From: Census2000 <Census2000(a)ccmc.org> Census Bureau Releases Detailed Population Counts From Dress Rehearsal State Legislatures Weigh In on Sampling Debate The Census Bureau has released more information from last year's Census Dress Rehearsal that confirms higher undercount rates for racial and ethnic minorities. The Bureau conducted a census dry run in Sacramento, California, and Menominee County, Wisconsin that used both direct counting and statistical sampling methods. In Columbia, South Carolina and eleven surrounding counties, the Bureau relied only on so-called "traditional" counting methods. The new information includes population counts for areas as small as census blocks and includes both "adjusted" and "unadjusted" numbers for Sacramento and Menominee. The "adjusted" counts reflect corrections for under - and overcounts based on a quality-check survey (called a "post enumeration survey") conducted in those two sites. In a news release, the Bureau said: "The data showed across-the-board that the undercount, which has been measured in every census since 1940, persists today, but that scientific methods used at two of the three test sites corrected for it." In Sacramento, the overall net undercount was 6.3 percent. The undercount of whites was 4.9 percent, while the rate for African Americans was 8.4 percent; for Asians, 6 percent; for American Indians, 8.6 percent; and for Hispanics, 8.2 percent. Because Hispanics can be of any race, the difference between the undercount of non-Hispanic whites (4.7 percent) and the undercount of racial and ethnic minorities shows what historically has been called the "differential undercount". In Menominee County, which primarily covers the Menominee American Indian Reservation, the net undercount was 3.1 percent. The Bureau reported an overcount of whites (-2.8 percent), while the undercount rate for American Indians/Alaska Natives was 4.6 percent. The complete dress rehearsal results are available on the Internet through the Census Bureau's American FactFinder system at www.census.gov (in the main menu, go to "A" and then to "American FactFinder"). General information on block-level census data is available at www.census.gov/dmd/www/pl94-171.html. State legislative activities: The debate over the use of sampling methods to correct undercounts and overcounts in the census has moved beyond Washington, DC to the states. Several state legislatures are considering bills or resolutions relating to the use of corrected census numbers in the redistricting process. Resolutions generally are non-binding measures expressing the position of one or both chambers of the legislature. In Arizona, Governor Jane Hull (R-AZ) signed into law a measure prohibiting the use of census data "derived from ... the use of statistical sampling" to draw boundaries for congressional and state legislative districts. The Colorado legislature approved and sent to the governor a bill requiring the use of "population data ... that has been used to apportion the seats in the United States House of Representatives among the states" to redraw congressional and state district lines. The New York Assembly passed a resolution supporting adequate funding for a census that includes sampling methods. Other states considering bills or resolutions relating to the use of census data for redistricting include Alaska, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Maryland, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, Oklahoma, and Tennessee. State legislature support and opposition to use of sampling has been generally along party lines. For those states covered under The Voting Rights Act, these legislative actions are subject to Section 5 pre-clearance review before the proposals can become law. The Census Bureau plans to produce one set of state population totals without statistical methods, which will be used for congressional apportionment. It will then conduct a 300,000-household quality-check survey to measure and correct any undercounts and overcounts in the first set of numbers. The corrected counts will be available down to geographic areas as small as census blocks. The fiscal year 1998 census funding bill also required the Bureau to make the census numbers available for all geographic levels without any corrections based on statistical methods. "Apportionment" is the process of determining, after each census every ten years, how many seats each state is entitled to in the U.S. House of Representatives based on its population. The determination is made according to a precise mathematical formula (called the Method of Equal Proportions) set forth in law. Each state must then redraw the boundaries for its congressional districts; a process called "redistricting." The Census Bureau must transmit detailed population counts, including information on race and ethnicity, gender, and age, to the states by April 1, 2001. (This first block-level data available from each census is sometimes referred to as "P.L. 94-171 data," after the public law requiring the Bureau to provide data to the states for redistricting purposes.) Federal law does not require states to use census data for redistricting but most do for practical reasons. States also use census data to set boundaries for their own legislative (usually Assembly and Senate) districts. Legal update: Attorneys for the City of Los Angeles said in an April 15th statement that they believe further lawsuits challenging the use of statistical sampling in the census will have to wait until after the count is finished and the results are sent to the states. Brian Currey, a partner with the law firm of O'Melveny & Myers, said, "no lawsuits would be ripe for consideration until after the final census figures are released and used by a state or local government for redistricting." The firm represented numerous cities, counties, states and Members of Congress in the case decided by the Supreme Court in January. Meanwhile, Matthew Glavin, president of the Atlanta-based Southeastern Legal Foundation, criticized congressional leaders of both parties for failing to resolve the controversy over the use of statistical sampling methods in the census. Mr. Glavin was the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit challenging the use of sampling as unlawful and unconstitutional. In a written statement, Mr. Glavin said: "In a nearly unparalleled abandonment of lawmaking authority, President Clinton, U.S. House Speaker Dennis Hastert, and House Minority Leader Richard Gephardt have held our system of representative democracy and the American people in contempt by publicly surrendering their duties on the census matter under the guise of 'legislative stalemate." The Supreme Court ruled in January that the Census Act prohibits sampling to derive the state population totals used for congressional apportionment. (While the opinion bears the name Department of Commerce, et al. v. U.S. House of Representatives, et al., the Court actually dismissed that case and issued its ruling based on the claims in Glavin v. Clinton.) 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. For copies of previous news alerts and other information, use our web site http://www.census2000.org.