Make Science, Not Politics, Count
The Census Bureau’s release last month of its first results from the 2000 census signals the return of another controversy over counting, one that may make Florida’s hanging chads look simple. The issue is whether politics or science should govern the Census Bureau’s data.
The population numbers released Dec. 28--raw data from the decennial national head count conducted last spring--will govern congressional apportionment. Although all 50 states gained population in the 1990s, growth was greater in the West and South. California remains the nation’s most populous state with a record 33.9 million people, but it will pick up only one new seat in the U.S. House of Representatives, its smallest gain in 80 years. States including Texas, Florida, Georgia and Arizona will gain two House seats each.
The Supreme Court has ruled that only these raw population counts can determine the apportionment of congressional seats to the states. But the states themselves can--and should--use more refined numbers to redefine their congressional districts. Toward that end, the Census Bureau plans to offer a second set of state-by-state population numbers beginning in March. These figures would adjust the head counts, using long-accepted statistical sampling techniques to correct for the inevitable undercounting of some groups and double-counting of others.
Republicans have fiercely resisted sampling, and President-elect George W. Bush or Congress could block the Census Bureau’s plans. That would be a mistake.
The head count itself, while diligently conducted, is simply too enormous a task to be complete or fully accurate. The 1990 census undercounted the American population perhaps by as much as 8 million people. Many believe that poorer, urban and minority groups were disproportionately undercounted. These groups are thought more likely to vote Democratic, which accounts for the nature of the partisan battle.
Yet constitutional guarantees of equal representation depend on getting as accurate a count as possible. Beyond reapportionment, census data affect how federal funding is allocated to needs as diverse as child welfare, farm assistance and urban housing. Refining the raw population counts with conventional statistical sampling techniques can ensure that those federal dollars go to the areas of greatest need.
The Republicans’ long-running partisan crusade against sampling makes them look anti-democratic, small d. As a first step toward a cease-fire, Bush’s Commerce secretary-designate, Don Evans, whose department oversees the Census Bureau, should support the most accurate count possible. Once confirmed, Evans should retain Census Director Kenneth Prewitt at least through the spring, to lend continuity and reliability to the revised count.