Census questions are too intrusive; wildlife fees are misused

Opinion
Share this Post

Census questions are too intrusive; wildlife fees are misused

Opinion
Share this Post

The Common Sense Census

Enforcement Act of 2000

I have been

contacted repeatedly by constituents who say the 2000

Census asks questions that are far too intrusive, and

unrelated to the constitutional requirement to count

Americans for the purpose of redrawing Congressional

districts.

Because of

this, I introduced "The Common Sense Census

Enforcement Act of 2000 (HR 2418) last week. The census

is constitutionally mandated for the purpose of

apportioning federal legislative districts, and the

population information gathered is also used in drawing

state legislative district lines.

The

Constitution requires the federal government to conduct

the census, and federal law (13 U.S.C. 221) also requires

that residents answer the census completely and

truthfully. Failure to answer any questions can result in

fines of up to $100. Furthermore, if one intentionally

provides inaccurate information in response to the

census, the law provides for fines up to $500.

These

penalties are understandable with regard to questions

directly related to apportionment, in light of its

central importance to our constitutional system. I do,

however, question the appropriateness of imposing such

penalties for refusal to answer questions unrelated to

apportionment.

The Common

Sense Census Enforcement Act eliminates the fine for

failure to answer Census 2000 questions unrelated to

apportionment. By taking this action, Congress can limit

the intrusive nature of the census while still providing

the government with the basic information necessary to

administer our republic.

The

intrusive questions have sparked outrage in other states.

Five Texans filed a lawsuit against most of the questions

on the Census form. In Houston, Texas, the judge hearing

their case has issued a temporary restraining order

against fining them until he has had a chance to hear the

case. Atlanta's Southeastern Legal Foundation has joined

the lawsuit.

In Georgia,

the response rate to the Census is 45 percent, and well

below the national average. Intrusive questions could

well be a factor.

Wildlife and Sport Fish

Restoration Programs Improvement Act of 2000

The misuse

of taxes paid by hunters and sports fishermen on their

equipment is one of the most blatant examples of

financial abuse I have seen in Congress. The U.S. Fish

and Wildlife Service's Division of Federal Aid is,

"if not the worst, then one of the worst-managed

programs we have encountered," the non-partisan

Government Accounting Office reported after studying the

agency.

The GAO

unearthed numerous expensive trips to foreign countries,

projects and expenditures unrelated to hunting or

fishing. Hearings held by the House Resources Committee

showed that excise taxes generated $426.8 million in

revenue during 1998, of which approximately $31 million

was set aside for the Fish and Wildlife Service's

overhead.

Of this

amount, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service spent over

half - $15.8 million - on trips and projects

totally unrelated to fishing or hunting. The U.S. Fish

and Wildlife Service also has misused other taxpayer

money. The director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service, a Clinton-Gore political appointee, testified

before the House Resources Committee that the Fish and

Wildlife Service was attempting to buy Palmyra Atoll, an

island 1,000 miles from Hawaii, with $30 million in funds

raised through the sale of duck stamps. The tiny island

has only 10 ducks.

Although

the director conceded the acquisition of the island is

being dropped because of Congressional opposition, she

refused to rule out a future effort to buy it. They are

paying $30 million collected from hunters for only ten

ducks which are on an island that nobody can get to.

The

Clinton-Gore Administration must not be serious about

controlling fraud and abuse if it thinks $3 million per

duck is a good use of the taxpayer's money.

Congress again passes

ban on partial birth abortion

Congress

passed a bill this week to ban an abortion procedure

denounced by many experts as "infanticide." It

is the third time the House of Representatives has voted

to ban the procedure, which involves partially delivering

an infant before killing it.

The House

previously voted to ban the procedure in 1996 and 1998.

Each previous attempt at banning partial birth abortion

has been thwarted by President Clinton and pro-abortion

members of the Senate. The American Medical Association

reports that partial birth abortion is "not good

medicine" and is "not medically indicated"

in ANY situation. For this reason, the president should

sign this bill banning the procedure, but allies of the

administration predict he will veto it.

Organ

Procurement and Transplantation Network Amendments of

1999

The House

of Representatives voted this week to study organ

transplant and allocation systems, and directed the

Department of Health and Human Resources to launch an

education program aimed at promoting donations. The Organ

Procurement and Transplantation Network Amendments of

1999 (HR 2418) authorizes studies of the country's organ

donation and transplant allocation system.

Allocation

will still be handled by the Organ Procurement and

Transplantation Network, which operates through regional

networks that locate donated organs and allocate them to

transplant patients.

Visitors

The

long-running members of the Georgia Building and

Construction Trades visited to discuss foreign trade

issues. Members of the Georgia Telephone Association

discussed telecommunications issues.

I also held

a meeting concerning the important land swap between

Columbus and Fort Benning. Patrick Moore from Sen.

Coverdell's office; Don Klima, director of the Advisory

Council on Historic Preservation Office of Planning and

Review; Randy Rivinus, Columbus Development Authority;

Biff Hadden, Columbus Chamber of Commerce; Linda

Veenstra, staff judge advocate representative of Fort

Benning, and Scott Farley, Army Environmental Center,

visited to share information and views.

We had many

other visitors, including students from Calvary Christian

School in Cataula. The Davidson family, and Cindy and

J.D. Lester visited the office while they were touring

Washington.

Stay Up-to-Date on What’s Fun and Important in Fayette

Newsletter

Latest Comments

VIEW ALL

Opinion

By Cal Beverly February 24, 2010

Opinion

By Letters To The ... February 23, 2010

Opinion

By Letters To The ... February 23, 2010

Opinion

By Letters To The ... February 23, 2010

Opinion

By Letters To The ... February 23, 2010

Newsletter
Scroll to Top