"The reason the government sells the census as your ticket to getting goodies - rather than as your civic duty - is that distributing goodies is now all the government does"

In this quote, Tom G. Palmer is offering a critique of government functions and interaction, especially concerning how the public is motivated to take part in the census. The census is typically a tool used by federal governments to collect necessary group information that notify policy choices, designate representation, and distribute resources. Nevertheless, Palmer recommends that the federal government promotes involvement in the census by highlighting the personal advantages individuals might receive-- the "goodies"-- rather than appealing to civic responsibility or duty.

Palmer's use of the word "goodies" indicates tangible advantages or rewards that people might receive from federal government programs or policies. This could describe public services, federal funding for neighborhood jobs, infrastructure improvements, or social services designated based on census data. By identifying these benefits as "goodies", Palmer suggests they are rather trivialized or minimized to simple transactional benefits, rather than parts of a shared, civic societal structure.

The phrase "dispersing goodies is now all the government does" presents a pointed review that recommends the government's function has moved or narrowed. Palmer is insinuating that the federal government focuses mainly on the redistribution of resources, rather than a broader spectrum of governance duties, such as fostering civic engagement, maintaining democratic principles, or resolving systemic social issues.

This perspective may reflect a wider commentary on the viewed relationship in between the federal government and residents, where Palmer argues for a deeper engagement by people in governance beyond individual gain. The underlying implication is a require a return to framing civic involvement as a duty that supports the common great, instead of lowering it to a means of obtaining individual benefits. Palmer appears to be advocating for a more standard or idealistic view of civic duty-- one where governmental and civic engagements are motivated by collective obligation instead of individual advantages. This critique welcomes reflection on how citizens engage with governmental procedures and the messages interacted by government organizations.