From: Census2000 &lt;Census2000(a)ccmc.org&gt; Census 2000 Funding Survives in the House After Heated Debate over "Emergency" Tag Legislators Must Reconcile House and Senate Bills As New Fiscal Year Approaches on October 1st Funding for Census 2000 survived a heated debate in the U.S. House of Representatives yesterday, as legislators considered a spending bill for the fiscal year starting October 1, 1999. The Fiscal Year 2000 (FY00) Commerce, Justice, State, and The Judiciary Appropriations bill (H.R. 2670) includes $4.476 billion for Census 2000 activities, $11.3 million short of President Clinton's request of $4.512 billion. (Most of the funding "cut" resulted from shifting money for development of the American Community Survey from the Census 2000 account to a separate account.) The measure designates money for Census 2000 as "emergency spending," meaning that the funds do not count against the tight caps Congress set earlier in the year for the Commerce-Justice-State budget account. The House is expected to complete action today on the $35.8 billion Commerce spending bill. The committee report explaining provisions of the appropriations bill is House Report (H. Rept.) 106-283. Dozens of lawmakers joined in the debate over an amendment offered by Rep. Tom Coburn (R-OK), to cut $2.8 billion from the census allocation of $4.476 billion. The Administration originally requested that amount for census operations next year but later asked for an extra $1.7 billion after the Supreme Court ruled that federal law required a direct count without sampling methods to calculate the state population totals for congressional apportionment. The amendment was defeated, 171 to 257, with 95 Republicans and 76 Democrats voting for the Coburn proposal. Rep. Coburn, saying the debate "wasn't even about the census," argued that calling the census an emergency was "pulling the wool over the American people's eyes." He charged that in adopting the 1997 balanced budget law, Congress failed to provide money for the census in 2000. Rep. Coburn also questioned the cost of the census, calling the $24 per household cost "abhorrent." "[The high cost] we're inefficient," the congressman said. Many legislators from both political parties who spoke in favor of the amendment said the debate was about the "integrity" of the budget process. "This [debate] is about the credibility of every Member of this body," said Rep. George Miller (D-CA). But Rep. David Obey (D-WI), senior Democrat on the appropriations committee, said the Census Bureau would not have enough money to carry out the census next year if the Coburn amendment passed. The House Rules Committee, which sets the rules for debating bills on the House floor, did not allow Rep. Obey to offer an amendment to lift the emergency designation from the Census 2000 account. The congressman said that while he favored removing the emergency tag, it would be far worse to cut funds needed for the decennial count. Rep. Dan Miller (R-FL), chairman of the census oversight subcommittee, also opposed the Coburn amendment, calling it "irresponsible." Rep. Miller said the Census Bureau needs more money to reduce the disproportionate undercount of racial minorities, immigrants, the homeless, and other hard-to-count populations. Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), the ranking Democrat on the census subcommittee, noted that the census would have cost less if congressional Republicans had not challenged the use of sampling in the original Census 2000 plan in court. Rep. Tom Sawyer (D-OH), chairman of the census subcommittee during the 1990 count, said that protracted wrangling over funding for the census could jeopardize activities, such as buying advertising slots, that must be done quickly after the new fiscal year starts. The Administration issued a "statement of policy," setting forth its views on the committee-approved version of the Commerce spending bill. While it "appreciates" the overall funding level for Census 2000, the Administration is concerned that the bill divides the money into specific operational categories. This earmarking, the statement says, "would impose unnecessary restrictions" on the Census Bureau's ability to deal with unexpected circumstances during the census, because the bill requires the agency to notify Congress 15 days before it intends to shift money from one activity to another. (See our August 2 News Alert for a complete description of the operational categories and other aspects of the committee-approved bill.) Congress will begin its summer recess period at the end of this week, returning to work after Labor Day. Legislators must then reconcile differences between the House and Senate versions of the Commerce appropriations measure. Each chamber will appoint members to a "conference committee;" traditionally, "conferees" are members of the two Appropriations Committees. After the conference committee agrees on a final spending package, the House and Senate must each approve the "conference report" before the bill is sent to the President for his signature or veto. Correction: In our August 2, 1999, News Alert, we misidentified one of the witnesses at a July 27 House census subcommittee hearing on the Census 2000 paid advertising campaign. The witness representing advertising contractor Young & Rubicam is Ms. Terry Dukes. We apologize for the mistake. 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. For copies of previous News Alerts and other information, use our web site www.census2000.org <http://www.census2000.org>. 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.