PDA

View Full Version : Obama makes shifty move of Census Bureau to White House




lynnf
02-07-2009, 08:00 PM
http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cfm?articleid=41986&dcn=todaysnews


Obama shifts Census oversight, triggering angry protest by Republicans

...

'They suggested the move could improperly influence legislative redistricting, which is shaped by Census counts.

"By circumventing the secretary of Commerce's oversight of the Census Bureau and handing it directly to a political operative such as Mr. Emanuel, you are severely jeopardizing the fairness and accuracy of the 2010 Census," Issa and McHenry wrote Obama.'

...

HOLLYWOOD
02-07-2009, 10:08 PM
Control the Statistics and MSM = 100% Effective Propaganda over the people

Smart move for a COMMUNISTIC SOCIETY RULER.

Uh, wait, what's going on here in this country? Yeap, Socialism in a rush is, the new Chromed Communism.

Kenyan President, Israeli cabinets... this country is done!

lynnf
02-08-2009, 08:35 AM
http://www.sodahead.com/question/252964/is-obamas-move-to-control-the-census-bureau-a-power-grab-to-help-create-a-permanent-liberal-majority/?tko=polls_recent

Is Obama's move to control the Census Bureau a power grab to help create a permanent liberal majority?
'
Little Noted Move on Census by Obama Could Spell GOP Disaster
...

'Trying to game the census for political purposes is just about what we'd expect from this crew. They have talked so long about building a permanent majority, manipulating numbers to perhaps overcount their core constituencies should not be put past them.

If Bush/Rove had dared to do something like this it would have been headline news nationally. As it is, we hear barely a peep from the media and are not likely to in the future.'

...

lynn

TrueFreedom
02-08-2009, 10:25 AM
Don't act like it's only democrats doing it.

Google Tom DeLay and Texas Congressional District 10.

This kind of stuff happens on both sides.

lynnf
02-08-2009, 12:11 PM
Don't act like it's only democrats doing it.

Google Tom DeLay and Texas Congressional District 10.

This kind of stuff happens on both sides.


but Bush didn't move the Census Bureau to be directly under the White House! this just means that Obama is more authoritarian than Bush! and that's a lot of authoritarianism.

and don't act like I was acting like it was only democrats. I was only talking about Obama, if you want to point out others, then it's up to you , not me.

oh, and up until now, Bush is the worst president ever, but Obama is working on replacing Bush in that category and he's only been in a couple of weeks!

lynn

TrueFreedom
02-08-2009, 04:02 PM
but Bush didn't move the Census Bureau to be directly under the White House! this just means that Obama is more authoritarian than Bush! and that's a lot of authoritarianism.

and don't act like I was acting like it was only democrats. I was only talking about Obama, if you want to point out others, then it's up to you , not me.

oh, and up until now, Bush is the worst president ever, but Obama is working on replacing Bush in that category and he's only been in a couple of weeks!

lynn

No that would not make him more authoritarian than Bush, it's just that Obama's was brought to the light. Bush knew what was happening and let it go on.

You then argue that you were not pointing to all democrats, just Obama, but when you use "spooky" language like "shifty" when talking about the Democrat President, it's pretty clear what your agenda is.

And yes Bush was a horrible president, but Obama is nowhere near reaching that level.

Lucille
02-08-2009, 04:05 PM
AOSHQ: Obama violating Constitution w/ census heist (http://minx.cc/?post=282579)


In Article I, Section 2 the US Constitution orders that "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."

The Congress, by law directed that:


"The Secretary [of Commerce]
shall perform the functions and duties imposed upon him by this title,
may issue such rules and regulations as he deems necessary to carry out
such functions and duties, and may delegate the performance of such
functions and duties and the authority to issue such rules and
regulations to such officers and employees of the Department of
Commerce as he may designate."

As I read it, the Director of the Census must, by law, be within the Department of Commerce
and under the direction of the (Senate approved) Secretary of Commerce
who then reports to the president. Am I missing something?

TrueFreedom
02-08-2009, 04:10 PM
AOSHQ: Obama violating Constitution w/ census heist (http://minx.cc/?post=282579)


The key word here is "may" not must.

Also the Congress dictated that by law. The same Congress that can use anything necessary and proper to enact their laws. So delegating that power to the White House would be included I'm sure....

Matt Collins
02-08-2009, 04:31 PM
This has already been discussed here:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=178561

Lucille
02-09-2009, 12:28 PM
GOP Sounds Alarm Over Obama Decision to Move Census to White House (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/02/09/gop-sounds-alarm-obama-decision-census-white-house/)
A number of Republicans are joining the fight to put the census issue into the political spotlight "before it's too late."


"I've always remembered what Joseph Stalin said: 'Those who cast the votes decide nothing. Those who count the votes decide everything.' The same principle applies to the census. Since one or the other party will always be in power at the time of the census, it is vital that the out-of-power party at least be able to observe the process to make sure it isn't being stacked in favor of the party in power.

lynnf
02-10-2009, 08:31 AM
No that would not make him more authoritarian than Bush, it's just that Obama's was brought to the light. Bush knew what was happening and let it go on.

You then argue that you were not pointing to all democrats, just Obama, but when you use "spooky" language like "shifty" when talking about the Democrat President, it's pretty clear what your agenda is.

And yes Bush was a horrible president, but Obama is nowhere near reaching that level.


and you jump in with an ad-hominem attack on me, rather than presenting your argument that it's not a shifty move. could that be because you don't have an argument that it's not a shifty move? shows what your agenda is.

lynn

lynnf
02-12-2009, 03:26 PM
now that Gregg is out as Commerce Secretary, maybe the Census shift won't be necessary since that was the stated reason for it.

lynn

lynnf
02-13-2009, 08:34 AM
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20090213/pl_politico/18821


Gregg flip-flop emboldens GOP

...

' "When your opponent trips and falls on his face, it certainly emboldens the opponent," added Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-N.C.). "This has been blunder after blunder. As an administration they are far from immune to tough days, weeks and months.

"It certainly emboldens us," McHenry said. '

...

lynn

angelatc
02-13-2009, 11:04 AM
What Obama wants to do is replace the hard count with computer modeling, which has proved to be less reliable than the hard count.

The GOP was threatening legal action. I hope they to get SCOTUS involved. Somebody needs to hand Obama his ass at some point soon, that's for sure.

Lucille
02-13-2009, 03:48 PM
Gregg Withdrawal Increases Census Stakes (http://www.discovery.org/blogs/discoveryblog/2009/02/gregg_withdrawal_increases_cen.php)

Reagan-era Census Bureau Director Bruce Chapman:


The announcement today by Sen. Judd Gregg that he is withdrawing as the president's nominee to be Secretary of Commerce--and citing the Census issue as one reason--is going to increase scrutiny of White House plans to try to change the way the 2010 Decennial Census is conducted. Clearly the president has done little to alleviate concerns of Gregg, a Republican, that the Census might be conducted in a politicized manner.

It is now unavoidable that the White House statements claiming oversight of the Census preparations were not flukes caused by ignorance or naivete. They must have been serious or Sen. Gregg would not have decided to withdraw. One previously could give the president the benefit of the doubt. He was too busy with other matters to make his position clear. Now he has lost another cabinet nominee--not because of faults in the nominee, but because the nominee didn't want to be part of the Administration that ignored the chain of command and tried to micro-manage a function traditionally left to career scientists.

It is also possible, however, that Gregg didn't quit, but was shoved. The West Wing officials by now may have figured out that there are legal as well as political risks if they try to change the plans for the Census from the White House instead of the Commerce Department. Lawsuits were threatened today by House Republicans.

It would be more expedient for the White House to have a pliable Secretary of Commerce in place if the aim is to "re-evaluate" the conduct of the 2010 Census in order to introduce adjustment of results through sampling and computer modeling. Gregg presumably would not have gone along--and would have been hard to run over.

But the legal issues will remain even if a willing partisan is nominated and confirmed as Commerce Secretary. There is a 1999 Supreme Court ruling that would make sampling-based adjustment difficult in the absence of compelling evidence that the customary hard count would be less credible. And that evidence not only is lacking, but a three year statistical study that was finished in 2003 to respond to this issue concluded just the opposite: adjusting the Census numbers through sampling and computer models could lead to a less credible Census result. A hard count has always been legally defensible. A fuzzy "adjusted" Census--where figures at the Census tract and block level would be demonstrably erroneous in many cases--could invite endless litigation and bad will.

Another problem for the Obama White House if it wants to change the Census approach: planning for the 2010 Census has been underway for years and now is in preparation for testing. The disruptions caused by an Administration decision to change those plans would cause great problems and probably agitate the resistance of career statisticians charged with responsibility for conducting the Census.

Finally, one wonders if the President understands that the Census is a function of government that requires not only integrity in fact but also the appearance of integrity. The reputation of the Census should not be compromised. It is hard enough to get people to cooperate in the conduct of the Census without creating a reputation for politicization.

Those on Capitol Hill that want White House direction--and an adjustment plan--for the Census say they worry about the Census Bureau's ability to reach out to minorities and urban dwellers and to "count everybody." In truth, the Census Bureau's record on reducing the "undercount" has improved with each new Census. Huge efforts are made to reach out to all groups.

However, what might well cause the undercount to grow would be efforts to politicize the Census, thereby generating doubt in large parts of the citizenry that normally are quite willing to take part. If that is the case, and the Administration refuses to back off, Sen. Gregg's withdrawal will prove to be only one in a series of likely developments that will trouble the 2010 Census.

Various kinds of individuals, myself included, have served as Directors of the U.S. Census Bureau. One thing I think we all have in common is a desire to have the statisticians' work respected, without politicization. As far a the general public, I felt a bit alone on this subject a week ago when I first blogged on this, but awareness has grown daily in a startling way. The Gregg withdrawal really makes the issue unavoidable.