9 Feb
2001
9 Feb
'01
11:01 a.m.
Perhaps some semantic clarification would help:
reAPPORTIONMENT is the allocation of seats to the 50 states. That's what
the Supreme Court ruled on and that's what happened at the end of
December. These data do not include adjustment (per the Supreme Court
decision) and DO include military and goverment-employed civilians from
overseas.
reDISTRICTING is the process, taking place within each state, that divides
the state up into the number of congressional (or state legislative or
whatever) seats. That is the primary intended purpose of the PL 94-171
file coming out next month. That's what the adjustment controversy is
about right now.
Patty Becker
At 04:17 PM 2/8/01 -0500, you wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Patricia C. (Patty) Becker 248/354-6520
APB Associates/SEMCC FAX 248/354-6645
28300 Franklin Road Home 248/355-2428
Southfield, MI 48034 pbecker(a)umich.edu
Ed, I must
admit I am a little confused. I thought the latest Supreme
Court decision on this matter was that "sampling" (vs. counting) was not
to be used in redistricting.
What gives?
bob
Bob--you are absolutely right. The Supreme Court found that sampling could
not be used in coming up with the total count of the population for
allocation of Congressional seats. That was already done. What was left
undecided was allowing the states to use adjusted counts for figuring out
their Congressional districts or for allocating money. Some states I
believe went ahead and passed their own laws and prohibited the use of
adjusted numbers for their own districts. I don't know off hand which
ones. Some others couldn't because their state laws had provisions tied to
civil rights laws that said the US Justice Department has to review and
rule on the action. The Justice Department has not made any rulings until
they see what undercounts might be. Virginia, I believe is a state that
has to wait for a Justice Department Ruling. They tried to pass a law and
I think someone took it to court. A much more detailed explanation of the
Virginia situation be found
at
<http://www.census2000.org/news/01/jan5.html>http://www.census2000.org/news/01/jan5.html
Some of the earlier newsletters on the census 2000 site get into more
detail than what I just tried to pull from my head. They are
at <http://www.census2000.org/news/>http://www.census2000.org/news/
Hope this helps to clarify what is getting to be a legally messy issue.