By REP. MAC COLLINS
3rd District U.S. Congress

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.

Back to Opinion Home Page | Back to the top of the page