I bet Florida oldsters are more PC literate in Florida than most places because it is the only way the can talk to their kids up north or see pictures of the grand kids. None of the youngins take hard copy pictures or use snail mail, nor do they talk in the phone. You can't text on a land line so Gramps E mails and uses Facebook on his desk top or lap top.
How many reasons did they go through for the Muslim ban?
Repubs usually use a number of excuses before they can get anything to happen. How many did they use up to get us into the Iraq war?
Voters - reading the above, would you vote for a trump(tard)?
Who's running against them? An open borders, sanctuary state, free health care for illegal aliens, eliminate ICE, 70% tax rate, free everything lib?
Every year I fill out Form 1040 I am reminded why I'll never ever vote for a democrat.
Can you imagine the anger of the obamacrats if their welfare benefits were taxed? LOL
Yep! Your taxes just keep getting worse, while the top billionaires get HUGE tax breaks because of the Repubs and their billionaire owners.
Every time I fill out a Form 1040 I am reminded that the first personal income tax was imposed by a Republican with the Revenue Act of 1861. Said Republican treated the Constitution like a piece of toilet paper and caused over a million deaths.
I am also reminded the 16th Amendment says Congress has the power to tax, not that it must tax. The Republicans never turned over the Revenue Act of 1913. 'Progressive' Republicans worked with Democrats to pass the Revenue Act of 1916 expansion. They had to make sure the war profiteers didn't suffer.
All the bastards never real a tax. We are still paying taxes imposed during the Civil War to pay for it.
Though a year or so ago I heard that it would be online, in the last couple weeks, I haven't seen any references to that. Have you all?
Came across an article that dealt directely with all this.
That gives a sense of the scale were talking about here, but its not actually the deadline. Wang notes that the first documents actually need to be mailed on March 12, 2020. That makes the printing pace much easier: Just 117 items per second. While its possible that the questionnaires could be printed later in the process than intended, that would likely disrupt the printers schedule and potentially increase costs for the government."
Actually 2 billion
Meanwhile, while you have your shorts in a knot over printing the survey, I'm quite amazed at the courts again trying to run the govt. In this case the SC decided that the executive branch needs to explain to the courts why they want to put a question on the survey. Quite amazing the balls they have, to think that it's up to them to decide what questions are OK, which are not. It's a clear over step again of the courts into the powers of the executive branch. What's next, the SC will run the survey too and decide all the questions?
No, that's the law.
No, the admin violated the law iiuc by trying to add a question at the last mimute without a good reason.
Actually, with a bad reason and multiple lies.
The bad reason was that they claimed it was "to enforce the voter rights act" (like trumps has ever done anything like that), but the evidence clearly shows that it was done entirely for political purposes, to increase the Repub chance of winning elections.
The lies include where the idea came from and who proposed it to who.
"There are many critiques of the Trump administration’s legal strategy in its quest to ask about citizenship on the 2020 census, but one cannot fault its chutzpah.
In a filing today, the Department of Justice told Judge George Hazel it might propose “a new rationale”—as yet unspecified—for asking about citizenship, and accordingly asked the federal judge to halt a case about whether the government acted with racial animus in trying to place the question on the census. Government lawyers further argued that since the status quo already bars the question under the old rationale, further litigation is unnecessary, though Hazel rejected the government’s request.
It’s the latest twist in a dizzying roller coaster of a case. Last week, the Supreme Court ruled against the Trump administration, effectively concluding that it lied about the reasons it wanted to ask the citizenship question. Government lawyers then told the plaintiffs and Hazel that they were dropping the matter, and that the census would be printed without the question. But after President Donald Trump angrily tweeted that he was still pursuing the matter, government lawyers were forced to admit to Hazel that they no longer knew what was happening. Hazel demanded an answer by today, hence the new filing.
In the real world, the fact that the executive branch apparently plans to offer some new, unspecified rationale for a decision it has already made is proof it has been lying about the motives all along—to Congress, to the American people, and to multiple federal judges. In the legal world, however, this maneuver might yet succeed.
To get the citizenship question on the census, Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross put the Justice Department up to claiming it needed citizenship data to enforce the Voting Rights Act. Ross claimed that the Justice Department came to him with this request, but documents have turned up since then that show he solicited it.
Nonetheless, the government told Congress and courts, in sworn filings, that the question was needed to enforce the Voting Rights Act. By the time the case reached the Supreme Court, the pretext was in shreds, and Chief Justice John Roberts led a 5–4 majority that rejected the administration’s attempt to include the question. But the decision left the door open for the government to come back with the “real” rationale and try again. That’s what the government is doing now.
The Fix Analysis Trump just admitted something he probably shouldn’t have about the census citizenship question Trump says he may force a citizenship question in the 2020 census President Trump said he is considering an executive order to try to force inclusion of a citizenship question as part of the 2020 Census. (The Washington Post) By Aaron Blake July 5
President Trump just explained why he thinks we need a citizenship question on the census. But in doing so, he seems to have said the quiet part out loud — and conceivably could have undercut the Justice Department’s legal case.
Speaking to reporters at the White House, Trump said you need the census citizenship question “for many reasons.”
“Number one, you need it for Congress — you need it for Congress for districting,” he said Friday. “You need it for appropriations — where are the funds going? How many people are there? Are they citizens? Are they not citizens? You need it for many reasons.”Take note of that first one. Not only was a redistricting rationale not mentioned by the administration in its failed legal defense of the question, but it was actually something the other side argued was the administration’s true motivation. The plaintiffs in the case — and many who oppose the citizenship question — have argued that this is a thinly veiled attempt by Republicans to gain a potential game-changing tool in redistricting.
Cite for us the law that says the SC gets to decide what questions are on the census and which are not.
Cite for us where the law says that they have to have a good reason, what exactly constitutes a good reason and that the SC gets to decide which questions have good reasons, which do not. They can ask your ancestry. WTF business of the govts is that? Do they have a good reason? They ask how many acres you own, is that OK? They ask how many toilets you have and what language you speak at home. There is "good reason" for that? But woaaaah! Ask if you're here legally or illegally, which is obviously something we should want to know, and well, now Houston, we have a problem.
Yo, Bobb-o,
Here's some editorial guidance for your next post:
Slow reader, eh?
What law would that be?
I'm not a lawyer and I don't know. Read the SC decision and you'll find out. I'm satisfied with the decision so I have no need to read it, but you seem unsatisfied. So satisfy your curiosity.
Have you heard the Stumpniks even argue that no valid reason is necessary? No. From the beginning, they've claimed they had a good reason. Even now they're searching for a good reason. They're not saying, We don't need a good reason. That shoudl tell you something.
Probably the same law.
Yes. If you'd paid attention over the last 40 years, you woudl have heard it.
Has anyone challenged these questions. The ones who challenged this question knew darn well it's motive was nefarious. The motive they gave, to enforce the civil rights law, was laughable. They have't filed a civil rights suit in 2.5 years. They're not waiting for new census data -- they don't give a darn.
It was already known that such a question would decrease responses. (How come you don't know that? )
That of course, is one of the things the Stumpniks want.
This should be enough for you: "The Supreme Court has called the administrations rationale for the question contrived and said the government could not go forward without a solid justification" and no one else, not even Hannity, is saying no reason is needed. Just you.
No. I almost missed this. This aspect of the discussion began at
8:48 ET on the 7th, when you claimed that the USSC had overstepped its authority. You claimed "It's a clear over step again of the courts into the powers of the executive branch. "In my post which you were replying to, I had talked only about whether the census would be conducted online or not and how many pages needed to printed, nothing about legalities.
So it's you who made the claim and it's up to you to prove it. Cite for us the law that says the executive can add any question he wants to the census form.
Your responsibility to cite the law that says what you fantasize the law is. Give it your best shot.
I wonder how many other times in this ng you've made baseless claims and then expected the person who disagreed with you to prove they were right, when proof was your responsibility.
The whole point went right over your head, as usual. The Constitution gives the executive branch broad powers. It's not up to the SC to decide what questions go on a census. Obviously if questions like how many toilets you have and what language you speak can be asked, then so can whether you are a citizen or not. If you don't like the questions, there is an election in Nov 2020. Elections have consequences. Who said that?
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.