From: Rich Graves <llurch@networking.stanford.edu>
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 08:34:34 +0800
To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Subject: Re: There's no general right to privacy -- get over it, from Netly
Message-ID: <Pine.GUL.3.95.970613165846.3560A-100000@Networking.Stanford.EDU>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

William H. Geiger III <whgiii@amaranth.com> wrote:

> Well this is rather a poor example. The requirment of a census was written
> into the costitution and with good reason. Many of the government actions
> are based on demographics congressional districting is a prime example.
> 
> There is a fight going on in cogress right now as the current
> administration wants to be able to gestimate the census rather than doing
> an actuall head count so it can manipulate the figures any way it wants
> (ie change the figures in key congressional districts so they can re-draw
> them to favor their supporters).

Not that I feel strongly either way, but the other way to look at this is
that the current Congress likes its cozy little districts and likes
restricting the census to people with permanent addresses, which tends to
bias the figures in favor of suburbia.

I certainly agree with the fundamental points that censuses and districting
have always been important, and hence political[ly corrupted]. Anyone here
descended from 3/5ths people? 

- -rich
 http://www.stanford.edu/~llurch/

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQBVAwUBM6HgHJNcNyVVy0jxAQEmsgH+IWGzDmFvmlCIKSxw26xaP4+tBRHhdRDu
BT572zIvqjQfh/4B31qOzOjjWh6cFCEREXE/9bzHaRmyOYA3YfP+EQ==
=8mJR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----