "special" projects. All I am describing is apportionment.....day to day distribution of funds.

[a fan]

No one has asked for the benefits of actually utilizing what the founding fathers intended. Funny, of all the dump we waste money on, figured you wouldn't get all worked up about enforcing the US COnstitution and costs pretty much would be on par with what the US Census spends every year.

Great. Kill all the survey questions in the Census. Good luck getting proper funding to the proper places without data. More waste. More fraud.


Who cares, right?

[runrussellrun]

Yes, WAHOO, mostly correct on the purpose of this thread/topic. (NO tRumping allowed )

But, regarding touting /toting the party lines......WHICH PARTY?

I would put meself, AFAN and you, wahoo, squarely in the INDEPENDENT camp. We don't HAVE a party.

The US Supremes just ruled that Congressional districts CAN be made up of something that IS made up. (political parties )
What LEGAL precedent dictates that political party even be considered as a district forming foundation?

Republican party didn't even exist for almost 100 years of the US's existence. And now the supremes make THIS ruling? clowns.

[runrussellrun]

No one has asked for the benefits of actually utilizing what the founding fathers intended. Funny, of all the dump we waste money on, figured you wouldn't get all worked up about enforcing the US COnstitution and costs pretty much would be on par with what the US Census spends every year.

Great. Kill all the survey questions in the Census. Good luck getting proper funding to the proper places without data. More waste. More fraud.


Who cares, right?

You addressed NOTHING that I asked. Thank you.

You are suddenly concerned about waste? Fraud? But poo pooed the FIRST evah Pentagon audit as worthless.

But, I am curious, which US Census questions, other than head counts, elimination would add to more waste. More fraud?

And, you are admitting that such waste/fraud exists in the first place?

[a fan]

You are suddenly concerned about waste? Fraud? But poo pooed the FIRST evah Pentagon audit as worthless.

It was.

They run one every year now? Nope. Did they correct any of their accounting methods, or get fined by Congress for not following accounting rules that every other Dept. follows with no trouble whatsoever? Nope.

So yep. Pointless.

[runrussellrun]

You are suddenly concerned about waste? Fraud? But poo pooed the FIRST evah Pentagon audit as worthless.

It was.

They run one every year now? Nope. Did they correct any of their accounting methods, or get fined by Congress for not following accounting rules that every other Dept. follows with no trouble whatsoever? Nope.

So yep. Pointless.

YThe NET was just there....right over THERE. (2nd simple question ignored, you're getting good at this )

What language in the last US Census helps allocate funds? The racist one about being a latino?

[a fan]

The NET was just there....right over THERE. (2nd simple question ignored, you're getting good at this )

The one I already answered? That I don't want hundreds more Reps in the House? And I told you to sue.....petition our courts if you think
your argument is so crystal clear.

What language in the last US Census helps allocate funds? The racist one about being a latino?

Also asked and answered. I gave you a link to the Census itself where they answer why they ask these questions. Visit the site. It's all there for you.

[runrussellrun]

No one has asked for the benefits of actually utilizing what the founding fathers intended. Funny, of all the dump we waste money on, figured you wouldn't get all worked up about enforcing the US COnstitution and costs pretty much would be on par with what the US Census spends every year.

Great. Kill all the survey questions in the Census. Good luck getting proper funding to the proper places without data. More waste. More fraud.


Who cares, right?

NO afan, THIS is what I am responding too. What I am asking. You are sardonically implying , I assume, that removing (kill) survey questions would prohibit proper funding because data is now NOT collected because of said removal.

Which ones? Which survey questions help reduce waste? Fraud? Help with proper funding? Here, let me help with the link:

https://www.census.gov/2010census/pdf/2 ... e_Info.pdf

How Obama wasn't called a racist for having some of these questions, I will always know.

[HooDat]

Which ones? Which survey questions help reduce waste? Fraud? Help with proper funding? Here, let me help with the link:

https://www.census.gov/2010census/pdf/2 ... e_Info.pdf

How Obama wasn't called a racist for having some of these questions, I will always know.

gotta say, the questions they choose to include make no sense to me. Why all the stuff about race and whether someone is Latino? Why all the stuff about who is related to the primary tenant (the infamous "Person #1")?

Why does it matter if the Latino people are Mexican, versus Cuban, vs Puerto Rican? No questions about Guatemala???

Why no questions about Sweden?
Why no questions about Sierea Leone or Sri Lanka

Why, it almost seems like they are worried about political voting blocks??!!??

Nothing about education?
Nothing about work/employment?
Nothing about disabilities?
...you know, stuff that the government should actually care about, and places where there is actually something they could DO??

they suck, and by "they" I mean the government.....

[runrussellrun]

and tRump and the pretend CONs get to look like tough guys because they "fought for the question", blame it on others, that it didn't make it.

Don't recall Obama being called a racist, when adding those "latino" "relationship" questions. Does anyone else?

[HooDat]

That which is measured becomes important....

[Brooklyn]

Have you guys sent in your forms, yet?

I did so yesterday. Hopefully, Lake Wobegone will be well represented hereafter ...

[runrussellrun]

How do you think these apportionments are calculated to determine how much Federal funding each State gets?

actually I think is it horse trading between congressmen as they attempt to get bills passed. They may use census data to buttress their arguments, but in the end it is politics and negotiation.

I have no clue why you're all this worked up by the Census.

While our discussions have roamed wild and free - I believe the purpose of this thread was actually to talk about the proper ratio of rep to citizen. To summarize:

RR seems to think the ratio should be lower so that people have a better chance of actually having a relationship with their rep, and someone other than the rich dude (or dudette) can have access.

Others (I think afan included) seem to think that the HofR is already a total cluster because there are so many people and so many localized interests that nothing can get done.

I for one think that a lot more localized interest and a lot more forced accommodation, and a whole lot more personal relationships with ordinary "joe's" wouldn't hurt.

But - with that said, the House already has a hard time doing anything other than tote the party line. Would that get better or worse with more reps? Probably worse. Plus more reps will cost more money.....

Article 1, of the US Constitution....but,whatever.

the Senate/House vote on the March, 2020 CARES act ...

.....zero Nay votes in the US Senate

.....six NAY votes from our US Reps (even party spread )


keep on telling us US Congress doesn't get turd down.