Census Bureau decision to sever relationship with ACORN a victory, but not an excuse to be any less vigilant
…gee, does ACORN do census-taking, too, or are they just limited to voter fraud?
— America’s Right, February 7-8, 2009 Weekend Reading
I remember when this story first arose back in March. My wife, daughter and I were in Charleston, SC narrowing down our search area for next year’s move when I first read that the same organization which, funded in part by $832,000 in contributions from Barack Obama’s campaign, had committed so much voter and voter registration fraud to warrant federal investigation in 13 states would be responsible for accurately counting Americans for the census. I was outraged, to say the least — even though I had seen it coming.
See, I looked at the $832,000 from Obama’s campaign as a mere down payment, enough to help him get into the office from which ACORN could once again be tapped to make real, lasting changes to the American political landscape. And the best way to do that was through reapportionment.
In the first few days of February, we found out that the White House had usurped control of the Census from the Commerce Department. At that point, I knew exactly what was happening. Politicization of redistricting maneuvers wasn’t anything new, I wrote, but the hijacking of the census had me worried nonetheless, especially considering the depth of the relationship between the president and ACORN.
It had been Barack Obama the young attorney, remember, had represented the group in its efforts to more aggressively promote subprime loans by lobbying the expansion of the Community Reinvestment Act. And Barack Obama the senator, remember, had told the group in November of 2007 that he has “been fighting alongside ACORN on issues you care about my entire career.” And then Barack Obama the president-elect, of course, addressed ACORN and other similar groups on October 12, 2008 and promised that he would be “calling all of you in to shape the agenda of my presidency.”
What better way to implement the redistributive change he’s been advocating for his entire life than to go to the heart of the political balance of power — congressional districts as defined by the census? And what group could he trust more than ACORN?
The game of connect-the-dots became more and more like child’s play as the White House made its goals more and more obvious.
Of course, it was entirely possible that the White House was only looking to assuage minority groups that had raised concerns about soon-to-be ex-Commerce Secretary Judd Gregg’s commitment to the census when it took control of the ten-year count, that it had nothing to do with politics. But the president’s pattern of advancing a leftist agenda at all costs said otherwise. Then came the realization that ACORN and groups like it would receive more than $5 billion from the so-called “stimulus” package.
The dots had been connected. In mid-March, official news arose describing how ACORN would be working with the Census Bureau to count Americans. But despite as clear as I perceived the president’s agenda to be, census officials assured concerned people that 13 federal voter fraud investigations does not a bad organization make, and subsequently downplayed the group’s role. On April 2, however, the White House’s agenda was made even more clear, this time through the president’s selection of University of Michigan professor Robert Groves–outspoken advocate for statistical sampling, the act of counting people by making geographical, demographical and mathematical estimates–to serve as director of the 2010 United States Census.
And that’s why we cannot make too much of the White House’s decision to cut ties–and yes, it was the White House’s decision, as the White House controls the census–between its Census Bureau and ACORN in the wake of videotapes showing unlawful activities in ACORN offices in Baltimore and Washington, D.C. Yes, it was a victory of sorts, but the writing is already on the wall — the president intends to pervert census taking practices and results in order to further the political goals of his administration and his party. ACORN may be out, but we must watch who steps in.