Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of 
Michelle Bachmann, prom queen for life of Wingnuttia High School, tells the Moonie Times that she and her family will refuse to answer most of the questions when the census takers show up because ACORN is one of the many organizations that has applied to help recruit the door-to-door canvassers.
Outspoken Republican Rep. Michele Bachmann says she's so worried that information from next year's national census will be abused that she will refuse to fill out anything more than the number of people in her household.
And by the way, she likes being criticized:
Mrs. Bachmann, who is in her second term in the House, has become a lightning rod for criticism from Democrats and liberal talk show hosts for her unapologetic conservative views.She said she considers that "a badge of honor."
"It's clear when a person speaks out against those policies they become a target, and that should be concerning to everyone," she said.
I have to confess that I actually find Bachmann attractive. Though to quote the brilliant Patton Oswalt, "Bear in mind that batshit crazy gives me a boner."
Politics
Comments
Ah yes, patriotism! Can't you just feel it?
Posted by: Theron | June 23, 2009 9:29 AM
I am absolutely in favor of Bachmann not filling out the census form. I hope she sways everyone else in her district to do the same. Of course, it would likely result in Minnesota losing a seat in the House (dropping down from 8 to 7 Representatives), but what are Bachmann's chances of surviving the redistricting?
Posted by: CS | June 23, 2009 9:37 AM
I am most concerned about this - what does Bachmann have to hide?
What is she afraid of?
Why does she hate freedom so much?
I feel her close proximity to Russia and Red China over the years have tainted her thoughts with marxist socialism and a will to plot against the Ideals and People of America.
Posted by: Captain Obvious | June 23, 2009 9:38 AM
I assume Bachmann has to cover up the illegal aliens she uses as domestic servants and confines in near-slave conditions in her basement. As undocumented aliens from Central America are almost certainly connected with the drug trade, there is probable cause for a no-knock raid on Michelle's home. As a precaution, the SWAT team should make a point of shooting her dog.
Say, does her hometown have one of those little tanks designed to knock through walls?
Posted by: kehrsam | June 23, 2009 9:53 AM
CS @2 - Minnesota is probably going to lose a Congressional District following the 2010 census no matter what she and her followers do to non-comply. There is going to be some gerrymandering whether the Democrats or the Republicans control the legislature and/or the governor's office. That being the case, I will be concentrating efforts to win the governor's race for the Democratic party just to make sure that no one can ever again introduce Bachman as a Congresswoman from Minnesota. It is so cringingly embarrassing.
Posted by: Mike Haubrich, FCD | June 23, 2009 10:19 AM
Without studying the numbers it's entirely possible that Bachmann's district *is* the result of gerrymandering by the Democrats -- pushing more of her insane conservative supporters out of surrounding districts to make them easier for Democrats to win...
All joking aside, gerrymandering is one of the most insidious and undemocratic acts perpetrated on the American people (no matter who does it). Bachmann would be a small price to pay if her continued career in Congress was the result of stopping the practice stone dead.
Posted by: tacitus | June 23, 2009 10:31 AM
I knew we were close (I live in the Twin Cities), but I thought it amusing that maybe Bachmann can get it pushed from a "probable" to a "certain" loss of a seat. Not that I believe many people would actual do what she says she will do -- I just don't see too many Twin Cities suburbanites or ruralites saying "Get lost!" to someone who shows up at their door trying to do their job. But it certainly would be bad for Bachmann if her voters did what she plans to do.
Posted by: CS | June 23, 2009 10:40 AM
Again, tacitus is right. A few years back two political scientists published an article defending gerrymandering on the grounds that it allowed more people to "win"--that is, to have a representative that they had voted for--thus increasing voter satisfaction. I think that's a pretty shallow view of voter satisfaction, as their is a dramatic increase in voter dissatisfaction with the Congress as a whole as a result of the increased partisan nastiness resulting from the more far right/far left politicians winning these gerrymandered districts.I met an Illinois state legislator a few years back, a Republican, but a distinctly moderate one (of the type that's no longer welcome in the party, it seems), who wanted to put the redistricting process in the hands of a bipartisan appointed committee. If ideas like this catch on, and if they work as planned, we could rescue American politics from the nutjobs.
I must say, however, that I’m sympathetic to Bachmannn’s position on the census. The Constitution requires a census for counting people, and nothing else. While as a social scientist I really value the information acquired by the census, I’m appalled that people are required by law to provide it. Her specific reason, however, is too stupid to get my support.
Posted by: James Hanley | June 23, 2009 10:59 AM
To get someone as batshit rightwing as her, her district can't be very centrist...
Not necessarily -- she could have run a bland campaign the first time, then secured her poularity by pork-barrel spsending and doing favors for constituents. That's how most Congresscritters stay in office -- because all the voters care about is favors for their own district, regardless of what happens to the rest of the country, or what their rep. does to anyone else.
Posted by: Raging Bee | June 23, 2009 11:08 AM
I looked a little into Minnesota, it doesn't look Gerrymandered and, looking at their political demographic at the time, I don't think they could have gerrymandered. Following the 2000 census they lost a seat in the house, in the state, the Governor was Ventura (I), the house was controlled by the Republicans, and the senate was controlled by the Democratic-Farm-Labor party. If you look at the CPVI of their districts, there are two heavily Democratic districts (D+21 and D+13) which look to be Minneapolis-St. Paul, which makes sense, one moderately Republican district (R+6), the western part of the state, picture the movie Fargo, and 5 districts that are +5 or less for either party. Interestingly the districts are narrowly +R, but elected a 5-3 Democratic majority.
Bachman herself won a vacated Republican district going up against, what appears to me, to be a relatively weak DFL challenger. In '08 she won reelection by a rather narrow margin, 46-44% and her district is in a rather large swath of the state that voted 55%+ for McCain:
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/individual/#mapPMN
Her district is in the area just NW of Minneapolis-St. Paul, that huge red chunk is her district plus the 3rd district and parts of the 7th and the 8th.
Given that those counties went (by a large margin) for McCain, her wingnuttery almost cost her the election.
Posted by: dogmeatIB | June 23, 2009 1:05 PM
True, but in Bachmann's case, she was batshit the first time, in 2006. She'd been batshit as a state rep for many years, and people here loved her for it (I live in MN6).
Posted by: chris | June 23, 2009 3:26 PM
I figured there should be a simple way to limit the potential for gerrymandering. Pass a state constitutional amendment to limit the ratio of the perimeter divided by the area of a congressional district. The amendment could be as short as one sentence. It would be strictly non-partisan, and should restrict the most extreme cases without reference to any politically sensitive group or constituency.
Posted by: Scott | June 23, 2009 5:20 PM
"Batshit crazy" turns you on? I don't find Bachmann the least bit attractive (or Ann Coulter for that matter). I guess I'm the opposite. This is what I want:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hXKcXnfgBEs&feature=related
She even has Carl Sagan on the bookshelf behind her. *Sigh* Why are girls like that so rare?
Posted by: Eric | June 23, 2009 5:50 PM
If Bachmann is so worried about things being abused, she should probably stop speaking English as well.
Eric@13: She also has a copy of James Randi's Flim-Flam. *doublesigh*
Posted by: Ken McKnight | June 23, 2009 7:18 PM
Eric: Yes, she's cute, but Ms. Watson is a lot younger than Bachmann, and of course she's an atheist, which is a definite turnoff. For her age, Bachmann is pretty hot, if not quite in the Sarah Palin class. But you'd have to duct tape both their mouths, whereas Ms. Watson's voice is so cute I can forgive her bland and mistaken analogies. Is there no woman who has it all out there on YouTube?
Posted by: kehrsam | June 23, 2009 8:14 PM
Dogmeat,
Way to show us all up by actually doing some research! (But then again, I'm on vacation, so I'm being a bit lazy.)
Posted by: James Hanley | June 23, 2009 8:37 PM
All this angst is Michelle Bachmann "borrowing trouble" - maybe she won't get the long census form at all, just the short form that asks for the number of peoople in her household! Oh, the humanity! And I'll tell her another thing - even if she gets the long form, if she just fills in the number of people in her household, that will be okay for the Census Bureau. No one is going to call on her and beg her to complete the long form. The door to door canvassers are just tracking down people who did not respond by mail. Actually, the ACORN people may be ideal for door to door canvassing since they may be going door to door in neighborhoods they know.
Posted by: BC | June 23, 2009 10:55 PM
I thought the census people interviewed adults. If Batshitemann answers the door when they come, she'll be asked to get get her mommy or daddy.
Posted by: blf | June 24, 2009 2:05 AM
Actually, there was a lot of concern about the "long form" of the census last time around. It asks for a lot of information - income, mortgage/rent amounts, insurance, disability, commute (how, when, and where), vehicles, military service, education, marital history and status, etc. It was impacting the number of people willing to fill out the census.
So it was split off into the American Community Survey. I hope I'm not anywhere near as crazy as Bachmann, but I got one of these earlier this year and I only filled out a few things that I don't mind being public - how many kids we have, etc.
After a case of minor identity theft a while back, I'm very careful about who gets that kind of info about me, and I frankly don't trust the information security of government agencies very much. (Leaving aside the known historical abuses, like the use of Census data to round up Japanese-Americans in WWII...)
I've been unable to find any case of someone actually being fined or prosecuted for not filling out the ACS. It really does seem to rest one questionable legal authority, and they don't seem to want to face a court challenge about it.
Posted by: Ray Ingles | June 24, 2009 9:55 AM
Ed:
You put up a first sentence like this:
"Michelle Bachmann, prom queen for life of Wingnuttia High School, tells the Moonie Times..."
and expect that we WON'T be ROFLOAO? Sheesh!
Ray Ingles:
Perhaps Ed will be covering this in the next day or two, but...
The private company that was easing the plight of the frequent (and often self-important) business traveller getting through the TSA's inspections with a "Security Fast Lane" has shut down all of its locations for lack of funds. They will apparently be going bankrupt. A number of folks are quite concerned about the fact that the information that was provided in order to get these "passes" will become part of the company's assets in a bankruptcy proceeding. Scary thought.
Posted by: democommie | June 25, 2009 7:32 AM
I was under the impression that filling out all of the census was the law...or at least in the constitution. Did she just tell all of America that she was planning to break the law?
Posted by: Joe | June 26, 2009 5:11 PM
"Why should I fill out my census form?
There are a number of reasons. For one thing, it is required by law."
Although the law specifies that people can be fined for refusing to participate in the census, officials have stated they will not impose those fines.
Also, it seems the next census will not be as involved as the 2000 census was.
"Census forms for the 2010 Census will be mailed out in March of 2010. These forms are short and to the point, and will "less than 10 minutes to complete." Whereas one in six households used to get a census long-form to fill out, in 2010 there will be only short-forms for everyone. This should serve as an encouragement to you. The 2000 Census long-form asked nearly ten times the questions per person as the short-form."
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1517074/2010_census_what_questions_will_they.html
Posted by: dean | June 29, 2009 12:41 PM