[CTPP] Census 2000 News Alert

From: Census2000 <Census2000(a)ccmc.org> Sampling Supporters and Critics Spar over Reach of Supreme Court Ruling Rep. Miller Proposal Would Expand Traditional Methods Legislators and stakeholder organizations offered sharply different interpretations of last week's Supreme Court ruling in a census lawsuit challenging the use of sampling to count the population. In its 5-4 decision issued January 25, the Court held that the Census Act bars sampling to calculate the state population totals for purposes of congressional apportionment. But writing for the majority, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor also said that the same provision of law "require[s] that sampling be used for [purposes other than apportionment] if 'feasible.'" (See January 27 News Alert for a summary of the decision and Administration reaction.) Rep. Dan Miller (R-FL), who chairs the census subcommittee, said that the Court "has ruled that sampling is dead." He urged the Administration not to "sidestep the Court's ruling by insisting the Census Bureau be required to produce two numbers in 2000, one based on counting and the other based on polling." Speaking at the annual mid-winter meeting of the U.S. Conference of Mayors, the chairman said the Court also forbade the use of sampling to derive the numbers used for redistricting (i.e., drawing the political boundaries within states). Whether adjusted census numbers based on sampling can be used to distribute Federal funds, Rep. Miller noted, is "a totally separate issue." At a census subcommittee hearing last fall, the chairman said that "sampling is an issue of apportionment of representatives not, I repeat, not the distribution of federal aid" (emphasis in original statement). However, the congressman also appeared to rule out the need for a second set of counts, saying, "the Bureau has long felt that two sets of numbers would breed controversy and confusion." According to press accounts, Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH), who chairs the Census Bureau's funding subcommittee, said his panel would not provide funds for a census that includes sampling. Rep. Harold Rogers (R-KY), head of the House appropriations subcommittee, said he "expect[s] the administration to move forward with a legal census, and we've already provided the necessary money to do so." Supporters of the Census Bureau's original plan to supplement traditional counting methods with statistical sampling said that the narrow focus of the decision on apportionment means that the 2000 census must produce a second set of numbers, if the Bureau deems it feasible, for all other purposes. "The court left in place the requirement to produce accurate, adjusted numbers for distributing federal funds and drawing the lines of every federal, state and local legislative district in the country," said Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), the senior Democrat on the census subcommittee. The congresswoman said President Clinton would veto any legislation that restricted the Bureau's ability to use sampling for non-apportionment purposes. Congress must pass a spending bill by June 15 to keep funds flowing to the Census Bureau, the Commerce Department and several other federal departments. Rep. Maloney also questioned how statistically adjusted numbers would be available for distributing federal funds if the Bureau does not produce two sets of census counts. Southeastern Legal Foundation president Matthew Glavin, who filed the lawsuit that led to the Court ruling, said "the integrity of the census count, on which we base political representation across America, is protected and intact." The Citizens for an Honest Count Coalition, a group of 30 organizations opposed to sampling, hailed the Court's decision as "a great victory for the rule of law." Americans for Tax Reform, an anti-tax increase organization that spearheaded the Coalition, said the Court "blocked Clinton's population polling scheme that was a partisan attempt to gain more Democratic seats in the House of Representatives." Echoing the response of many civil rights advocates, the National Asian Pacific American Legal Consortium, which represented several parties in the lawsuit, said it would continue to press for a census that includes sampling methods to correct undercounts and overcounts for non-apportionment purposes such as redistricting and the allocation of federal funds. The Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, comprising 180 organizations, also urged Congress to lift the statutory ban on the use of sampling to produce the apportionment numbers. The American Jewish Congress said Congress must allow the use of statistical methods "if it is concerned about accurately knowing how many Americans there are and where they live." Attorneys for the City of Los Angeles, which led a group of states, cities and Members of Congress who intervened in support of the Census Bureau's plan, said they would return to court, if necessary, "to compel the use of [sampling] to assure the fair allocation of federal funds." At the Mayors' conference, Under Secretary of Commerce for Economic Affairs Robert Shapiro said the Bureau would release a new census plan in a few weeks that conforms to the Supreme Court's ruling. Rep. Miller proposes initiative to bolster traditional counting methods: Following the Supreme Court ruling last week, Rep. Miller proposed several initiatives "designed to increase local community involvement and count everyone in the next census." Calling his plan America Counts Today (ACT), the census panel chairman said the President and congressional Democrats must "put partisanship aside so we can work together to save the 2000 census." The proposal includes hiring at least 100,000 additional census enumerators to work in the hardest-to-count communities; reinstating the Post Census Local Review program (used in 1990) that gave local officials a chance to review population and housing unit counts before the final tally; adding $300 million to the $100 million paid advertising campaign; providing matching federal grants to communities and nonprofit groups for outreach activities; sending a second census form to all households; and asking Americorps participants to help with the count. In response to Miller's proposal, unveiled at the Mayors' conference, Rep. Maloney said that New York City allocated additional funds and personnel to help with the 1990 census but the effort still fell short. Relatively few people were added to the count through the Post Census Local Review program, the congresswoman said. According to Census Bureau evaluations, the 1990 program added about 125,000 people to the census at a cost of $9.6 million; subsequent research found that 12 percent of those additions were incorrect. Rep. Maloney also expressed concern about the Bureau's ability to hire more enumerators in a tight labor market. Tomorrow: Census Monitoring Board issues two reports; President sends 2000 budget request to Congress. 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>om>. Please direct all requests to receive News Alerts, and all changes in address/phone/fax/e-mail, to Census 2000 at <Census2000(a)ccmc.org> or 202/326-8700. Please feel free to circulate this information to colleagues and other interested individuals.