To CTPP contacts:
Tom Mank has taken a new job in New Hampshire and is no longer working on
CTPP. We will have a replacement soon. In the meantime, Jerry Everett and I
(Elaine Murakami) are handling the work.
We are running a little behind on the production and distribution of TAZ-UP.
We expect that we will start shipping packages around March 12. (Both Jerry
and Elaine will be at the Boston Transportation Planning Applications
conference from March 7-11). Because the Census Bureau does not yet have a
complete set of TIGER, the shipping of TAZ-UP will flow as the delivery of the
TIGER files to us. TAZ-UP REQUIRES the use of TIGER/Line 98. However, if you
already have a shape file with your TAZs defined with another geographic BASE,
you can bring in the file as a reference to help you define the TAZ using
TIGER/Line 98.
We are trying to set up a ONE phone number for CTPP and will let you know the
number as soon as possible. ( The number is 202-366-5000 as of 3/5/99)
Thanks for your patience. Hope to see you in Boston.
Elaine
my phone is 202-366-6971
To CTPP contacts:
Tom Mank has taken a new job in New Hampshire and is no longer working on
CTPP. We will have a replacement soon. In the meantime, Jerry Everett and I
(Elaine Murakami) are handling the work.
We are running a little behind on the production and distribution of TAZ-UP.
We expect that we will start shipping packages around March 12. (Both Jerry
and Elaine will be at the Boston Transportation Planning Applications
conference from March 7-11). Because the Census Bureau does not yet have a
complete set of TIGER, the shipping of TAZ-UP will flow as the delivery of the
TIGER files to us. TAZ-UP REQUIRES the use of TIGER/Line 98. However, if you
already have a shape file with your TAZs defined with another geographic BASE,
you can bring in the file as a reference to help you define the TAZ using
TIGER/Line 98.
We are trying to set up a ONE phone number for CTPP and will let you know the
number as soon as possible. ( The number is 202-366-5000 as of 3/5/99)
Thanks for your patience. Hope to see you in Boston.
Elaine
my phone is 202-366-6971
From: Census2000 <Census2000(a)ccmc.org>
Hearing and Document Update
Because of recent changes in, or additions to, the schedule for
congressional activities relating to the census, we want to provide
stakeholders with updated information on these events. We also want to
pass along information on how to access new materials of interest to
stakeholders.
Congressional oversight hearings: The House Subcommittee on the Census
will hold a hearing this afternoon to discuss the "America Counts Today
(ACT) Initiative," a proposal by Chairman Dan Miller (R-FL) to "enhance
traditional enumeration methods." The hearing starts at 2:00 p.m. in
room 2203 Rayburn House Office Building. Census Bureau Director Kenneth
Prewitt will testify. The subcommittee will also hear from Rep. Carrie
Meek (D-FL), sponsor of the "Decennial Census Improvement Act of 1999"
(H.R. 683). The bill would allow federal agencies to disregard income
earned by temporary census enumerators in determining eligibility for
certain federal benefits.
The census subcommittee will vote on H.R. 683 at a "mark-up" scheduled
for Thursday, March 4, at 9:15 a.m. in room 311 Cannon House Office
Building.
Congressional appropriations hearings: The House Appropriations
Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, State, and The Judiciary has
rescheduled its hearing to review the Commerce Department's budget
request for Fiscal Year 2000 (FY00), which includes funding for the
Census Bureau. Secretary William Daley will appear before the panel,
chaired by Rep. Harold Rogers (R-KY), on Wednesday, March 3, at 2:00
p.m. in room 2359 Rayburn House Office Building. The hearing originally
scheduled for March 4, to review the Census Bureau's funding request in
more detail with Director Prewitt, has been postponed.
Secretary Daley is scheduled to testify before the counterpart Senate
appropriations subcommittee, chaired by Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH), on
Thursday, March 11, at 10:00 a.m. in room S-146 of The Capitol.
Census Monitoring Board: The eight-member Census Monitoring Board will
hold a meeting on Monday, March 8, at 9:30 a.m., in the Census Bureau's
conference center at its Suitland, MD, headquarters. The agenda for the
meeting and any witnesses have not yet been announced.
Tabulating race and ethnic data: The Office of Management and Budget's
Draft Provisional Guidance on the Implementation of the 1997 Standards
for the Collection of Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity can now be
found on OMB's web site at
<http://www.whitehouse.gov/WH/EOP/OMB/html/misc-doc.html>. OMB is
accepting comments on the draft guidelines for tabulating multiple
responses to the race question in the census and other federal surveys
for two months and expects to issue provisional guidance at the end of
April.
Dress rehearsal evaluation: The Census Bureau has issued a "Report Card:
Evaluation of the Standards for Success" on its Census 2000 Dress
Rehearsal, conducted in three sites in 1998. The report compares data
from various stages of dress rehearsal operations with a set of
standards for each site: Columbia, S.C. and surrounding counties;
Sacramento, CA; and Menominee County, WI (including the Menominee
American Indian Reservation). Key elements for evaluation include the
address lists, mailing a replacement questionnaire to all households,
the paid advertising campaign, door-to-door follow-up activities, and
unduplication of multiple responses from the same household. For more
information on the dress rehearsal February 1999 Report Card, please
contact the Bureau's Planning, Research, and Evaluation Division at
301/457-3525.
Questions about the information contained in this News Alert may be
directed to TerriAnn Lowenthal at 202/484-2270 or, by e-mail at
<terriann2k(a)aol.com>. Please direct all requests to receive News
Alerts, and all changes in address/phone/fax/e-mail, to the Census 2000
Initiative at <Census2000(a)ccmc.org> or 202/326-8700. Please feel free
to circulate this information to colleagues and other interested
individuals.
********** C E N S U S 2 0 0 0 B U L L E T I N **********
Vol. 3 - No. 4 Feb. 25, 1999
The following statement on Census 2000 was read by Census Bureau
Director Kenneth Prewitt at a news conference Wednesday (Feb. 24, 1999)
at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C.:
"I will make a few general observations and then take your questions.
"I start with a word on recent history. The results of the 1990 census
did not please the Census Bureau, or the Bush Administration, or the
Congress, or governors, mayors, and other state and local officials, or
a large number of private and public sector data users, or the American
public. It was a costly census; it was less accurate than what the
country has a right to expect. The Census Bureau was charged to design a
more modern census, one that would reduce the number of Americans who
are missed -- either because we cannot find them or because they won't
cooperate. It did so. That design, however, quickly became mired in
political disputes, was litigated, and a month ago was set aside by the
Supreme Court.
"The Census Bureau had, of course, planned for that possibility. It had
presented an alternative design to the Administration and the Congress
in mid-January, before the Court ruling. Based on our recently completed
evaluation of our Dress Rehearsal experience, we have further refined
that plan. Its principal features are the subject of this press
conference.
"The Dress Rehearsal tells us two things.
"First, however hard we try and whatever the level of resources
available, Census 2000 will not count everyone. Moreover, this
'undercount' will not be equally distributed across demographic groups.
There is what we refer to as a differential undercount. For instance, in
1990 we counted nearly all white Americans, but only approximately 95
percent of African-Americans and Hispanics, and an even lower rate of
Native American Indians. Insofar as these less well counted groups are
concentrated in some states, not others; in some cities, not others; in
some neighborhoods, not others -- these states, cities, neighborhoods do
not get their fair share of either the political or economic benefits
allocated on the basis of census numbers.
"Second, the Census Bureau's design should include a procedure --
described in the updated summary as the Accuracy and Coverage Evaluation
(ACE) -- that will identify the magnitude and distribution of the
differential account, and correct for it. The Dress Rehearsal confirms
the statistical soundness of this procedure. Consequently, I have today
informed the Secretary of Commerce and the Congress that it is feasible
for Census 2000 to include this procedure, and that by doing so we will
produce a more accurate and complete census than would otherwise be the
case.
"Because the Supreme Court ruled that this more accurate number is not
to be used for apportionment purposes, our design also includes a major,
labor intensive (and expensive) effort to find and enumerate as many
Americans as is humanly possible in the time-frame available. In pursuit
of this goal, our first and most important effort is to put a census
form in the hands of every single household in America. Census 2000
features many improvements and technical innovations not available in
1990 -- for example, a completely re-engineered Master Address File, the
most comprehensive ever constructed in U.S. history; first-ever use of
paid advertising; intensified partnerships with tens of thousands of
local governments, tribal organizations, private groups and non-profit
organizations nationally and locally, a census-in-the-schools
initiative.
"This plan is operationally robust, and will be conducted with complete
dedication by the Census Bureau professionals. This said, the
apportionment counts are not likely to be an improvement on the 1990
accuracy levels. How can this be? How can you spend more money, mount
improved operations, and yet not increase accuracy? Because all the
factors that made it difficult to count Americans in prior censuses are
today even more present. In more American families, both parents work,
making it difficult to find anyone at home. Transient lifestyles are on
the rise. People are busy. More people live in irregular housing.
Greater numbers of people are linguistically isolated. Large immigrant
populations avoid government officials. Census forms must compete with
huge flows of junk mail. More persons are cynical about -- or actively
hostile to -- any of the works of government. Census 2000 must overcome
decreased levels of civic engagement by the American people. In short,
the Census Bureau has to work harder to stay in place. We will produce
the best apportionment counts that we can; they will not include
everyone.
"Allow me to summarize the points just covered, so as to leave no
ambiguity. Between the 1st of April and 31st of December, the Census
Bureau will count (and assign to an address) everyone it possibly can.
The results of this effort will meet our obligation to present
apportionment counts without the use of modern statistical methods. But
the work will not then be finished. Census 2000 will continue its work
with an Accuracy and Coverage Evaluation in order to produce more
complete and accurate numbers, which will be ready prior to April 1,
2001. It is the task of the Census Bureau top produce the best numbers
possible, not to decide how they will be used. The more complete census
counts will be made available in a form that allows them to be used, if
it is so decided, for redistricting purposes, for determining the
allocation of federal funds, and for ongoing statistical and program
purposes. Some may describe this as a 'two-number census,' but it in
fact is a census that is progressively more complete, more accurate.
"I conclude by reminding us all that the census clock ticks --
relentlessly, ceaselessly. In just 372 days the first Census 2000 forms
get delivered. Given the lateness of the hour, we must acknowledge the
hard reality that we no longer have the luxury of debates about
alternative designs, or substitute procedures. No matter how well
intentioned, we cannot now take a chance on untested operations or late
additions. The largest peacetime mobilization in U.S. history must go
forward based on the considered professional judgment of the career
scientific and operational experts at the Census Bureau, who stand with
me here today. We are up to the task, but only if we are allowed to do
the task."
For further information about the Census 2000 Bulletins, contact J. Paul
Wyatt in the Public Information Office on 301-457-3052 (fax:
301-457-3670; e-mail: pwyatt(a)census.gov).
From: Census2000 <Census2000(a)ccmc.org>
Sampling Opponents Criticize Revised Census 2000 Plan;
More Litigation Looming over Use of Sampling
Opponents of sampling in the census harshly criticized the Census
Bureau's revised plan for Census 2000, unveiled at a press conference
yesterday by Bureau Director Kenneth Prewitt, while supporters of
scientific methods said the Bureau must be allowed to implement its plan
without further interference from Congress.
House Census Subcommittee Chairman Dan Miller (R-FL) called the new plan
"irresponsible" and "a recipe for disaster." He said the publication of
two sets of census numbers - one at the state level for congressional
apportionment and a second, more detailed set corrected for undercounts
and overcounts measured by a quality-check survey, will "confuse and
confound the American people. The Census Bureau is peddling snake oil
and they're headed for your neighborhood," Rep. Miller said at a press
conference following the Bureau's announcement.
The chairman suggested that the "second, manipulated number[s]" would
trigger increased litigation, but said "Congress remains ready to work
with the Administration and Congressional Democrats on ways that will
help count the American people, not create a new field of litigation -
census law". After the Supreme Court ruled 5 - 4 that federal law
barred the use of sampling methods to compile the state population
totals used for congressional apportionment, Rep. Miller proposed
several enhancements to the traditional census design. The census
subcommittee, without any of its Democratic members present, approved
one element of that proposal - a nine week review of preliminary
household counts by local governments - two weeks ago.
Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), the subcommittee's senior Democrat, praised
the Bureau for "a blue print for obtaining the most accurate count
possible" in 2000. She said the Supreme Court ruling prohibited
sampling only for apportionment but required the use of scientific
methods for all other purposes if the Bureau considered it feasible.
Saying the Republican majority in Congress wanted to "spend billions
more for a less accurate census," Rep. Maloney described opposition to
the plan as "something out of 'Alice in Wonderland' - you put in more,
you get less."
Other congressional reaction to the revised Census 2000 plan was
similarly divided. House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-IL), a former
census oversight chairman, said he was "disappointed that the
Clinton-Gore Administration apparently will not allow the professionals
at the Census Bureau to actually count everyone." The Speaker accused
the Census Bureau of a "political flip-flop on census guessing," noting
that the Bureau's original plan called for one set of census numbers to
avoid confusion and controversy.
House Democratic Leader Richard Gephardt (D-MO) called the plan "an
important step toward the goal of carrying out the most accurate
possible 2000 census." He said the Bureau "should be permitted to go
forward without unwarranted political interference from Republicans in
Congress." Wade Henderson, Executive Director of the Leadership
Conference on Civil Rights, said the redesigned quality-check survey
(called the Accuracy and Coverage Evaluation, or ACE, program) "will
ensure the numbers used for non-apportionment purposes in 2000 are the
fairest and most accurate." Civil rights advocates would work with
grassroots organizations, Mr. Henderson said, to encourage support for
the new plan.
Supreme Court litigant vows return to court: Matthew Glavin, President
of the Atlanta-based Southeastern Legal Foundation (SLF), said his
organization would take "swift legal action against this administration
to prevent the unconstitutional use of statistical sampling" in the 2000
census. Mr. Glavin accused the President "and his allies" of trying to
"achieve by political fiat what they could not accomplish by legal means
- the skewering of American representative democracy for partisan
expediency." He said SLF would seek a declaratory judgment and
injunctive relief to prevent the Bureau from producing census numbers
based on sampling for intra-state redistricting.
The high court granted standing to Mr. Glavin, co-plaintiff Rep. Bob
Barr (R-GA), and other individual litigants in their legal challenge to
the Census Bureau's original plan to use scientific techniques in the
census. The Court's ruling did not address the constitutionality of the
proposed sampling methods. Interested stakeholders can obtain more
information about SLF's census litigation on the organization's web
site, at www.southeasternlegal.orghttp://www.southeasternlegal.org.
Census legislation: Rep. Carrie Meek (D-FL) has reintroduced a bill to
widen the labor pool for Census 2000 by waiving income earned as a
temporary census employee in determining eligibility for certain federal
benefits and payments, such as food stamps, Medicaid, and pensions for
military and federal retirees. Census subcommittee Chairman Dan Miller
(R-FL) and the panel's senior Democrat, Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), are
both cosponsors of the Decennial Census Improvement Act of 1999 (H.R.
683), which was referred to their committee for consideration.
In a letter to her colleagues seeking support for her bill, Rep. Meek
said that H.R. 638 would help the Bureau recruit and hire enumerators
who live in the hardest-to-count communities. To expand the labor pool
for the 1990 census, Congress passed legislation to waive provisions of
law that penalized military and federal retirees who returned to work
for the federal government by reducing their monthly pension benefits
during the period of employment.
Clarification: In the February 24 News Alert, we inadvertently listed
next week's hearing of the House Subcommittee on the Census for Tuesday,
March 1. The correct date is Tuesday, March 2. We apologize for any
confusion.
Questions about the information contained in this News Alert may be
directed to TerriAnn Lowenthal at 202/484-2270 or, by e-mail at
<terriann2k(a)aol.com>. Please direct all requests to receive News
Alerts, and all changes in address/phone/fax/e-mail, to the Census 2000
Initiative at <Census2000(a)ccmc.org> or 202/326-8700. Please feel free
to circulate this information to colleagues and other interested
individuals.
We are running a little behind on the production and distribution of TAZ-UP.
We expect that we will start shipping packages around March 12. (Both Jerry
and Elaine will be at the Boston Transportation Planning Applications
conference from March 7-11). Because the Census Bureau does not yet have a
complete set of TIGER, the shipping of TAZ-UP will flow as the delivery of the
TIGER files to us. TAZ-UP REQUIRES the use of TIGER/Line 98. However, if you
already have a shape file with your TAZs defined with another geographic BASE,
you can bring in the file as a reference to help you define the TAZ using
TIGER/Line 98.
We are trying to set up a ONE phone number for CTPP and will let you know the
number as soon as possible.
Thanks for your patience. Hope to see you in Boston. We mailed copies of the
CTPP Status Report last week.
Elaine
my phone is 202-366-6971
From: Census2000 <Census2000(a)ccmc.org>
Census Bureau Unveils Revised Census Plan
In Wake of Supreme Court Ruling
Cost Estimate Not Finalized, But News Reports Suggest
Sharply Steeper Price Tag
Tomorrow: Reaction from Congress and Stakeholders
At a press conference today in Washington, D.C., Census Bureau Director
Kenneth Prewitt unveiled a revised plan for Census 2000 that "is
progressively more complete, more accurate." He called upon Congress to
help the Bureau move forward with "a consensus census," saying that the
Bureau "no longer [has] the luxury of debates about alternative designs,
or substitute procedures."
The plan would produce one set of state population totals based solely
on traditional direct counting methods that will be used to apportion
the 435 seats in Congress among the 50 states. The Bureau must report
those state numbers to the President by December 31, 2000. The U.S.
Supreme Court recently ruled in a case challenging the Bureau's original
plan that federal law prohibits the use of sampling to compile the
population numbers used for apportionment.
After counting "everyone it possibly can," Dr. Prewitt said, the Bureau
would then conduct a quality check survey - named the Accuracy and
Coverage Evaluation, or ACE - to measure the accuracy of the initial
count and provide the basis for correcting any undercounts and
overcounts. The survey would cover 300,000 households nationwide, down
from the 750,000 household post enumeration survey the Bureau proposed
in its original plan. The corrected set of numbers, which Dr. Prewitt
said will be more accurate than the direct count, will be available for
geographic areas as small as census blocks by April 1, 2001, the legal
deadline for the Bureau to transmit detailed counts to the state
legislatures for the redistricting process.
Director focuses on accuracy concerns: Despite an "operationally robust
plan," the Census Bureau believes that the numbers produced for
congressional apportionment "are not likely to be an improvement on the
1990 accuracy levels." Dr. Prewitt cited busy or transient lifestyles,
irregular housing, language barriers, fear of government officials by
immigrants, and decreased civic engagement as continuing and growing
factors that make it harder to count accurately. "The Census Bureau has
to work harder to stay in place," the director said.
The Bureau also released more results from its 1998 dress rehearsal,
showing higher undercount rates for racial minorities than for
non-Hispanic Whites. Dr. Prewitt said the overall net undercount in the
Columbia, S.C., area was 9.4 percent; for non-Hispanic Blacks, the rate
was 13.4 percent, compared to 6.3 percent for non-Hispanic Whites. The
Bureau used only traditional counting methods in the Columbia site, but
conducted a quality-check survey to measure the accuracy of the results.
In 2000, the redesigned quality-check survey (or ACE) will not estimate
undercounts and overcounts for each state based only on the sample
households within that state. Instead, information gleaned from the
survey for various demographic subgroups will be "pooled" with data from
other states in the same region. Dr. Prewitt said this design would
produce "more robust" measurements of accuracy for smaller geographic
areas, since data on less populous demographic subgroups in some states
could be combined with data on the same subgroups from sample households
in another state in the same region.
In response to questions from journalists, Dr. Prewitt said the revised
plan is "not a two-track design," but rather a census that relies on a
range of methods "to produce more complete data." He noted that the
Bureau has produced one set of numbers for apportionment and a second
set for other purposes, including redistricting, in the past. In 1990,
for example, military and federal civilian personnel, and their
dependents, stationed overseas during the census were included in the
state population totals used for congressional apportionment only,
shifting a seat in Congress from Massachusetts to Washington. Their
numbers were not included in any other census tabulations. Dr. Prewitt
also referred to statements made in the past by House census
subcommittee Chairman Dan Miller (R-FL) that suggested sampling could be
used to produce different numbers for the allocation of federal aid.
Dr. Prewitt said the Bureau is still working on a cost estimate for the
new plan, which he said will cost much more than the Bureau's original
plan. The cost increase, he noted, is attributable to the need to
contact all households that don't respond by mail, instead of a sample
of those households as originally planned. The Bureau estimates that 61
percent of the nation's 120 million households will respond voluntarily
by mail. It cost $25 million to follow-up with each one percent of
households that don't mail back their forms, Dr. Prewitt said. He also
said that the ACE survey will account for a relatively small portion of
census costs, disputing charges by some opponents of sampling that the
quality-check procedure will drain resources from the traditional count.
News articles today in The Washington Post and The New York Times quote
unnamed sources familiar with the plan as saying it will cost $2 - $3
billion more than the original $4 billion price tag.
Hearing on Commerce budget postponed: The House Appropriations
Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, State, and The Judiciary has
postponed a hearing originally scheduled for tomorrow, February 25, to
review the Commerce Department's budget request for Fiscal Year 2000.
Secretary Daley is likely to appear before the panel next week. Next
week's planned appearance of Dr. Prewitt before the same subcommittee,
to discuss the details of the Census Bureau's funding request, will
likely be pushed back another week, as well.
Oversight hearing scheduled: The House Subcommittee on the Census will
hold a hearing on Tuesday, March 1, to review the status of census
planning and preparations with Dr. Prewitt. The hearing will begin at
2:00 p.m. in room 2203 Rayburn House Office Building.
Questions about the information contained in this News Alert may be
directed to TerriAnn Lowenthal at 202/484-2270 or, by e-mail at
<terriann2k(a)aol.com>. Please direct all requests to receive News
Alerts, and all changes in address/phone/fax/e-mail, to the Census 2000
Initiative at <Census2000(a)ccmc.org> or 202/326-8700. Please feel free
to circulate this information to colleagues and other interested
individuals.
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999
From: Census2000 <Census2000(a)ccmc.org>
Congressional Committee and Advisory Committee Debate Need
For Post Census Local Review Program
OMB Issues Draft Guidelines for Tabulating Multiple Race Responses
Over the objection of panel Democrats and the Census Bureau, the House
census subcommittee approved legislation to require a Post Census Local
Review (PCLR) program in the 2000 census. The February 11 "mark-up" of
H.R. 472, sponsored by subcommittee chair Dan Miller (R-FL), followed a
hearing on the measure that featured testimony from several local
officials and the Census Bureau's director in 1990, Dr. Barbara Everitt
Bryant. (Please see our February 9 News Alert for a summary of H.R.
472, the "Local Census Quality Check Act".)
In opening remarks, Chairman Miller called the Census Bureau's decision
not to include PCLR in the 2000 census "unfortunate," saying the failure
to allow local governments to review preliminary housing unit counts
"breeds distrust in the Census." The chairman said he was "amazed that
there is anyone at all testifying against" the bill. Noting that "we
won" the "fight over sampling in the Supreme Court," Rep. Miller called
for "concrete proposals that will help give the Bureau and local
communities the resources and tools they need to get an accurate count."
In brief remarks at the start of the hearing, the Committee on
Government Reform's senior Democrat, Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA),
registered a strong objection to the subcommittee's consideration of the
bill so soon after its introduction and the hearing. The swift action,
Rep. Waxman charged, indicated that the panel's majority members were
not interested in evaluating comments and concerns about the local
review program in order to develop the best solution. Democratic
members were also upset that consideration of the legislation was taking
place without Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), the subcommittee's senior
Democrat, who was attending a conference in the Netherlands.
Rep. Danny Davis (D-IL) called Post Census Local Review "an old issue
with a troubled past," and suggested that efforts should be focused on
"count[ing] all the people" instead of on housing units only. He then
read a letter to the panel's chairman from Census Bureau Director
Kenneth Prewitt, expressing concern that the Bureau had not been invited
to present its view on H.R. 472 to the subcommittee. Rep. Davis
listened to testimony from the four panels of witnesses, but refused to
participate in the mark-up that followed the hearing. Rep. Harold Ford
Jr. (D-TN), a new panel member, refused to attend both the hearing and
the mark-up, saying the process appeared to be partisan.
Several witnesses representing municipal governments or their
associations said they supported reinstatement of a Post Census Local
Review program in 2000. Palm Beach (FL) County Commissioner Carol
Roberts, emphasizing the high growth rate in her community, said that
PCLR offers the "best opportunity [for local governments] to correct
miscounts" in the census. Ms. Barbara Welty, representing the National
Association of Towns and Townships, said that smaller communities need
45 working days to review preliminary housing unit counts, as proposed
in H.R. 472, because of limited fiscal and personnel resources as well
as less technical expertise. She said that many smaller local
governments are not participating in a pre-census review of census
address lists and maps (called the Local Update of Census Addresses, or
LUCA) due to lack of resources or time, making a post-census review more
important for them. Mr. Lanier Boatwright, President of the National
Association of Development Organizations (NADO), suggested that the
Census Bureau should provide financial assistance to smaller governments
that could not afford to review pre-census address lists or preliminary
housing unit counts during the census itself. He noted that most of the
nation's 39,000 local governments served fewer than 3,000 people.
Expressing doubts about the benefits of a lengthy PCLR program, Richmond
(VA) Mayor Timothy Kaine said that the 1990 PCLR was not cost-effective
and that it did not address "two significant problems that produce an
inaccurate census: systemic undercounting of people within households
that are counted, and over counting." The U.S. Conference of Mayors, he
said, believed that sampling methods were the best way to address those
problems. In the 1990 census, local officials reviewed preliminary
counts of housing units, but not population. Evaluations showed that
about 70 percent of the people missed in the 1990 census lived in
households that had been counted; among African American households, the
comparable figure was 80 percent.
Dr. Bryant called the 1990 PCLR "well intentioned but ineffective" and
noted that the program added only 0.08 percent of all housing units
counted in that census. She said the review was effective in
identifying housing units or entire subdivisions that had been counted
in the wrong location, but said that those geographic coding mistakes
were corrected in the permanent mapping database. Former Commerce Under
Secretary Everett Ehrlich, now a member of the Census Monitoring Board,
compared Chairman Miller's proposal for PCLR in 2000 to the game "Beat
the Clock." The legislation, Mr. Ehrlich cautioned, gives 39,000 local
governments a chance to review and challenge their census counts without
leaving enough time for the Bureau to evaluate the claims before the
December 31, 2000 deadline for submitting state population totals to the
President.
Immediately after the hearing, the subcommittee's Republican members
approved H.R. 472, without any amendments, by a 5 - 0 voice vote. The
Government Reform Committee is expected to take up the measure in the
near future.
Census Advisory Committee debates merits of local review: Several
members of the Commerce Secretary's 2000 Census Advisory Committee
expressed disappointment both with the Census Bureau's decision to
eliminate any form of post census local review and with Congress'
efforts to pass legislation mandating such a program. Those who voiced
their concerns generally agreed that an opportunity to review housing
unit counts before they become final could help identify glaring
mistakes in the geographic location of neighborhoods or group
facilities. However, most of them also opposed requiring a specific
Post Census Local Review program through legislation and said they did
not advocate a repeat of the 1990 program in 2000.
The comments were made at the committee's final meeting on February 19,
where stakeholder organizations discussed their report and
recommendations to the Secretary concerning the 2000 census. In its
report, the committee unanimously endorsed a post census review of
address or housing unit lists, as well as a large post-enumeration
survey to provide the basis for correcting measurable undercounts and
overcounts.
The Advisory Committee agreed to establish a working group to address
disagreements about the local review process between the Census Bureau
and local governments. The Secretary of Commerce is expected to renew
the committee's charter so that it can continue to provide guidance
during final preparations and the census itself. We will provide a more
comprehensive summary of the Advisory Committee meeting in a future News
Alert.
Draft Guidelines Issued for Race and Ethnic Data: The Office of
Management and Budget issued Draft Provisional Guidance on the
Implementation of the 1997 Standards for Federal Data on Race and
Ethnicity (formerly known as OMB Statistical Policy Directive 15) on
February 17. The draft guidelines were developed by an inter-agency
task force to provide guidance on tabulating multiple responses to the
race and ethnicity questions in the 2000 census and other federal data
collection activities. The new standards issued in October 1997
include several other changes to the race categories.
OMB is seeking comment on the draft guidance and expects to amend the
document after additional research and analysis. The agency will issue
the final provisional guidance at the end of April 1999, after a
two-month discussion period. Interested stakeholders may obtain further
information from the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (the
division of OMB responsible for federal statistical policy) at
202/395-3093.
Appropriations hearings scheduled: House and Senate appropriators have
signaled the start of the annual funding process by scheduling hearings
to review Fiscal Year 2000 (FY00) budget requests for the Commerce
Department and Census Bureau. The House Appropriations Subcommittee on
Commerce, Justice, State, and The Judiciary, chaired by Rep. Harold
Rogers (R-KY), will hear testimony from Commerce Secretary William Daley
on February 25, at 10 a.m. in room 2358 Rayburn House Office Building.
Census Bureau Director Kenneth Prewitt will discuss the Bureau's funding
needs at a hearing on March 4, at 10 a.m. (room TBA).
The counterpart Senate appropriations subcommittee, chaired by Sen. Judd
Gregg (R-NH), has scheduled a hearing on March 11, at 10 a.m., in room
S-146 The Capitol, to review the Commerce Department's funding request.
Congress also must pass, and the President must sign, legislation to
keep funds for the current fiscal year (FY99) flowing to the Census
Bureau and all other agencies covered under the Commerce, Justice,
State, and The Judiciary budget account by June 15, 1999.
Census Monitoring Board activities: The presidential appointees to the
Census Monitoring Board will hold community forums in San Antonio, TX,
and Miami, FL, to assess how the undercount in 1990 affected these
communities and to hear local concerns about the 2000 census. On
February 24, Board Co-Chair Tony Coelho will convene a forum from 11
a.m. to 12:30 p.m., at the University of Texas/San Antonio Downtown
Campus, 501 West Durango St., Buena Vista Street Building, Lecture Hall
1.328. On February 25, a Presidential Board appointee will hold a
forum from 10:30 a.m. to 12:00 p.m., in the Miami-Dade Public Library,
Main Building, First Floor Auditorium, 101 W. Flagler St., in Miami.
Both events are open to the public.
Census stakeholders may obtain information on the activities of the
Board's Presidential appointees by calling 301/457-9900. The Board's
congressional appointees may be reached at 301/457-5080, or through
their web site at www.cmbc.gov <http://www.cmbc.gov>. The presidential
members plan to establish a web site in the near future.
New publication: The Population Reference Bureau has issued a report
entitled, "The 2000 Census Challenge," authored by Dr. Barry Edmonston,
director of Oregon's Center for Population Research and Census. Dr.
Edmonston discussed the report's highlights at a briefing sponsored by
the National Press Club on February 18. After reviewing concerns about
rising census costs and diminished accuracy, the author concluded that
fundamental reform of the census process was needed to obtain a more
accurate count of historically-undercounted groups. Dr. Edmonston also
co-authored "Modernizing the U.S. Census," a 1995 report issued by the
National Academy of Sciences' National Research Council pursuant to a
legislative mandate. Copies of the new report are available from the
Population Reference Bureau, at 202/939-5417 or rsilvis(a)prb.org
<mailto:rsilvis@prb.org>.
Questions about the information contained in this News Alert may be
directed to TerriAnn Lowenthal at 202/484-2270 or, by e-mail at
<terriann2k(a)aol.com>. Please direct all requests to receive News
Alerts, and all changes in address/phone/fax/e-mail, to the Census 2000
Initiative at <Census2000(a)ccmc.org> or 202/326-8700. Please feel free
to circulate this information to colleagues and other interested
individuals.
From: Census2000 <Census2000(a)ccmc.org>
Census Advisory Committee Readies Final Report;
House Panel to Vote on Local Review Bill
The 2000 Census Advisory Committee will present a final
report to the Secretary of Commerce next week that includes
recommendations on outreach and partnership activities, the
paid advertising campaign, efforts to improve the count of
historically-undercounted populations, and the use of
sampling. The report's recommendations were "unanimously
approved" by the committee, which comprises organizations
representing local and state elected officials, civil rights
advocates, scientific disciplines and data users, community
service providers, veterans and senior citizens, and
businesses. (See below for information on the advisory
committee meeting.)
The report emphasizes the importance of locally focused
activities and the need for "flexible field operations" to
increase participation among hard-to-count and distrustful
populations. The Secretary should evaluate the paid
advertising campaign's "creative message" and change it, if
necessary, the committee suggests. The panel also proposes
expanding plans for language assistance and school-oriented
materials, as well as the availability of 'Be Counted' forms
in public places.
The committee recommends a "post-census local review" that
would allow local officials to review housing unit, but not
population, counts before the numbers are finalized.
Communities that formally participated in a pre-census
address compilation program (the Local Update of Census
Addresses, or LUCA) should receive a detailed list of
responding addresses and group facilities for review, while
other communities would receive only summaries of household
counts for each block.
Noting its previous support for statistical methods if
testing demonstrated their effectiveness in reducing the
undercount, the committee advises the Secretary "to conduct
Census 2000 as accurately and efficiently as the most
current scientific knowledge and operational feasibility
allow." If sampling is not allowed for reapportionment
purposes, the panel said, the census should include a
sufficiently large post enumeration survey (PES) to measure
census accuracy down to small geographic areas. "The
Secretary should direct the Census Bureau to prepare and
release, on a timely basis, counts corrected for the PES
estimates of coverage errors," the report also states.
Census subcommittee schedules hearing and "mark-up": The
House Subcommittee on the Census will hear testimony on
legislation authored by its chairman and then vote on (or
"mark-up") the measure at a meeting scheduled for Thursday,
February 11. The "Local Census Quality Check Act" (H.R.
472) was introduced last week by Rep. Dan Miller (F-FL) and
seven cosponsors. The bill would amend the Census Act
(title 13, United States Code) to require a "postcensus
local review" in every census, giving local governments an
opportunity to review housing unit counts and boundaries
before the final census numbers are tabulated. During the
census, local officials would receive block level maps and
address lists by August 1 or within 30 days after the
follow-up visits to unresponsive households are complete,
whichever is earlier. They would have 45 days, excluding
weekends and holidays, to review and challenge the
information; the Census Bureau would then re-canvass the
challenged areas and notify the local governments of any
resulting corrections to the housing lists or maps by
November 1.
Among the witnesses invited to testify are the mayors of
Scottsdale, AZ, and Richmond, VA, the National Association
of Development Organizations, and Census Monitoring Board
Co-Chairman Kenneth Blackwell. The hearing will begin at 10
a.m. in room 2247 Rayburn House Office Building, followed
immediately by the mark-up.
Census Advisory Committee meeting: The 2000 Census Advisory
Committee will meet on Friday, February 19, to present its
final report and recommendations to the Secretary of
Commerce. The committee's charter is set to expire but the
Commerce Department is expected to renew the panel's
authority. The February 19 meeting, which is open to the
public, will be held from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. at the Embassy
Suites Hotel, 1900 Diagonal Rd., Alexandria, VA (tel:
703/684-5900).
The census and civil rights: The U.S. Commission on Civil
Rights will hold a briefing for its members on the civil
rights implications of the debate over census methods. The
meeting will take place on February 12, beginning at 10
a.m., at the Commission's offices (624 9th Street, N.W.,
Room 540, Washington, DC) Among those invited to present
information are the Lawyers Committee on Civil Rights,
National Congress of American Indians, Mexican American
Legal Defense and Educational Fund, and Matthew Glavin,
president of the Southeastern Legal Foundation, whose
lawsuit against sampling led to last month's Supreme Court
ruling that the Census Act bars sampling to count the
population for purposes of congressional apportionment.
Senate bill introduced: Senators Daniel P. Moynihan (D-NY)
and Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) introduced legislation last week to
allow the use of sampling methods in compiling the state
population totals used to reapportion Congress. S. 355
responds to the recent Supreme Court ruling that the Census
Act bars sampling for apportionment purposes. Sen. Moynihan
said in a statement "sampling is vital to achieving the goal
of the most accurate census possible." Rep. Carolyn Maloney
sponsored a companion bill in the House (H.R. 548).
Questions about the information contained in this News Alert
may be directed to TerriAnn Lowenthal at 202/484-2270 or, by
e-mail at <terriann2k(a)aol.com>. Please direct all requests
to receive News Alerts, and all changes in
address/phone/fax/e-mail, to the Census 2000 Initiative at
<Census2000(a)ccmc.org> or 202/326-8700. Please feel free to
circulate this information to colleagues and other
interested individuals.
