I know a little and am intrigued. Why wouldn't he have?
Ewwww! Well you did ask. And I do still have all of my files.
So be prepared to be bored to tears.
I've worked both the 2000 and the 2010 census.
Both times I had to take "The Oath" Basically the same oath as
I took for the military except that, instead of pledging to the CinC,
there is a confidentially agreement included. To this day I can not
divulge any information that I may have picked up from my work.http://www.census.go...disclosure.html
Now most of you know that I look into things before I make any commitments.
I did my research and this is typical of what I found.
The Bureau stopped such releases during the 1920's, a position which was made official in 1930 by an opinion from the Attorney General. His opinion said that even the name and address of an individual was confidential. \
At about this same time, the Secretary of State asked for data about individual farms in Stevens County, Wash. Clouds of sulphur dioxide from a smelter located across the border in Canada had caused extensive damage to crops in the United States, and the matter had been handed over to an international tribunal. The Census Bureau refused to release the information, and the tribunal decided not to press the point, even though it felt it had the necessary power. The reason? It would have caused the U.S. Government to breach a promise it had made to its citizens as well as to violate the U.S. law of census confidentiality. The Census Bureau did provide aggregated county data which allowed the court to award damages to the Washington farmers.
Now we jump to 1941. It's hard to imagine now but, with World War II underway, there was near hysteria about the Japanese-Americans living on the West Coast which led to one of the most embarrassing moments in U.S. history, the internment of large numbers of these loyal Americans. At the height of this feeling, the Secretary of War requested the Census Bureau supply the names, addresses, and ages of all persons of Japanese extraction living on the West Coast. This time, in spite of the national emergency, the Bureau held to its position on confidentiality of individual records and refused. However, the Bureau did supply summary data at tract level, but not individual data. I should add that today tract level data is part of the regular publication program of the Bureau. But, as in 1941, no individual disclosures, even by implication, are allowed.
In 1947, during the rising concern about possible Communist infiltration and sabotage, the Attorney General requested information from census records about certain individuals for use by the FBI. Again, the request was denied.
So I went to work at the bureau. While I was there this came out.http://www.nytimes.c...e-japanese.html
and more recently http://www.scientifi...he-us-census-b/ *
I read the reports and see a lot of speculation but not a lot of actual proof. Mostly releases of
macro data which is always available, as opposed to actual names and addresses as claimed.
It is possible
that some information was released (especially in the Wash. D. C. area) but not likely. *
The bureau released a CYA statement regarding the study.
But bureau officials do not dispute the findings of the paper. They say, however, that the strengthening
of the laws protecting the confidentiality of data on individuals and the environment today would make
a repetition of those abuses unlikely.
I'll have no problem returning if I'm needed in 2020. (if I'm still alive and cognizant)
I've got lots more but I tried to keep it brief. For more see:The American Census: A Social History, Second Edition 2015
Edited by RiverFox, 05 January 2016 - 08:28 PM.