Numbering the Folks

Recounting my brief term as a federal employee. 

On my way to work this morning, I saw an advertisement for this year’s census; they’re up-staffing for the decennial production.  It immediately called to mind one of my very first jobs, twenty years ago this spring, working on the 2000 census.  

I was in high school, and I saw an ad, not that dissimilar to the one I saw today.  I think they even had a website back then, too. The pay was amazing- I lived in Kentucky, so our wages were probably much lower than those of people in the bigger states.  These were federal wages: I would be making nearly twice my pay at whichever fast food establishment employed me at the time. 

I filled out an application, sent it in, and got an interview.  When they confirmed that I was a reasonably personable kid they hired me.  It was part-time, after school and on weekends. I started in late spring. 

My job was a “non response follow-up representative,” or some such nonsense.  What I did was: you know those forms you get in the mail, the really official ones that come every ten years?  If you don’t, wait a few months. Anyway, you were supposed to fill it out and send it in, and if you didn’t, someone like me knocked on your door and filled it out for you, by asking about a dozen questions.  

That was for most cases: one in every however-many households got a longer form.  They did this for surveying purposes. A few of my follow-ups were on those forms, and they could take awhile, like fifteen or twenty minutes.  

I went through training.  They very slowly explained to literate adults how to fill out a painfully simple form.  I was, at least technically, one of those adults. They told us that if we encountered resistance, we should very calmly and patiently explain that responding to the census is federal law, and they had to comply.  

Surely eager to show myself an “a” student among my fellow federal wage-earners, I asked what we should do if they threaten to call the police.  The trainer, who was also my supervisor, said that we should tell them to go ahead, and that the police will tell them they have to answer the census questions. 

I was assigned a route not too far from my high school, off Richmond Road in Lexington.  One of my follow-up visits was to the school’s drama teacher, who had recently directed me in a musical.  We laughed at each other as he filled out his form. The job was pleasant enough; most people were cooperative, if a bit wary.  Nearly everyone was polite, even if they were inclined to refuse.  

After about three weeks on the job, I had a short form follow-up at a little suburban house in the neighborhood.  The woman who answered the door was simply not having it. I politely insisted, and she started airing conspiracy theories about the government.  I told her I didn’t know about any of that- I was a political science nut and knew it was garbage, but wasn’t going down that road with her- but that my job was to get her to answer these dozen questions, and then I would be on my way.  

She threatened to call the police, except saying it that way makes it sound angry.  She wasn’t angry. She informed me, quite calmly, that if I didn’t leave her doorstep, she would have no choice but to call the police.  

I told her, with equal calm and resignation, that I would wait on the porch until they arrived, and that they would tell her to answer my questions.  

She tested the theory.  

I learned a few very interesting things that afternoon, and in the days and weeks that followed.  I learned that people do not, in fact, have to answer census questions. They can answer or ignore you as they please.  I also learned that police officers, as a rule, do not appreciate having the law or their jobs explained to them by eighteen year old political science nuts, particularly if said eighteen year old political science nut happens to be wrong.  

Another lesson: don’t trust everything you learn in training.  Managers are fallible too, and mine had trained me wrong.  

The final lesson, and it was a doozy: being a federal wage earner is a wonderful, wonderful thing.  

I was fired that day, kind of.  So was my boss. It happened in dramatic fashion.  I waited around with the policeman and the homeowner, and then my boss showed up in her car.  I had given the officer her number. We had scarcely begun apprising her of the situation when another car pulled up, and a stranger got out: it was my supervisor’s supervisor.  

After all the facts came to light, it was resolved that I was to go home, and not report to work again until they told me to.  Same for my boss, who to her great credit, fessed up to having trained me to let them call the police. The homeowner was free to go back to her life unmolested by the US Census.  

While I was at first dejected- it was one of my first jobs and I had just lost it for following directions- things quickly turned around.  The next week, I got my paycheck. My full paycheck. And the one after that. And then the next. The federal government, perhaps since they had not actually fired me, but just told me to go home, continued to pay me for a further five months, after only three weeks of actual work. 

In the twenty ensuing years, I have never had an employer pay me not to come to work, not counting vacation or sick days.  It’s a great gig. If you’re looking for an opportunity and see one of those little advertisements, I’d highly recommend it.  If I were looking for work, I’d sign up in a heartbeat. Except I’m probably on a list somewhere, exiled from the bureaucratic corps because of Lisa’s shitty job training.  


Published in: on January 23, 2020 at 8:30 pm  Leave a Comment  
Tags: , , ,

Could Wyoming be the Answer?

Congressional districts are not performing as intended, and it is time for a change.  

When I first moved to New York, one of the first things I did was head over to to find out who would be my new representative.

I’m sure that isn’t exactly a list-topper on most people’s relocation  checklists, but I try to stay engaged in politics, and wanted to be sure I knew who purported to speak on my behalf on capitol hill.

Having identified my member, a Democrat named Grace Meng, I decided to take an additional step that I assumed- wrongly- would be fairly easy.

I wanted to meet her.  I wanted to meet my representative.

Now, I’m not talking about an hour-long meeting to advocate on my issues, debate policy, or lobby for a particular piece of legislation.  My goal was to get a quick handshake and perhaps a three minute conversation to introduce myself, express my support, and pay my respects.  My thinking was that I often write to my member about pending legislation, and my voice might be more effective if the member knows who the hell I am.

What I did not expect was the reaction from Congresswoman Meng’s office when I made this request; they were completely flummoxed.  They told me that she does not keep office hours to meet with constituents, and that if I wanted a meeting, I would have to be a member of a community or lobbying group.  Instead, they offered me a meeting with one of her aides.

I explained, per above, that my sole goal was to get a handshake and a few minutes of introduction.  They flatly told me this was not an option, but helpfully suggested that I could attend one of her town hall meetings, where she “sometimes” shakes hands at the rope line.

Now, one of the often-voiced criticisms of Congress is that lobbyists have too loud a voice, but I was certainly not expecting that unless I were a lobbyist, I could not even request a brief meeting with my member.    So, I did a little bit of research.

During the days of our country’s founding, when the whole legislative system was being designed, George Washington was known for being a peacemaker who seldom advocated for any particular outcome.  However, the one time he actually advocated a position during the Continental Congress, he argued that representative districts of 40,000 people were too large, and that 30,000 was a more appropriate number.  Consequently, the first congressional districts had approximately 30,000 people per member of Congress.

Today, there are on average over 700,000 people living in each district, with variations based on the population of the state.    This is over twenty times the original number, and has made constituent contact far more unwieldy.  How can a member of Congress adequately represent my issues if she doesn’t even have the time to meet with me, unless I belong to a lobby or group?

The rate of growth in Congress has not kept pace with other modern democracies.  We have picked a number of representatives- 435- and we stick with it no matter how large our population grows.  That number was established in 1912, when the population was only 92,000,000; today it has more than tripled.  As a consequence, our voices as voters are diluted in what is ostensibly the people’s house.

Among the competing proposals to fix this problem is what is known as the Wyoming plan.  Here’s how it works: every state is entitled to at least one representative, no matter how small.  Wyoming is currently the smallest state (population around 575,000).  That means your vote counts more in Wyoming than it does in a larger state, like California or New York.

The Wyoming plan would set the size of congressional districts at the population of the smallest state, as counted in the census. This would have the dual benefits of reducing the number of people per district, and making our individual votes more equal than they are today.  If the Wyoming system were currently in effect, there would be around 530 representatives, or 95 more than there are today.

In a healthy democracy, our voices are heard through our representatives.  The system is definitely broken when our representatives do not have time to meet with us, no matter how briefly.  Reducing the size of congressional districts will make the body more accessible, responsive, and responsible to the needs and demands of we, the people.


Published in: on November 7, 2013 at 11:00 am  Comments (1)  
Tags: , , ,