form: www.census2000.org
January 27, 2003
CENSUS NEWS BRIEF
2003 Funding Bill Headed To House-Senate Conference Committee; Domestic
Spending Constraints Could Threaten Future of American Community Survey
Late last week, the U.S. Senate completed action on an omnibus
appropriations bill that funds all non-defense government activities for
Fiscal Year 2003 (FY03). House Joint Resolution 2 (H.J. Res. 2) covers
eleven of thirteen regular appropriations bills that Congress failed to
pass before adjourning last fall, including the Commerce, Justice, and
State, The Judiciary and Related Agencies bill. (The Census Bureau is
part of the Commerce Department.)
The sweeping measure to fund federal agencies for the budget year that
began last October 1 now heads to a conference committee, where House
and Senate negotiators will try to agree on final spending levels.
While the House did not pass its own version of the omnibus bill, House
Republican appropriators unveiled a Commerce/Justice/State
appropriations bill earlier this month, to indicate their position going
into conference.
Both the House and Senate have signaled their intent to cap spending for
2010 census planning at last year's level; the Senate allocation was a
further reduction from Fiscal Year 2002.
Senate Bill Fails To Cover Full ACS Test Program: The Senate-passed
version of H.J. Res. 2 allocates $558.9 million for Census Bureau
programs and activities, $146.4 million below the President's budget
request for the current fiscal year. (The amount includes funds for a
4.1 percent federal civilian employee increase; the President has
proposed a 3.1 percent pay increase.)
The Periodic Censuses and Programs account ("Periodics"), one of two
main funding categories for the Census Bureau, received $385.7 million,
$114.6 million less than the Administration's request of $500.3
million. Appropriators noted that an additional $15 million in unspent
funds from the previous year (called a "carry-over") would be available
for Periodics programs. The Periodics account covers the decennial
census and census support operations, including mapping and address list
development, as well as other mandated cyclical activities such as the
Economic Census.
In a more detailed explanation accompanying the funding bill, Senate
appropriators set aside roughly $95 million for 2010 census planning,
substantially less than the President's request of $214.5 million.
Appropriators further recommended that $42.8 million of the total amount
be used for "design and planning" and $52.2 million be used for
MAF/TIGER improvements, but made no mention of the national
Supplementary Survey currently being conducted as part of American
Community Survey development. Funding for the 700,00-housing unit
Supplementary Survey was $29 million in FY02. The Census Bureau's
"re-engineering" plan for 2010 includes three major initiatives:
modernizing the Master Address File (MAF) and digital geographic
database (the TIGER system); early planning, development, and testing of
a "short form-only" census; and nationwide implementation of the
American Community Survey (ACS), which would eliminate the need for a
long form in future censuses.
Senate appropriators separately allocated $27.1 million to continue data
collection in the 31 American Community Survey test sites, bringing the
total amount available for all 2010 census planning either to $122.1
million, or $137.1 million if the carry-over is applied to this
program. The Census Bureau originally hoped to implement the ACS
nationwide in FY03, at a cost of about $123 million.
House Appropriators Signal Position on FY03 Census Bureau budget: The
House of Representatives, meanwhile, will reconvene today after being in
recess for two weeks. Unlike the Senate, the House did not consider an
omnibus appropriations bill for FY03, but negotiators will go directly
to a conference committee to work out a final measure with the Senate.
(H.J. Res. 2, which originated in the House, passed that chamber on
January 8. However, the bill was a continuing funding resolution to
keep federal agencies operating at FY02 levels; the House approved the
measure simply to serve as a legislative vehicle for the Senate's
omnibus appropriations bill. The House then adjourned for two weeks,
while the Senate began consideration of the FY03 funding bill by
substituting its appropriations language for the original language of
H.J. Res. 2.)
On January 8, Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA), chairman of the Appropriations
Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, State, and The Judiciary, introduced
a separate funding measure for FY03 (H.R. 247). While not considered by
either the Appropriations Committee or the full House, Chairman Wolf's
bill offers a marker for the House's position in negotiations with the
Senate. H.R. 247 would allocate $599.5 million for the Census Bureau,
$105.8 million below the President's FY03 request. The Periodic
Censuses and Programs account would receive $410.3 million, including
$143.3 million for 2010 census planning. According to the Census
Bureau's Congressional Affairs Office, an unofficial explanation of the
Wolf bill, prepared by the Appropriations Committee, further earmarks
$57.1 million for the American Community Survey. That amount is
comparable to the FY02 funding level for the 31 ACS test sites and the
national Supplementary Survey combined. The unofficial report indicates
that $1 million of ACS funding should be used to evaluate the effects of
voluntary response to the survey. The Census Bureau considers the ACS
to be part of the decennial census, for which response is mandatory by
law. It believes voluntary ACS response would increase costs and
diminish data quality. However, key members of the Census Bureau's
oversight committee have questioned the need for mandatory response to
the ACS, in light of public concerns about privacy.
Until Congress passes and the President signs the catch-all FY03
appropriations bill, the Census Bureau and other non-defense federal
agencies will continue to operate under Fiscal Year 2002 spending
levels. The current Continuing Budget Resolution, the eighth such
stop-gap funding measure since FY03 began last fall, runs out on January
31. Congress would pass another Continuing Resolution if the House and
Senate do not agree on a final omnibus funding bill by that date.
The following chart compares relevant "line items" for the Census Bureau
going into conference on the FY03 funding bill, based on the best
available information about current funding levels and the House and
Senate positions. All amounts are in millions of dollars and rounded to
the nearest hundred thousand.
FY02 FY03
FY03: FY03:
(Actual)Request House Position
Senate Position
(Budget Authority)
Census Bureau $544.8** $705.3
$599.5 $558.9
Periodic Censuses & Programs $375.4 $500.3 $410.3
$385.7
2010 Census Planning (total) $92.1= $214.5 $143.3
$95.0
2010: ACS $56.1= $121.2
$57.1 $27.1
2010: MAF/TIGER imprvmnts $15.0 $51.4 Unknown $52.2
2010: Design & planning $21.0 $41.9 Unknown
$42.8
*Current budget request figures are modestly lower than those set forth
in the budget justification submitted to Congress in February 2002, for
reasons that are not entirely clear to the editor.
**Included $54 million in carry-over funds from previous year.
=Includes $27.1 million from the Continuous Measurement line item, which
funded the 31 ACS test sites, and $29 million for the Supplementary
Survey.
President To Unveil 2004 Budget Request Next Week: President Bush is
tentatively scheduled to send his Fiscal Year 2004 (FY04) budget request
to Congress the week of February 3. No details about the Census
Bureau's budget request for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 2003,
are available yet. However, senior White House officials have said
publicly that the Administration's plan will hold discretionary federal
spending to a four percent increase, with most of the additional
spending going to homeland security and defense. Budgetary constraints
could spell particular trouble for 2010 census planning. In the normal
ten-year development and implementation cycle for a decennial census,
funding demands are at their lowest in the "03" year, and then increase
as the Census Bureau carries out field tests for several years, a dress
rehearsal (in the "08" year), final address list compilation, and other
critical preparations. Furthermore, full implementation of the American
Community Survey in FY04 would require more than double the funding the
Census Bureau is likely to receive for FY03. While other "Periodic"
programs, such as the Economic Census, will need less money in FY04 than
in FY03, the leap from test mode to full, ongoing implementation of the
ACS in budgetary terms is daunting in the current economic climate.
Census News Briefs are prepared by Terri Ann Lowenthal, an independent
consultant in Washington, DC. Please direct questions about the
information in this News Brief to Ms. Lowenthal at 202/484-2270 or by
e-mail at <terriann2k(a)aol.com>. Thank you to the Communications
Consortium Media Center for posting the News Briefs on the Census 2000
Initiative web site, at www.census2000.org. Please feel free to
circulate this information to colleagues and other interested
individuals.
We are behind schedule on the release of the Part 1 data (by place of
residence) for CTPP 2000. Data release did not begin in December as we
said it would, and it is clear now that it will not begin in January
either. Release may begin by the end of February but I can't guarantee
that date yet as there are still too many unknowns. Here's where we stand.
The programs are all written to tabulate the data, and we are on our fifth
iteration of the complete Part 1 datasets in the tabulate/review/correct
process for our test states. We recently added one table to Part 1 but
have been held up from going into full final production by a policy issue
that has cropped up here in the Census Bureau. This is unfortunate timing,
since if we had released the data in December as planned we might have
gotten it out before the policy issue arose. The issue affects other census
products in addition to the CTPP, but we do not have a time table for when
it will be resolved. This is a high priority topic here, though, so I am
hoping it will be resolved in the next two weeks.
We just completed our first review of the browsing, mapping, and exporting
software that will be used to access CTPP 2000 data (CTPP Access Tool
--CAT). We sent our comments to the two vendors late today so they can
begin incorporating the fixes. There are several bugs that need to be
addressed, but the basic functionality seems to be working properly. I do
not anticipate getting a second version to review any sooner than the first
week of February, and it will take us a few days to check out that version.
If we are up and running in data file production by then we will submit the
files to the vendors, they will import the data and create the CD images,
send the images back to us for volume CD production, and then shipping out
to the States and MPOs will occur. Given these delays and CD production
scheduling, I expect that the first CDs will be available beginning in late
February at the earliest. Part 1 release for the entire country will
probably take six to eight weeks.
I know that many States and MPOs are planning to use the CTPP 2000 for
their model update work and need the data as quickly as possible. I
apologize for this delay and am working to get the data out as soon as
possible.
--Phil Salopek
All:
Caliper Corporation has just made available to its users the Adjusted 2000
Census Data. These data contain PL94-171 redistricting data, adjusted based
on the Accuracy and Coverage Evaluation (A.C.E.) survey conducted during
Census 2000. The A.C.E. survey was designed to measure net undercounts,
such as people missed, and overcounts, such as people counted twice. The
undercounts are largely in Latino, African-American, and other minority groups.
We have created a web mapping application at
(http://198.22.17.155/maptitude/censusadjusted/map.asp?map=1) that you can
use to browse the difference and percent difference between the original
and adjusted total population, and the difference between the original and
adjusted Hispanic population. The map starts at the state level, and as you
zoom in shows the data at the county and then the place/MCD level. You can
locate a state, a ZIP Code, and even an address to move the map to an area
of interest, and you can click on map to get more detail on the Adjusted
2000 Census Data for an area.
Users of the Caliper Corporation Geographic Information System software
products, Maptitude and TransCAD, can purchase Redistricting Data CDs with
Adjusted 2000 Census Data, which are available for a single state or
territory. Each Data CD contains boundaries and adjusted 2000 Census data
for Block Groups, Blocks, Counties, County Subdivisions (MCDs), Indian
Reservations, Places, State, Tracts, and Voting Districts for a single
state or territory. For more information, please visit
(http://www.caliper.com/DataCDs/AdjustedData.htm).
We hope that you find the web mapping application a useful way to start
looking at the Adjusted 2000 Census Data.
Peter
----------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Van Demark
Director of GIS Products and Training Phone: 617-527-4700
Caliper Corporation Fax: 617-527-5113
1172 Beacon Street E-mail: peter(a)caliper.com
Newton MA 02461-9926 Web site: http://www.caliper.com
TO: CTPP-News; BayArea Census Listserv; BayArea GIS-T Listserv
FR: Chuck Purvis
Hello again!
The registration for the "CTPP and Census 2000 Products" Workshop for Monday, January 27th, is closing at 5:00 PM today. We currently have over 100 persons registered, and we need to close down registration for planning the final logisitics of the workshop. We're very much looking forward to having you all here!
http://www.abag.ca.gov/abag/events/ctpp/
We have a substitution on the program with Ms. Clara Reschovsky of the Census Bureau Journey-to-Work and Migration Statistics Branch filling in for Phil Salopek. Thank you, Clara!
In terms of CTPP data available at the January 27th workshop, we do not anticipate having any of the CTPP area-of-residence (Part 1) data to show. The area-of-residence data is expected in February - March 2003; the area-of-work and commute flow data is expected this summer (April - July); and the county-to-county total commuters data files are anticipated in February.
For those folks not attending, we will do what we can to post all materials, powerpoint presentations, etc., on the MTC/ABAG web sites by sometime next week.
Chuck Purvis, MTC
**************************************************************
Charles L. Purvis, AICP
Senior Transportation Planner/Analyst
Metropolitan Transportation Commission
101 Eighth Street
Oakland, CA 94607-4700
(510) 464-7731 (office)
(510) 464-7848 (fax)
www: http://www.mtc.ca.gov/
Census WWW: http://www.bayareacensus.ca.gov/
**************************************************************
We have found that EPA is using the urbanized area information in the stormwater permitting program. I think it is mostly used to identify which local governments will need to apply for permits.
Larry G. Mugler, AICP
Denver Regional Council of Governments
-----Original Message-----
From: David Saladino [mailto:dsaladino@swrpc.org]
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 11:51 AM
To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net
Subject: [CTPP] New Urbanized Area Boundaries -- Impacts
We have recently been asked by our State DOT to review and revise our region's Federal Functional Classifications based on the new Census 2000 urban areas. I have a fairly good understanding of the impact that new and re-aligned urban bounds will have in our State's Federal allotment of funds from US DOT. Does anyone know what other Federal agencies (other than DOT) use urbanized boundaries (either urban areas or clusters) for administrative and/or funding purposes?
Thanks in advance,
Dave
--------------------------------
David Saladino
Regional Planner
Southwest Region Planning Commission
20 Central Square, Second Floor
Keene, NH 03431
Ph: (603) 357-0557
Fx: (603) 357-7440
E-mail: dsaladino(a)swrpc.org
Internet: <http://www.swrpc.org> http://www.swrpc.org
We have recently been asked by our State DOT to review and revise our
region's Federal Functional Classifications based on the new Census 2000
urban areas. I have a fairly good understanding of the impact that new
and re-aligned urban bounds will have in our State's Federal allotment
of funds from US DOT. Does anyone know what other Federal agencies
(other than DOT) use urbanized boundaries (either urban areas or
clusters) for administrative and/or funding purposes?
Thanks in advance,
Dave
--------------------------------
David Saladino
Regional Planner
Southwest Region Planning Commission
20 Central Square, Second Floor
Keene, NH 03431
Ph: (603) 357-0557
Fx: (603) 357-7440
E-mail: dsaladino(a)swrpc.org
Internet: http://www.swrpc.org
I can't answer your question directly, but I think it is important to note
that many DOT's will be modifying the Census Definition for use in
transportation planning. Therefore, if you concur with a modified boundary
with the DOT, that boundary would probably not have bearing on another
Federal agency's programs.
Frank Miller
Missouri Department of Transportation - Springfield Area District
"David Saladino" <dsaladino(a)swrpc.org>@chrispy.net on 01/21/2003 12:51:15
PM
Sent by: owner-ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net
To: <ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net>
cc:
Subject: [CTPP] New Urbanized Area Boundaries -- Impacts
We have recently been asked by our State DOT to review and revise our
region's Federal Functional Classifications based on the new Census 2000
urban areas. I have a fairly good understanding of the impact that new
and re-aligned urban bounds will have in our State's Federal allotment
of funds from US DOT. Does anyone know what other Federal agencies
(other than DOT) use urbanized boundaries (either urban areas or
clusters) for administrative and/or funding purposes?
Thanks in advance,
Dave
--------------------------------
David Saladino
Regional Planner
Southwest Region Planning Commission
20 Central Square, Second Floor
Keene, NH 03431
Ph: (603) 357-0557
Fx: (603) 357-7440
E-mail: dsaladino(a)swrpc.org
Internet: http://www.swrpc.org
(See attached file: C.htm)
Michelle Musser wrote:
> morning ed - i heard that the 1990 ctpp information was going to be
> released on the internet today. do you know the site
> address.thanks,Michelle Musser
> Planner - GIS Technician
> St. Cloud Area Planning Organization
I am at the Transportation Research Board meetings and I heard the same
thing. If it is not up today it will be any day. The 1990 (not 2000 yet)
ctpp is going up on the BTS (bureau of transportation statistics)
TransStats website. You can get to it from the BTS homepage by clicking
on the TransStats link
http://www.bts.gov/
TO: Bay Area Census Listserv; CTPP-News Listserv; Bay Area GIS-T Listserv
FR: Chuck Purvis, MTC
DT: January 10, 2003
***********************************************************************************************************************
The web-based registration page, and agenda, are now up-and-running, at:
http://www.abag.ca.gov/abag/events/ctpp/
PLEASE REGISTER BY January 20th, in order for us to get an accurate headcount! Thanks!
By the way, in terms of the CTPP data, we are *ONLY* expecting that the residence-based tables (Part I of the CTPP) will or may be available for California by the January 27th workshop.
DATA ON COMMUTER FLOWS (place-to-place, county-to-county, tract-to-tract, etc.) WILL BE RELEASED IN THE April-June 2003 time period. DATA ON WORKPLACE-based tables (Part 2) will also be released in the April-June 2003 period.
***********************************************************************************************************************
Mark your calendars for January 27th!
MTC and ABAG are hosting a free workshop on Census 2000, on Monday, January 27, 2003, 8:30 AM - 4:00 PM, at the MetroCenter Auditorium, 101 Eighth Street, Oakland.
The title of the workshop is "CTPP and Census Products" and will cover two main topics:
* the CTPP (Census Transportation Planning Package); and
* the PUMS (Public Use Microdata Sample).
The purpose of the workshop is to learn about Census 2000 datasets to be released in 2003. The CTPP, also known as the "Journey-to-Work Package" is a rich dataset that is "not just for transportation planners." The PUMS is a research dataset that provides the most flexibility for planners and researchers.
Leading the workshop will be senior staff from the U.S. Census Bureau, the Federal Highway Administration, and MTC.
We will have a web-based registration page in the next few days, and we encourage you to RSVP so we can make our necessary arrangements for seating, handouts & refreshments.
The intended audience for this workshop are city and county planners, transportation planners and engineers, consultants, librarians and the media.
For more information on the workshop, please contact me or the workshop registrar: Mr. Shimon Israel of MTC, at 510-464-7839, or e-mail: sisrael(a)mtc.ca.gov
For more information on the Census Transportation Planning Package, visit the Transportation Research Board's subcommittee site, at: http://www.trbcensus.com/ and the FHWA Census site, at: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ctpp/
We look forward to seeing you here on January 27th!
Chuck Purvis
**************************************************************
Charles L. Purvis, AICP
Senior Transportation Planner/Analyst
Metropolitan Transportation Commission
101 Eighth Street
Oakland, CA 94607-4700
(510) 464-7731 (office)
(510) 464-7848 (fax)
www: http://www.mtc.ca.gov/
Census WWW: http://www.bayareacensus.ca.gov/
**************************************************************
The adjusted census data are also available on the UC Berkeley website in a
different format:
http://swdb.berkeley.edu/data/adjusted_census.html
-----Original Message-----
From: Elizabeth Hartmann [mailto:elizabeth.hartmann@dot.state.mn.us]
Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 8:14 AM
To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net; dvest(a)ci.pueblo.co.us
Subject: Re: [CTPP] ADJUSTED CENSUS COUNTS
Here's a possibility:
>From just a quick look at the file(s) structure, what you get when the files
are unzipped is something very similar to the SF1, 100% counts (someone
please correct me if I'm off-the-wall, here). Way back when the
Redistricting files were released, someone on this listserve was kind enough
to share his (very user-friendly) SAS program. That program can be altered
for SF1, and with cut-and-paste, and a little tweaking, I believe the same
program can be used for the adjusted counts.
Haven't tried it yet, though.
Good luck!
Liz Hartmann
Research Analysis Specialist
Minnesota Department of Transportation
Office of Investment Management
>>> "Vest, Don" <dvest(a)ci.pueblo.co.us> 01/07/03 06:51PM >>>
Pardon my ignorance, but perhaps someone would be kind enough to suggest how
I might be able to at least view the data from the unzipped files. The
technical documentation referrs to a simple software program on the CD-ROM
disk which allows the data to be viewed--similar to what FactFinder does.
Thanks.
Don Vest
City of Pueblo
Dept. of Planning & Development