Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I never heard them making a big deal out of any of the other census years. Is it because this year they are counting illegal populations? Just weird is all I am saying. There must be an explanation. Maybe because we had kids, they didn't count us. That info. may go directly to the govt. after we got their ss#.
The census was to count every person living in the country and by sex and age. The 1790 census ( we have about 5 families we have located in this in MA and VT and CT) listed the head of household, then listed males by ages ( groups of things like age 0-5, 6-10, etc. At the end of the men, it asked how many were of militia age ( 16-45). Then the women were counted, again by age.
If you want to find census forms, Rootsweb has them. So does LDS and Ancestry and many other sites. I posted the Rootsweb line ( free). You should be able to get the forms.
Over the years, the census added occupations, schooling, names of all people, monetary worth, place of birth, place of parents birth.
Most immigrants came intending to become citizens... so citizenship was taken off. (It was NOT on the short form in 2000) However, then the country got into the "illegals"stuff and this year.... I see in the census now is that the 2010 census wants to count you by race but calls Hispanic not a race, but still asks Hispanics to identify origin
Technically, as written originally, censuses were simply to count every man woman and child in the country. No one counted origin or citizenship until the mid 1800s. I have no problem with it. I do think that congressional representation should be determined based on American citizenship though.
...However, then the country got into the "illegals"stuff and this year.... I see in the census now is that the 2010 census wants to count you by race but calls Hispanic not a race, but still asks Hispanics to identify origin
Technically, as written originally, censuses were simply to count every man woman and child in the country. No one counted origin or citizenship until the mid 1800s. I have no problem with it. I do think that congressional representation should be determined based on American citizenship though.
Which is either naive or deliberately wrong by those who create the current census and other policies. Hispanic as in Spanish speaking has nothing to do with race, that's true. Many Americans speak English but have little or no English ancestry.
But most of the people we know or think of as Hispanic or Latino are racially native American. Their ancestors just happen to come from the parts of the Americas that were dominated by the Spanish.
Originally census taking was conducted to see how many men there were to form an army. That's why they focused on heads of families and how many males were 16 or older.
As for representation based on citizenship, I couldn't agree more.
Actually the American people we call Hispanic or Latino are generally part Native American. Depending on where their origins are they can be a blend of European, Native American and African bloods in all the variations possible. Identifying them for the census will quantify Spanish language needs and demographic partitioning.
I don't think anyone has yet mentioned that a census every 10 years is a constitutional requirement.
I am a Census Bureau temporary employee for the 2010 census. Yes, illegal aliens will be counted this year and from my understanding, this is the first time the Census Bureau will be making the effort to count them. A state's representation in the House is determined by census data so, collectively, it is to our benefit to be counted. The more people living in a state, the more representation it has in Congress. States may either lose or gain representation in Congress from the census data collected this year. Not only that, but districts are drawn based on census data, too, so that every representative represents approximately the same number of people--or as close as possible. I believe that a region's representation in their own statehouse is also determined by census data.
The census form I received asked only about the people living in my household. No other personal information was asked for. I don't know if census forms asking for personal information are being distributed this year but the forms I am working with are solely for a head count.
I don't see the gathering of population data as a useless exercise. There are many good reasons for a country to know how many people are living within its borders and where, other than a state's representation in Congress. Allocation of federal money for infrastructure projects, schools, hospitals, etc. is also based on census data.
Spending money on studies like this one is a boondoggle.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
