The 2020 census - hard to be impressed

First of all, I am well aware that the purpose of the decennial census of the United States, as stated in the Constitution, is to obtain a population count for the apportionment of the House of Representatives.

That said, it is also true that from about 1850 to 1940, so far, the United States Census has been a boon to family history researchers.   Ten years ago, I critiqued the 2010 census, finding it also not much to write home about from a genealogical perspective.  2020 isn't much better.

The first three questions asked: how many people lived in the residence as of 1 April 2020, how many others may have stayed there on that date, and is the home owned or rented.  The form asked for a telephone number.  

The form then runs through each of the people resident in the home as to name, sex, age and date of birth.  Then  the form asks if the people listed are Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish in origin.  The Census Bureau maintains that these are not races, but ethnic origin.  But why single this group out when there was also a general question that asked everyone's ethnic origin?

The form asks each person's race.  It asks for whether others named on the form are permanent or temporary residents of the home.  It asks for the relationship of each to the head of household.

There is also a question about the ethnic origin of each person.  

Again, we have a census that doesn't ask a lot that is really useful to research into family history.  At least there is the question about relation of each person to the head of household.  

The questions that gave people dyspepsia -- including me -- were the questions about race and ethnic origin.  The statement from the Census Bureau was that this information was needed to facilitate services for eligible groups.  Sad to say, in our current political climate, this type of information in the wrong hands, that is to say, the hands of a racist regime, can have dire implications.

I wanted to poke the system in the eye with a sharp stick and, to the race question, answer "human."  This would have been possible because for each of these sorts of question, there was a space that could be filled-in freely.  I had a couple snarky answers for the ethnic origin question.  1. I could have answered Neanderthal and Denisovan, because through the National Geographic Society's Genographic Project (now closed), I found out I am 2.1% Neanderthal and 1.1% Denisovan.  A waggish friend said that means I'm 3.2% extinct.  2.  I could also have answered that my ethnic origin was Olduvai Gorge.  But I didn't, because my husband wouldn't agree to it.  Probably a good thing, though, because giving such an answer may have resulted in a fine -- but I could have argued that such answers were not false.

Race is a touchy subject again, mainly due to the actions and words of some public officials, as well as the resurgence in hate groups and, to this nation's shame, hate crimes.  Asking that in the census was not a wise choice.