[House Hearing, 106 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
OVERSIGHT OF THE 2000 CENSUS: COMMUNITY-BASED APPROACHES FOR A BETTER
ENUMERATION
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE CENSUS
of the
COMMITTEE ON
GOVERNMENT REFORM
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SIXTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
JUNE 28, 1999
__________
Serial No. 106-63
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Government Reform
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.house.gov/reform
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
61-509 CC WASHINGTON : 2000
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM
DAN BURTON, Indiana, Chairman
BENJAMIN A. GILMAN, New York HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
CONSTANCE A. MORELLA, Maryland TOM LANTOS, California
CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, Connecticut ROBERT E. WISE, Jr., West Virginia
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida MAJOR R. OWENS, New York
JOHN M. McHUGH, New York EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York
STEPHEN HORN, California PAUL E. KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania
JOHN L. MICA, Florida PATSY T. MINK, Hawaii
THOMAS M. DAVIS, Virginia CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York
DAVID M. McINTOSH, Indiana ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, Washington,
MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana DC
JOE SCARBOROUGH, Florida CHAKA FATTAH, Pennsylvania
STEVEN C. LaTOURETTE, Ohio ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland
MARSHALL ``MARK'' SANFORD, South DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio
Carolina ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH, Illinois
BOB BARR, Georgia DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois
DAN MILLER, Florida JOHN F. TIERNEY, Massachusetts
ASA HUTCHINSON, Arkansas JIM TURNER, Texas
LEE TERRY, Nebraska THOMAS H. ALLEN, Maine
JUDY BIGGERT, Illinois HAROLD E. FORD, Jr., Tennessee
GREG WALDEN, Oregon JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois
DOUG OSE, California ------
PAUL RYAN, Wisconsin BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont
HELEN CHENOWETH, Idaho (Independent)
DAVID VITTER, Louisiana
Kevin Binger, Staff Director
Daniel R. Moll, Deputy Staff Director
David A. Kass, Deputy Counsel and Parliamentarian
Carla J. Martin, Chief Clerk
Phil Schiliro, Minority Staff Director
------
Subcommittee on the Census
DAN MILLER, Florida, Chairman
THOMAS M. DAVIS, Virginia CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York
PAUL RYAN, Wisconsin DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois
MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana HAROLD E. FORD, Jr., Tennessee
Ex Officio
DAN BURTON, Indiana HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
Thomas B. Hofeller, Staff Director
Kelly Duquin, Professional Staff Member
Mark Stephenson, Minority Professional Staff Member
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on June 28, 1999.................................... 1
Statement of:
Jacobson, Jean, Racine County executive...................... 24
Ladwig, Bonnie L., Wisconsin State representative; and
Gwendolynne S. Moore, Wisconsin State senator.............. 12
Robinson, Nathaniel E., administrator, Division of Energy and
Intergovernmental Relations, Office of Governor Tommy G.
Thompson; Allan K. Kehl, Kenosha County executive; and Dr.
Paul Voss, Department of Rural Sociology, University of
Wisconsin at Madison, WI................................... 43
Smith, James M., mayor, city of Racine, WI; and John M.
Antaramian, mayor, city of Kenosha, WI..................... 28
Letters, statements, etc., submitted for the record by:
Antaramian, John M., mayor, city of Kenosha, WI, prepared
statement of............................................... 34
Kehl, Allan K., Kenosha County executive, prepared statement
of......................................................... 47
Ladwig, Bonnie L., Wisconsin State representative, prepared
statement of............................................... 15
Maloney, Hon. Carolyn B., a Representative in Congress from
the State of New York, article dated December 2, 1998...... 57
Ryan, Hon. Paul, a Representative in Congress from the State
of Wisconsin, prepared statement of........................ 8
Smith, James M., mayor, city of Racine, WI, prepared
statement of............................................... 30
Voss, Dr. Paul, Department of Rural Sociology, University of
Wisconsin at Madison, WI, prepared statement of............ 51
OVERSIGHT OF THE 2000 CENSUS: COMMUNITY-BASED APPROACHES FOR A BETTER
ENUMERATION
----------
MONDAY, JUNE 28, 1999
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on the Census,
Committee on Government Reform,
Racine, WI.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:13 a.m., in
the Racine City Council Chambers, 730 Washington Avenue,
Racine, WI, Hon. Dan Miller (chairman of the subcommittee)
presiding.
Present: Representatives Miller, Ryan, and Maloney.
Also present: Representative Petri.
Staff present: Jo Powers, assistant press secretary; Kelly
Duquin, professional staff member; and Mark Stephenson,
minority professional staff member.
Mr. Miller. Good morning. The Subcommittee on the Census
will have its field hearing and we will start.
I apologize for the delay. My plane just sat at the
National Airport because the crew had gotten in late the night
before and had to wait 8 hours before they could begin the
flight. Normally when you start a flight early in the morning,
you are safe, but I was not. Congresswoman Maloney had a
similar problem, but she got in at 1 a.m. But we are here, and
we appreciate your patience to allow us to begin late and if
necessary, we will juggle the schedule.
The process is we will have some opening statements by the
Members of Congress here this morning and then we will go to
our first panel.
Let me thank everyone for having us here today and my
fellow committee members here, and Congressman Petri joining us
also, and the distinguished witnesses.
I am pleased to be here in Congressman Paul Ryan's district
this morning, and I thank him for requesting that we come here
to Racine, and for so graciously hosting this hearing. I would
also like to thank his staff for the invaluable assistance in
making this hearing possible.
We began this series of field hearings in December of last
year with our first one in Miami and our second in Phoenix.
Today's hearing will continue a commitment I made last
September at a hearing in Washington to reach out to those
undercounted in the 1990 census in their own community. If we
want a better census in 2000, we must draw from the expertise
and knowledge of the people in the field.
I am gratified to be continuing the national conversation
regarding the 2000 census, and in the process, fulfilling the
commitment I made last September. Members of Congress do spend
the bulk of their time in Washington--it comes with the job.
Through the field hearing process, my colleagues and I have
benefited greatly from rediscovering, or even discovering for
the first time, the distinct characteristics of each region of
the country--indeed, specific communities.
I know when it comes time to conduct a decennial census, it
is members of those communities that will make it happen. From
the many field hearings held in Washington, I know the Census
Bureau, with a great deal of input from outside groups, has
created a new program and aspects of publicity in an effort to
make the 2000 census the most accurate ever. These include
local updates of census addresses, partnership programs, a paid
advertising campaign, Census in the Schools Program and
improved promotion outreach.
Unfortunately, the Bureau decided against a post-census
local review program, which proved very valuable in 1990. I am
interested in hearing how many local officials feel about
inclusion or exclusion of these and other programs and how they
might be proceeding. They will, of course, only be as effective
as each community wants them to be.
Some communities may even have their own twist on a
specific Bureau program to make it more effective for their
particular area. And that is why we are here today, to find out
how Racine, Kenosha and the entire State of Wisconsin are
working toward the most accurate 2000 count possible, with and
without ideas from Washington, DC.
Let me also state for the record, this is not a hearing to
debate the use of sampling in the 2000 census. The Supreme
Court ruled in January of this year that a full enumeration
must be conducted. Regardless of one's views on the subject, we
must all agree any census will only be as good as its base
count. As April 1, 2000 draws ever close, we must focus our
efforts on achieving the best count possible and stop wasting
our time and energy fighting a fight that has been settled by
the Supreme Court and six Federal judges.
The face of our country and communities change every day.
We must work hard, harder than ever before, to keep pace with
that change. The census is the very core of our democracy. It
cannot be the result of anything less than our absolute best
effort.
I am certain that every witness we will hear from today has
the same goal: the best count possible for Wisconsin and our
Nation. As leaders in your communities, you are well aware of
how much your constituents are affected by your efforts. While
the census may seem mundane to some, you understand and
appreciate its significance and importance on the Federal and
local levels. It cannot be done without your help and I look
forward to hearing your ideas and input, and I thank you for
your commitment to this very important issue.
At this time, I would like to call on the ranking member,
Congresswoman Maloney from New York.
Mrs. Maloney. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Paul
Ryan, for hosting us. And again, I thank you and your staff for
your efforts to make our visit here pleasant.
This is an important hearing. I must say, we have been all
around the country. As the chairman said, we have been in
Arizona, we have been in California for a different hearing and
down in Florida. But when I arrived here in Racine, I felt like
I was in upstate New York. In Florida, you know you are in a
different part of the country, but a lot of it looks very
similar to my own State.
I think it is really important for the subcommittee to go
out and hear from local communities and to visit the places
where the rubber hits the road, to hear from the people that
are directly affected by the census.
I only hope that in the near future we can visit a few more
cities in our oversight capacity. For example, my hometown, the
city of New York, was terribly undercounted in the 1990 census,
as was Congressman Davis' great city of Chicago, also a member
of the committee. I know that Representative Davis and I would
welcome the subcommittee to our States at any time.
Today, we are going to be hearing from a number of
distinguished government representatives and academics. As we
have heard in our other field hearings, the State of Wisconsin
and the American Indian tribes in this area also have a strong
interest in an accurate census 2000. As many of you know, the
State of Wisconsin made extraordinary efforts in 1990--and I
see my colleague, Mr. Petri, who probably led many of those
efforts--to ensure that all of its residents were counted. And
they should be commended for these efforts. Wisconsin was a
model for the Nation in 1990, and I hope the same will be true
in 2000.
Outreach and promotion efforts included gathering advice
from local officials, building trust in communities, creating
census day events and spending significant resources. Elected
and appointed local government officials, community and
neighborhood organizations and the Census Bureau worked in a
coordinated effort to count Wisconsin residents. These efforts
paid off. The mail back response rate for Wisconsin was 77
percent, 13 points above the national average. Dr. Barbara
Bryant, the Director of the 1990 census, presented this State
with an award for having the highest mail back rate in the
country.
In 1990, the undercounts for Wisconsin and Racine County
were 0.6 percent and 0.7 percent respectively--among the lowest
in the Nation. Yet, despite these extraordinary efforts, the
1990 census undercounted Milwaukee by 2.3 percent. Over one-
half of Wisconsin's undercounted community was located in
Milwaukee. Almost 5 percent of Milwaukee's African-Americans,
10,000 people, were missed in 1990; 3.5 percent of Racine's
African-Americans were missed. By contrast, only 0.8 percent of
the whites in Milwaukee and 0.3 percent of the whites in Racine
were missed.
It is these different rates of undercount which are most
troubling. The 1990 census was the most examined census in the
history of this country. The total error rate for the 1990
census was over 10 percent--26 million people were miscounted.
There were 8.4 million people missed, 4.4 million people were
counted twice and 13 million people were counted in the wrong
place. To make matters worse, the people missed and the people
counted twice are quite different. The people missed in the
census are minorities and children, American Indians, Hispanics
and Asians as well as the urban and rural poor. The people
counted twice in the census tended to be affluent suburbanites,
those who might be fortunate enough to have two homes.
Today, we review how local communities are working for an
accurate count and there are a number of components to a
successful census, which require active involvement by local
communities. Without these efforts, the undercount for 2000
could exceed that of 1990. However, as we listen to these
ideas, we must keep in mind that promotion and outreach alone
will not solve the problem of an undercount, which is much
larger in poor and minority communities than in the rest of the
world--or the rest of the country.
Let me mention a few ways in which local communities can
help. First, there must be an accurate address list--the Bureau
cannot meet that goal without the help of local governments.
The Bureau needs local governments to evaluate its list of
addresses for the communities. If the Census Bureau and local
communities can agree on the addresses to be counted, most of
the controversy we saw during local review following the 1990
census can be avoided.
Second, there must be a large advertising and promotion
program. The Bureau cannot do that without advice from
community leaders on the kinds of messages that will convince
people to participate. The Bureau also can use advice on the
best vehicle for these messages. Tailoring the advertising
campaign to local communities cannot be done without community
involvement.
Third, the Census Bureau must recruit and hire hundreds of
thousands of temporary workers. It is important that wherever
possible, these workers come from the community being counted.
The Census Bureau cannot do that without referrals from
individuals in all economic sectors who can identify potential
applicants.
Fourth, there must be language assistance guides and
questionnaire assistance centers to help people, particularly
those with limited English skills. The Census Bureau cannot do
that without help from community leaders in identifying the
best locations for assistance centers and volunteers to help
staff those activities.
Mr. Chairman, I have listed only four ways in which the
local communities can help the Census Bureau achieve a more
accurate count, but of course there are many more ways, and I
know that we will hear some very good ideas today.
However, what we have learned from past census' is that
these efforts cost money. The majority in Congress won their
case in court and based on the statute, the Supreme Court ruled
that enumeration must be used for apportionment reasons, which
is the allocation between seats between the States. So in a
sense, Wisconsin won in that effort. Yet the court said that
the use of a modern scientific count could be used for the
purposes of distribution of Federal funds and the count for
redistricting. And for the distribution of Federal funds, this
would, of course, help the State, and particularly the city of
Milwaukee, which was undercounted quite dramatically.
As a result of the Supreme Court case, the census is going
to cost an extra $1.7 billion. Yet I know that even after
spending an extra $1.7 billion, and even after increased
efforts are made to boost local participation, there will be a
large undercount in Milwaukee and similar places, just like in
1990. If modern scientific methods are not used, the Census
Bureau estimates that the net undercount for 2000 will increase
by almost 25 percent nationwide. This means that if it is not
corrected, then these localities will lose millions in Federal
assistance. If the same holds true for Milwaukee, 1 out of
every 16 African-Americans will be missed. The Census Bureau
needs everyone's help to complete what is an unbelievably
difficult task.
I look forward to today's testimony and I hope we can
provide the Census Bureau with some very useful ideas of how
localities can work with the Census Bureau for a better count.
Again, I thank my distinguished chairman and all the
distinguished members of the panel for being here today and for
their assistance and for their hard work.
Thank you.
Mr. Miller. Thank you. We indeed have a great challenge to
conduct this 2000 census, but we can learn a lot from the past.
And in the 1990 census, as Congresswoman Maloney said,
Wisconsin had the highest mail response rate, and we learn a
great deal from that.
My predecessor in charge of the census issue is the current
Speaker of the House Denny Hastert. He had a hearing a few
years ago, and I think Mr. Petri may have attended and
participated, where they investigated why and how they were so
successful. But this year, we are fortunate to have on our
subcommittee, Paul Ryan, a new Member of Congress, but one who
has a very special interest because of the interest that the
entire State of Wisconsin has demonstrated in the census. So we
are delighted that he helped bring this hearing to Racine and
to Wisconsin, and we are now ready for your opening statement.
Mr. Ryan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
First, I just would like to welcome everybody and thank you
very much for coming. I really appreciate the fact that Mrs.
Maloney, you were able to come here from New York and I really
appreciate the chairman coming here to handle this hearing.
We have done a good job in Wisconsin in participating in
the census. We can do a better job, but I think there is a lot
we can learn from local officials here in Wisconsin on how we
can do a better job of participating in the census.
I see the census as a cooperative effort, a bipartisan
cooperative effort between local, State and Federal officials
to make sure we get the best possible number, because no one
can disagree with the fact that we need an accurate count and
accurate census.
I will be brief with my remarks because we got kind of a
late start, but my highest priority is an accurate census. The
importance of a census to our system of government cannot be
stressed enough. It was specifically provided for in our
Constitution. The founders of our country clearly felt that it
was vital to ensure fair representation for the citizens of
this country. The census right here in Wisconsin is especially
important. Getting an accurate count may mean a difference of
as much as $24 million per year in Wisconsin. That is $240
million over the next decade in Federal funding for the people
of Wisconsin, at a minimum, according to the General Accounting
Office.
The census numbers are the numbers local communities will
use to plan for economic development, land use and school
districts, among many other things. These numbers will be used
for the next decade to determine available funds and allocation
of resources. Because of this, we must focus our attention on
ways to achieve the best count possible for the citizens of our
State.
Sampling is not an option, according to the Supreme Court.
Our Constitution states that ``an actual enumeration must be
performed.'' The communities of Wisconsin must work together to
develop methods that will help us achieve the best enumeration.
Programs focused on outreach and local government review,
in my opinion, will give us the accuracy we are looking for.
Local governments know how important an accurate census is to
the representation--just ask anybody. The local governments do
not need an incentive program to increase their desire to have
everyone counted, they just need the tools to make sure that it
actually happens. The Census Bureau can do that by working with
them to focus on areas that are typically undercounted, to
develop partnerships and suggest methods of outreach.
We must do everything possible to ensure that this year's
census plan is on the right track. Among other things, the
Local Census Quality Check Act of 1999, which passed the House
of Representatives earlier this year, is a program that would
allow local officials to check numbers after the census. It is
a program that has been suggested as a way to lay the
foundation for a successful census through actual enumeration.
The local updating of census addresses program is another
one that the Census Bureau is actually engaging in currently.
The LUCA program has been in use in cities across the country
to provide a check prior to the census.
These are voluntary programs, and one of the purposes of
having this hearing is to raise awareness to the voluntary
nature of participating in the census. It is our intent to have
this hearing right here in Racine, in southern Wisconsin, to
raise awareness of all of our efforts as local officials, to
make sure that we participate to the fullest extent possible in
the actual enumeration in this year's census. It means quite a
bit to our communities. These voluntary programs allow the
input of local government as a check on the data obtained by
the Census Bureau. Local government officials, in my opinion,
know their jurisdiction a lot better than officials in
Washington do. They are in the best position to point out flaws
in district maps or neighborhoods that are being undercounted.
They will help to ensure that all people in their areas are
counted.
Other programs, such as outreach in the schools, churches,
and business communities, or the recruitment of census workers
from the community may also be helpful in ensuring accurate
counts in our communities.
I am anxious to hear from the witnesses here today. We have
also been doing some outreach with local government officials
in southern Wisconsin. About 3 months ago, I sent out a mailing
to all elected officials in southern Wisconsin in the First
Congressional District, asking for their input as to whether or
not they think input in the census would be valuable, would
they participate, do they think it would be helpful. And I just
want to briefly mention a couple of those quotes after this
mailing.
Mayor Jim Smith, who is going to be with us here
testifying, early on in response to some of the local efforts
that we are trying to get involved with the Census Bureau, said
this: ``We have had a very positive experience working with the
Census Bureau on local update of census addresses for the year
2000 census. We would anticipate it would be very beneficial to
both the Census Bureau and the city of Racine to have an
opportunity to review maps and addresses after the count has
been completed.''
Sheila Seigler, the town clerk of Wheatland, said, ``I
believe the very best attempt should be made to get an accurate
count and local review would aid that process.''
In Evansville, Jennifer Petruzello, who is the city
administrator over there, we talked about this after our town
hall meeting, said ``The city would appreciate the opportunity
to review survey data and will work with the Census Bureau to
ensure an accurate count of the citizens in our county.''
Throughout southern Wisconsin, local community leaders and
elected officials are eager and ready to get working on having
an accurate census. What we would like to hear from today is
your input, how can we best achieve this, what do you think of
local efforts? And hopefully we can share ideas on how we can
get the best enumeration through for the 2000 census.
I would like to once again thank the members of the
committee for traveling here to Racine to have this hearing. I
think that we have a lot to offer in this dialog right here
from southern Wisconsin and I would like to thank all of the
witnesses for coming to participate in this today and I look
forward to everyone's testimony.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Miller. Thank you, Paul. Congressman Petri, did you
want to make an opening statement? Congressman Petri is not
officially a member of our committee, but obviously he is a
very important Member of Congress. During the 1990 census, he
was very actively involved in Congress on the particular
subcommittee that ran the issue of the census oversight.
[The prepared statement of Hon. Paul Ryan follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED]61509.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED]61509.002
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED]61509.003
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED]61509.004
Mr. Petri. I just wanted to join Congressman Ryan in
thanking you, Mr. Chairman, and your senior Democratic member,
Representative Maloney--you representing the Sarasota area of
Florida and she Manhattan out in the New York City area--for
coming all the way out here to Wisconsin to listen and to
receive the input of officials in southeast Wisconsin about how
to improve the census.
I really want to commend Paul Ryan for his leadership and
initiative in organizing this hearing here today. I think it is
a testimony to the respect and effectiveness that he has
displayed that this hearing is being held here in Racine today.
And I think we probably should be thanking Mayor Smith for
making this beautiful facility available for us and also all of
the witnesses for the effort that went into their testimony.
Thank you.
Mr. Miller. Thank you.
We will go ahead and proceed. Our first two witnesses will
be the Honorable Bonnie Ladwig and the Honorable Gwendolynne
Moore. If they would come up.
We had our first hearing in Miami last December with
Congresswoman Carrie Meek, and we focused on inner-city issues
and the large immigrant population that Miami has, both Haitian
and Hispanic. Then, when we were in Phoenix, it was really
focused on the American Indians. We had members of tribal
leaders who testified on that focus there.
So we really do learn a lot from these. This is to see what
real America is like. Now a lot of the people here are going
down to my district in Sarasota, FL for the winter and we
appreciate that. So we have a little connection here.
Congressman Petri's in-laws vacation in my area in the winter
time.
But this is a Federal hearing of the Government Reform
Committee. It is a requirement of our committee that we swear
in our witnesses. So if you would both stand and raise your
right hands and repeat after me.
[Witnesses sworn.]
Mr. Miller. Please be seated and let the record reflect
that the witnesses answered in the affirmative. Now we will
have opening statements. Ms. Ladwig, would you like to begin?
STATEMENTS OF BONNIE L. LADWIG, WISCONSIN STATE REPRESENTATIVE;
AND GWENDOLYNNE S. MOORE, WISCONSIN STATE SENATOR
Ms. Ladwig. Thank you, Chairman Miller and the members of
this Subcommittee on the Census. Thank you for inviting me to
testify in front of you today and thank you for coming to
Racine.
I am State Representative Bonnie Ladwig. I represent parts
of the Racine area. I have been in the State assembly for 7
years. Before that, I served on the Racine County Board for 12
years. I bring kind of a different perspective because I have
served as a census crew leader in 1970, as well as a quality
inspector for the 1980 census. So, I feel I am quite well
versed on the whole census process.
I do not think I need to tell anyone here how crucial the
census is going to be for Wisconsin. With both Federal money
and a congressional seat at stake, we have got to make sure
that every person is reached with this count. And depending on
how accurate the census is, Wisconsin could lose $240 million
in the next decade.
I know there are numerous plans already underway to raise
awareness about the upcoming census, but I wanted to bring up a
way that I believe would be very effective. People fear what
they do not know. We live in an age where the protection of
privacy is key to most people. They are very leery about giving
out any information about themselves and their families for
fear of fraud or even identity theft. They need to know that
this is not the case, that is not what the census is used for.
We have to educate the people about what it is, what the census
is and how the information is to be used. They need to know
that this is not for some mailing list that is going to be sold
or for the FBI to keep tabs on them. They have to know what is
really on the line. And I believe that if the people in Racine
knew that millions of dollars in Federal aid and congressional
seats were up for grabs, they would be much more likely to
participate in the census. The message needs to reach them that
this is not a bad thing.
One of the concerns, I know when I had worked on the
census, was a long form versus a short form. We did find people
who get the short form are very willing to fill it out; there
are not a lot of invasive questions. When you get to the long
form, it takes quite a long time to fill it out to begin with,
and a lot of the questions are very personal. I know we
frequently had to call people when we did not get a form from a
certain address, and if that did not work, we had to go out to
their homes. You did not go out just once, twice, or three
times. You made sure that you got every form that you could
get, that was humanly possible. So, I think it is very
important to educate the people about how many people get the
long form and exactly what that long form is used for.
Another thing that I would like to mention is the important
role our children play in educating parents. I am beyond the
small children age, but I do have grandchildren. And whether we
realize it or not, our children are a wealth of knowledge. Most
of our children are in the school system we currently have, and
I believe this is a perfect opportunity to reach a majority of
families. If we educate the children, they will take home what
they learn, and in turn, educate the parents. By getting the
children involved, you can really make this a family affair
while preparing the children for the future, when they will be
the ones filling out the forms. We will be teaching them early
to be responsible citizens. I know on election day, if the
polling places are held in schools, frequently the classrooms
will come in. We will let them use sample ballots as if they
are voting. They, in turn, then go home and tell their parents
about it. The same thing could be done with the census, using
sample census forms in the classroom. Just have a census within
the classroom and see then what the children will take home to
their parents.
I truly believe that education will be the key to getting
an accurate count. If people know what they are filling out and
why, I think we will greatly increase participation. When you
get children and the community involved, the number will go up.
Local elected officials are also very important. They are
dealing with their constituents on a daily basis. Most
communities have enhanced 911 systems, which do have a record
of all the homes, so that you should not be missing the homes.
You might miss somebody in the home, but at least you should be
able to have an accurate account of every home, as well as
school censuses that are done locally.
I thank you for giving me the chance to testify in front of
you today and I welcome any questions you might have. Thank
you.
Mr. Miller. Thank you very much, Ms. Ladwig.
Senator Moore, would you like to make your statement?
[The prepared statement of Ms. Ladwig follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED]61509.005
Ms. Moore. Thank you so much, Honorable Dan Miller of
Florida and Honorable Carolyn Maloney from New York. I
certainly would like to join our own First District Congressman
Paul Ryan in welcoming you here to Racine, and I am also happy
to see Honorable Congressman Tom Petri here as well.
I was born in Racine, so Representative Maloney, I can
assure you this is not upstate New York, but this is the center
of the known universe. [Laughter.]
I am really privileged to be a member of the Wisconsin
State Senate. I am one of two African-Americans who serve in
that 33-member body, and I am the first African-American woman
to ever have served in the Senate in the State's 150-year
history. I occupy a Senate seat that was created during the
1990 redistricting plan. The map was drawn by a Federal court.
And so I have a real particular interest in apportionment and
redistricting as it relates to representation of minority
people.
As well as being concerned about this as a local issue, I
am a member of the Black Leadership Forum. The Black Leadership
Forum is a consortium of national organizations that represent
the African-American interests, including, for example, the
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, the
National Urban League, the Congressional Black Caucus, the
National Black Caucus of State Legislators, Council of Negro
Women and so on and so forth. This consortium is chaired by
Reverend Joseph Lowery of Atlanta, GA and the executive
director is Dr. Yvonne Scruggs, who was formerly, I believe,
the deputy mayor of Philadelphia.
In addition, I am honored this year to have been elected as
the Chair of the Wisconsin Legislative Black and Hispanic
Caucus. Our caucus joins those national organizations in
advocating for increased electoral representation and
additional resources for traditionally undercounted and
underrepresented minorities.
Our caucus has a powerful interest in both accuracy, the
best enumeration possible, as well as the use of statistical
sampling. We do recognize, as Wisconsinites, the irony of
wanting an accurate count, if in fact that means that other
congressional districts that may be more populous would pick up
a seat and perhaps we would lose one. However, if these worst
fears are realized, we are particularly concerned, because we
believe that the minorities in this State will endure and bear
the most disparate impact.
I think it was Representative Maloney that mentioned
earlier in her comments that half of the people who were
missed--albeit we did a fantastic job of enumerating our people
in 1990--half of those people who were missed were from the
city of Milwaukee, the city which I represent, 30 miles north
of Racine here. The second locus point in the universe.
But in all seriousness, Milwaukee is a very diverse
community. Racine here has the second largest concentration of
African-Americans. There are a great number of Mexican-
Americans who live here in Racine as well, and we are concerned
that the redistricting process be fair so that we can at least
retain the representation that we have and not endure a loss of
State representatives; if in fact our worst fears are realized,
that we will not lose a congressional district here in
southeastern Wisconsin.
There is one African-American State representative that
represents the city of Racine here, and all of the other State
legislators, State representatives, represent districts in
Milwaukee.
Does that red light mean anything?
Mr. Miller. That means about 5 minutes, but go ahead.
Ms. Moore. So I am going to try to wind up. We are not
debating the U.S. Supreme Court decision. Again, our caucus has
an interest in the most accurate enumeration and the use of
statistical sampling. We are concerned that 77 percent of those
in Wisconsin who are undercounted are children, and we need
this information for accurate and critical planning for
education, health care, transportation and housing.
And I guess the bottom line is that I would like to
associate myself with all of the wonderful strategies that
Representative Ladwig has laid out, and the bottom line is that
we need money for that. I think that any of the strategies that
would be employed ultimately will require face-to-face contact
with our constituents. There is no replacement for that. And
that will cost money. I think we ought to hire minorities in
Wisconsin and other places around the country to make those
door-to-door contacts, to guarantee the best enumeration
possible.
Thank you for your indulgence today. I would be happy also
to answer any questions.
Mr. Miller. Thank you. We will proceed to a question
period. We use the light for our 5 minute program. This is what
we do in Congress, it is how you keep on schedule the best you
can, with our little light system.
The focus of this is to try to get a better understanding
of what we can do to get the best count possible and see right
at the local level how we do that.
Representative Ladwig, I will just respond to a couple
comments you made. The long form is a concern. One out of every
six gets the long form. The short form is down to six or seven
questions now and that is what obviously the majority of the
people will receive. The long form is very detailed and asks a
lot of personal information. This may be the last time that we
will do the long form. It will be conducted next year but they
are experimenting with something called the American Community
Survey and something that would be done annually, each year for
10 years, and in effect, accomplish the same information. But
we are going to have it this coming year.
One program that I am very excited about that the Census
Bureau has is the Census in the Schools Program. It is going to
be run by Scholastic, Inc., it is contracted out, where they
will contact elementary school teachers, and they have a packet
of information. I went to the initial presentation on it with
Secretary Daley, the Secretary of the Commerce Department, and
Dr. Prewitt, the Director of the Census Bureau, unveiling the
plan. It is right now only going to be presented to 40 percent
of the school teachers in this country and then the principals
receive it for the rest. I think it should be expanded to 100
percent of the teachers, and so we are going to push to include
that funding.
Senator Moore, you mentioned the funding. This is a very
expensive process, we are going to spend over $4 billion this
next fiscal year. And this current fiscal year, we are spending
over $1 billion preparing for the census. And Congress has not
been afraid to spend the money. We know this is a
Constitutional responsibility. I know we have a lot of other
needs for money, but this is one that the Constitution Article
I very specifically states for us.
Our concern is how do we reduce the undercount, especially
in the minority communities. That is the reason we were in
Phoenix and the reason we were in Miami and that is what we are
looking for here.
A couple of questions. Why do you think minorities do not
participate in the census? They do not respond to the same rate
of mail. What are your opinions about why that would be the
case, and what can we do specifically? How do we reach
minorities, say, in your Senate District? Are they afraid to
respond? I mean, you know, there are some people, very
conservative people on the far right, that are afraid of the
government and do not want to give any information. What could
you share on that?
Ms. Moore. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the question.
I did not spend a lot of time in my testimony enumerating
various specific strategies because I really meant it when I
said I thought the bottom line was door-to-door, face-to-face
contact. I do think that some of the things that Representative
Ladwig mentioned were very important, particularly as it
relates to people concerned about illegal alien status,
language barriers, cultural barriers, the belief that the
census will be used for purposes other than enumeration, would
be cross-referenced with other kinds of public assistance
records or warrants for arrests that may be outstanding. And it
is only the reassurance of people who live in the neighborhood,
people perhaps who they have seen or run into in the grocery
store, people who speak their language, that have even a
possibility of breaking through those barriers.
Another thing is, I think people are barely literate, and
so I think when they do receive information in the mail, they
are less likely to respond. And there is a lot of trouble
responding to mail. You have got to get a stamp; you have got
to take it back to the mailbox. And if you are like Gwen Moore
here, you do not get a chance to respond to your mail as often
as you do to an interview that might present itself right there
at that time.
I do think that the face-to-face contact is the only way to
break through some of the barriers and to use local people who
can relate to the residents therein. That is absolutely the
best possible solution. I do not know if it is appropriate to
offer people incentives or bonuses for the correct enumeration,
but if that were possible, that would be something that I would
certainly suggest.
Mr. Miller. Ms. Ladwig, would you like to elaborate on
that?
Ms. Ladwig. Well, I think what Senator Moore said, it is
the door-to-door contact, especially again with the long form,
where you have to go out and explain to the people what it is
being used for; no, it will not be used for W-2, it will not be
used for the Sheriff's Department warrants or even for child
support payments. And using people from the neighborhood, I do
not know if it necessarily would work real well, because do you
want your next door neighbor to know all the personal
information. But if you could use somebody of the same
nationality or race, I think that would be very important.
Mr. Miller. Thank you. Mrs. Maloney.
Mrs. Maloney. Following up on the chairman's question. Both
of you in your testimony said that many people in the hardest
to enumerate populations have a general mistrust of the Federal
Government. You mentioned that. Particularly Senator Moore, as
the Chair of the Black and Hispanic Caucus, what are you doing
already to help with the census? What could we do to alleviate
these fears and concerns? And is there something other than
explaining the confidentiality that you just went through, Ms.
Ladwig, that it is only confidential information with the
Census Bureau, is there something more that the Bureau could be
doing besides explaining confidentiality and hiring members
from communities as you mentioned? Can you think of anything
else we could do to break through?
Ms. Moore. One of the things that I have thought of is a
secondary way. The Census Bureau could use local programming,
commercials, and radio programming--particularly effective with
some of the smaller communities--to provide a very culturally
specific message, to actually have actors say that these files
will not be cross matched with other sorts of files, like I
think she mentioned the child support files. It is a very
delicate issue, because I love the idea of collecting child
support, it is one of my favorite ideas. But I know it is very
intimidating.
I think it is important to use local talent, cultural
messages and to have the advertisement address those very
sensitive issues.
Mrs. Maloney. Do you think radio ads are more effective
than newspaper ads?
Ms. Moore. Oh, absolutely. In the minority community,
absolutely. I hope there is no print media here. Print media is
out for sure. Radio is the way to go, for sure, in local,
smaller areas.
Mrs. Maloney. It is my understanding that Governor Thompson
asked for $750,000 for census outreach and that the legislature
did not meet this request. Can you explain why, when you said
you think it would be very helpful?
Ms. Ladwig. I think----
Ms. Moore. We did.
Ms. Ladwig. You did do that. I think the 750 that you are
referring to is the money the assembly took out for public
campaign finance.
Mrs. Maloney. Oh, really? Did he get extra money for census
outreach?
Ms. Moore. I do not want to misspeak. The budget has not
passed yet. We are planning on debating it tomorrow perhaps,
but I do believe that the Senate version of the budget has
moneys included for census data. You know, I do not want to
bash our Governor here and there. Is a representative from the
Governor's Office here who perhaps can better answer that
question? But the Governor's proposal, his budget that he
provides to us, would need to have included that amount of
money. I am a member of the Joint Committee on Finance and we
took no action to delete any funds that were provided by the
Governor. So we should probably defer.
Ms. Ladwig. I would also like to just mention, I think ways
that it could be addressed is local cable TV lets your local
legislators put on 20 second public service comments. I think
that would be something that all legislators across Wisconsin
could do. We all write news columns for your weekly newspapers.
We could address it in those columns. We send out newsletters
where it could be addressed, as well as letters to the editor.
Mrs. Maloney. Ms. Moore, do you believe that the
differential undercount, which as you know is primarily
children and minorities in both rural and urban areas, can be
eliminated with the use of modern scientific methods on top of
enumeration?
Ms. Moore. Oh, I am absolutely relying on the scientific
sampling principles to bridge that gap. I do not think that
with our best efforts--and Milwaukee had a major effort done by
people who are very reliable, very responsible and this
undercount was still there. I do believe that the application
of scientific principles does provide the opportunity for the
minority community to, in particular, get the financial
resources that are so critical toward our very survival.
If in fact Wisconsin loses a congressional seat, I guess it
is my understanding that we would also lose Federal funds
proportionate to that, and I think our Congressman Ryan
mentioned earlier that that can be up to $240 million over 10
years. I would be very concerned about the distribution of that
loss throughout the State and I would be very concerned if in
fact Milwaukee, Racine, places here in southeastern Wisconsin
that bear a lot of the social burdens of low-income poor
minority folk, would have to realize the brunt of that loss. So
I am very relieved that at least a portion of the apportionment
process is going to be more accurate so that at least resources
will not be lost.
Certainly our State has just elected its very first
Hispanic to the State legislature and it takes about 15,000
votes to elect someone to the State legislature. So any small
undercount of minorities, ethnic minorities, is the difference
between our having an assembly seat or not having an assembly
seat. And certainly I am the product of a seat that was created
by a U.S. District Court to advance the interests of more
minority representation in our State. We are not a Texas or a
California or a Mississippi or Georgia or Alabama, but our
interests are the same as other ethnic minorities throughout
the country in being counted.
Mrs. Maloney. Well, my time is up. I must say I have
enjoyed tremendously being addressed by two women members of
the legislature. There are always firsts. This is the first
time it has happened in all our hearings, so it is wonderful to
have two very informed members of the legislature here. We
appreciate very much your time and your input.
Ms. Moore. And we appreciate it too. We sent our first
woman to Congress last time and so now only Mississippi has
never elected a woman to Congress. So, we are relieved not to
be the very last State to do that. [Laughter.]
Mr. Miller. Thank you. One comment just to confirm and
assure the question about confidentiality. There are very
strict Federal laws as to what the census information can be
used for. And it is protected--it is very well protected. It
cannot be shared with other Federal agencies. And so I think
whenever we go through this process, we should all be
comfortable in assuring the confidentiality and the privacy of
that information.
Congressman Ryan.
Mr. Ryan. Thank you. Well, I too would just like to thank
you ladies for coming to us today. Thank you for taking time
out of your busy schedule, Representative Ladwig and Senator
Moore, I really appreciate your participation.
I wanted to ask you a question on local review, but first I
would like to touch briefly on the issue that we have been
talking about. As you know, I represent the First Congressional
District, which has large pockets and a concentration of
minority members, especially here in Racine, and in Kenosha as
well. So I, too, absolutely believe we have got to do
everything we can to make sure that these populations are
accounted for in the census. And if they are not, that will
dilute the representation, not only in Congress, but it will
dilute the representation in State and local government and in
Federal funding and all other important issues.
What we have found is that in a forthcoming study from the
Census Monitoring Board statistical sampling will actually harm
those neighborhoods, will actually hurt those historically
undercounted areas. And what I am talking about is now that we
have had a chance to review the adjustment numbers from the
1990 census, we have found that although sampling or adjustment
actually adds numbers back to the region and to the State
level, it does not put them back into those areas that are
undercounted. So, for example, in the area surrounding this
city hall right now in Racine, it has a large minority
population. I toured it. I did a drive-around with the police
just a few weeks ago looking at the weed and seed programs and
the community policing programs. Let us assume that this is one
of those undercounted areas. If this area has an undercount
rate such as 20 percent, what the adjustment will do, based
upon our new studies from the 1990 census adjustment, is that
although the 20 percent will be added back in with adjustment,
it will add about 18 percent of those 20 percent undercounted
people to towns like Burlington or Union Grove, not to these
areas, only about 2 percent to these areas.
So when we are trying to put people back into the
undercount in inner-city Milwaukee, with sampling we may end up
actually putting those populations back into Brookfield or
Waukesha. So what the experts have been saying, and in this
forthcoming study from the Census Monitoring Board, is that we
are not going to add them back into these historically
undercounted areas. We will actually put them into other areas,
thereby even diluting them even more. So I would ask you to
take a look at this stuff when these studies become available
and this analysis comes out.
But I wanted to ask you another question about local
involvement, because as members of the local legislature, of
the Senate and the assembly, what do you think of the idea of
having local officials having the chance of reviewing the
census data after the census has been conducted? Right now, we
have the LUCA program, which is the local update of the census
addresses, which is taking place pre-census. Currently the
Census Bureau does not plan on engaging in a dialog with
locally elected officials and church groups and other groups,
minority groups, to check the data after it has been counted.
We did this in 1990.
Do you think it would be a good idea to check the data
locally after it has been counted, but before the final data is
submitted?
Ms. Moore. Thank you for the question, Congressman Ryan.
Let me take your second question first. That may be a
useful method so that local officials who know of peculiar
areas within their communities or communities that have just
experienced some growth or building--I know that the fire
department often knows where people live and no one has any
idea that they live there. That may be a very useful survey
prior to certifying the final data.
As it relates to your first question, I am not personally
an expert in methods of statistical sampling. That is why in my
testimony, I indicate that I am interested in the application
of the best methods of scientific statistical sampling. It is a
little bit difficult to understand or realize how statistical
sampling would take more people out of, say, Milwaukee----
Mr. Ryan. What actually it does, because if you look at the
sampling issue, it is very ineffective at the local level, at
the block level, at the neighborhood level. It may be more
effective at a macro level, such as the State level, but
actually it is very inaccurate. Charles Schultz, who was
President Carter's economic advisor--he is a census participant
and knows quite a bit about census economics, census taking--
has said that it is very inaccurate data and that he encourages
that we not use sampling for the local levels, for those
historically under-utilized areas, because it does not get
precise information into the block level and the local level.
It will actually take those undercounted people and assume that
they live somewhere else, not in the areas that they actually
live.
So I think our goals are the same, which are to let us
count people where they live and let us do the best job we can
to count them. We know we have to do this. It is in the
Constitution. So let us move forward in a cooperative agreement
to do just that.
Ms. Moore. Mr. Chairman, if I might--I know that you do not
like to have these running discussions, but I am very
interested in the comments that the Congressman has made and I
would like to ask a question of him. I know that perhaps is not
appropriate.
I guess I am interested in what the facts were in the
Supreme Court decision that led to their agreeing to
statistical sampling for redistricting purposes, were they not
satisfied that these scientific methods were accurate?
Mr. Ryan. It was for the purpose of apportionment, so the
Supreme Court did not rule for or against redistricting and
Federal funding. The court ruling was narrowly focused around
the sole issue of apportionment. But I would be happy to yield
to my colleague as well.
Mr. Miller. The Supreme Court ruled on the issues of
reapportionment that it was against the law--it was not asked
to go on redistricting and we can have opinions and it will
probably eventually go back to the courts to get it resolved.
So on redistricting, it is fairly confident we are not going to
have two sets of numbers. But that will be for another court
case and another day.
Mrs. Maloney. Point of information and personal privilege.
I think to clarify the opinion of Sandra Day O'Connor--first of
all, they ruled only on the statute, not on the
constitutionality part, but only on the statute. And they said
in terms of apportionment that enumeration had to be used, but
that was based on a statute. Now this was a prime issue, as Mr.
Petri knows, for Wisconsin. In the last redistricting, there
was a concern that there would be a shift of a seat from
Wisconsin to another State. That issue is gone now. Wisconsin
won what they wanted. There will be no shifting in
apportionment between the States. But it went further to say
that in terms of distribution of Federal funds and
redistricting, to use modern scientific methods were feasible.
So in a sense, it ruled for enumeration for purposes of
apportionment, but for purposes of redistricting and
distribution of funds, it ruled that the use of modern
scientific methods could be used.
So in a sense, Wisconsin won on the apportionment issue,
and they could likewise win on the second issue, which is the
distribution of funds, because you were greatly undercounted in
Milwaukee.
Ms. Moore. But what he said was that we could lose under
sampling because it is so imprecise.
Mr. Ryan. That is right.
Mrs. Maloney. Let us get a scientific report on that. In my
opinion, and from what I have read, Wisconsin would win.
Ms. Moore. OK, thank you.
Mr. Miller. Because of the time, we are going to keep
moving along. Congressman Petri, did you have questions?
Mr. Petri. Just very briefly. I appreciated your comment
about the need to inform people that there will not be any use
of any information provided for census purposes for other non-
census purposes. We have to keep driving that message home.
Do you have any idea about when, how soon before the actual
census begins, the Census Bureau and other organizations that
are interested in an accurate census should begin the public
outreach and information efforts through radio advertising,
fliers that elected officials send out, church meetings and
sermons, educating children and so on? Should it be done when
the people are out on the street, or 3 months before, or should
we be starting now for next year?
Ms. Ladwig. I would think in the fall would be a good time,
just an initial education program and then back off again until
after the first of the year, because with the holidays coming
up, it kind of gets lost in the shuffle. And I think it would
be important to let people know exactly who does get the census
information, what it is used for and why it is important to
have.
Ms. Moore. That is a very good question, I think,
Congressman Petri, and I think Congressman Ryan talked about
some focus groups, and my colleague, Representative Ladwig,
talked about school groups. If you are going to have pastors of
churches, heads of organizations, especially those
organizations that deal with great numbers of minorities, the
tribes here in Wisconsin, it might be a good idea to start
those focus groups early on so that they can help gather folk.
Mr. Miller. Thank you. Thank you both for coming, we
appreciate your testimony and your official statements will be
put in the record also, but thank you very much for sharing
your thoughts with us today.
Ms. Moore. Thank you.
Ms. Ladwig. Thank you for coming to Wisconsin.
Mr. Miller. It has been our pleasure.
We are going to have a slight change in the schedule now.
Both Mayor Smith and Mayor Antaramian have agreed that Jean
Jacobson will go now because of her schedule. She will have to
leave. So if Ms. Jacobson would come forward please. She is the
Racine County executive.
If you would just remain standing, Ms. Jacobson.
[Witness sworn.]
Mr. Miller. Would you proceed with your opening statement,
Ms. Jacobson.
Ms. Jacobson. I have not said that since the day I was
married 35 years ago. [Laughter.]
STATEMENT OF JEAN JACOBSON, RACINE COUNTY EXECUTIVE
Ms. Jacobson. Congressman Miller, Congresswoman Maloney,
Congressmen Ryan and Petri, welcome to Racine.
This is a place that we are very proud to call home, here
in Racine County, and I would like to thank you for the
opportunity to address you this morning on the upcoming census.
I understand that you are interested in examining ways the
Census Bureau can improve its coverage and that you think one
way to do this is to gather ideas from local officials and
community groups. And let me tell you how absolutely refreshing
that is. We so often feel that there is a great distance
between us and the Capitol Building in Washington that is more
than can be measured simply in miles. And it is really nice to
know that you believe that those of us who are really the
closest to the people that you are asking to count, we may have
some good ideas about how we are going to do it.
Believe me, we are extremely knowledgeable about the fact
that an accurate count of the population here in Racine County
is really extremely important to us. And with that in mind, my
office has determined that our best ally in our local effort is
the University of Wisconsin Extension Office. With their
special training in outreach efforts of all kinds of things,
they really have the skills that we are looking for to reach
everybody.
University of Wisconsin Extension is recognized across the
State as well as within the county as an unbiased and very
highly respectable resource for local government, for community
groups, businesses and non-profit organizations. Mr. John
Alliane, the community resource development agent, is here with
me today, who will be heading up this effort.
These people at the University of Wisconsin Extension are
local people and they deal with local people on an everyday
basis. They are very well respected in all of our neighborhoods
and particularly as we have just heard over the last few
minutes, in those neighborhoods where perhaps a stranger would
not be as well accepted.
What they have planned, and what I would like to tell you
about today, is what we call the Racine County Census 2000
Community Education Program. The aim of the program is to
impress upon local municipal officials and community leaders
the importance of obtaining an accurate count of our residents.
Their enthusiastic involvement in the process is, we believe,
very essential to their success.
The key to this is education. The vehicle will be a forum
to be held in October or November of this year, a time line
which the other two ladies before me agreed would be a good
time to start this process. Those who will be invited to the
forum are going to include a number of people--local government
elected officials, the town clerks of the 18 municipalities,
the mayors and aldermen of our county's two cities, the
presidents and trustees of our seven villages, the chairmen and
supervisors of our nine towns, as well as the members of the
County Board of Supervisors, business and civic leaders,
representatives of local non-profit social service
organizations, the clergy--very key people especially in the
minority communities--educators and media representatives.
Now these groups represent our stakeholders and we want
them to all be included and be involved and very interested in
this endeavor. Invitations to the forum will be sent in
September to individuals from each of the identified
stakeholder groups. Special care will be taken to ensure
geographic and ethnic representation from all across Racine
County. Every effort will be made to impress upon the invitees
the vital importance of the topic, and information supplied by
the U.S. Census Bureau relating to the fiscal impacts of the
census should really be very helpful to everybody involved.
We are going to have a number of speakers at this event.
One will be the University of Wisconsin Extension census
specialist, Dan Verhoff, and Shirley Warren of the U.S. Census
Bureau. Mr. Verhoff will discuss the fiscal impacts of
obtaining a complete count, various applications of this type
of data and the difficulties that people are going to have in
trying to determine an accurate count. Ms. Warren will tell
attendees about the U.S. Census Bureau resources that are
available to help everybody and to assist local communities in
obtaining that accurate count.
Now in addition, the Census Bureau's complete count
committee structure will be presented and discussed. Attendees
will be encouraged to form complete count committees at
geographical levels that they deem suitable and will be given
the opportunity to modify the structure of the committee to
suit local needs. I think what is important here is the
committees, and the structure is going to be formed by
themselves and the people who are going to be involved locally.
I can envision a number of different possible outcomes from
this process. Attendees might decide to form a single
countywide committee; they may decide to form two committees,
one for the western part of the county and one for the eastern
more incorporated areas; maybe one for the towns, which in
Wisconsin are the unincorporated areas. They may well come up
with either or an entirely different idea. It is going to be
their decision and the important thing is that it is their
decision. They are going to have some ownership in it, and
therefore, there will be a greater interest on their part in
having it all be successful.
Regardless of the outcome and the structure that they
select, the University of Wisconsin Extension is going to
function as the information conduit to the attendees. And they
will assist these newly formed committees by arranging and
facilitating the initial meetings. When you get neighborhood
groups together, they do not often know how to facilitate
themselves and get the job done, and that is where the
University's expertise lies. And they also are very good at
connecting groups with resources, both State and Federal.
These committees will serve as a link between the U.S.
Census Bureau and the local community. And one of their most
important functions is going to be communication. And that is a
subject that we have talked about quite a bit this morning. We
believe that the better the communication between the Bureau
and the committees and between the committees and our citizens,
the more likely we are going to end up here with probably the
best count that we possibly could have.
This program, and the support that the Extension Office
will provide in the months that follow, will supply local
leaders with information to encourage their continued
involvement as well as providing them with sufficient direction
to take action. I think we as local leaders will hear really
quickly what difficulties these committees are having and
hopefully we can step in and help them out before the census is
over.
I do not think I have told you anything earth-shaking here.
You probably have heard and will hear a lot of variations on
the same theme as you conduct your travels. However, the same
process will result in as many different outcomes as there are
communities, and the ability for us to tailor our efforts to
our particular circumstances is what keeps this from being a
cookie-cutter process. And it is hopefully going to ensure a
very successful outcome.
I thank you for your kind attention here today and really
appreciate you coming to Racine County. I have had the
opportunity personally to testify in Washington at a committee
similar to this, and I have to say that this is really nice to
have you come back to our neighborhood to do this.
I hope that your visit here in Racine County is very
pleasant and that you will remember us as a very warm and
hospitable community.
I do not have any creamer with me, but hopefully--oh, there
is some here. Please stuff your pockets with whatever is left.
And again, thank you, Paul, I am sure you had a lot to do
with coming here. It is really great to have you come to the
chambers here in the city and listen to us.
Mr. Miller. Thank you very much, Ms. Jacobson. Because we
are adding another panel, we are just trying to hold ourselves
down to one short question.
I am impressed that you have organized this community
education program for this October or November. Who took the
initiative to do that? It takes planning and organization. You
have already got your speakers. Who made that decision and
proceeded with it. Was it you or the mayor or----
Ms. Jacobson. The decision to go with University of
Wisconsin was my decision. The University of Wisconsin
Extension Office here in Racine County is a tremendous
neighborhood outreach program where they do many things,
including community gardens in local neighborhoods. They do a
lot with teaching people how to cook their foods and stay
within a budget, and they are very close to our community. And
what better organization here in our county to take on this
initiative. And when I called them, they just jumped at the
possibility. Already within Wisconsin they were teaching the
University of Wisconsin Extension staff the process of census
taking and how this will work in the community. So it was just
an absolutely perfect match.
Mr. Miller. Mrs. Maloney.
Mrs. Maloney. Congratulations on all you are doing. It is
very, very encouraging, and I appreciate really the effort of
leaders such as yourself in your State that are working on an
accurate count.
Is your county participating in the local update of census
addresses program, LUCA? In the last census, it was not
particularly productive and what they tried to do was
incorporate it earlier. There is no reason why you cannot get
every address. They have this program they have been exposing
to cities and counties across the country and I am wondering
are you participating in this address check program of the
Census Bureau?
Ms. Jacobson. I am not familiar with it, I have to admit.
And I do not know whether the Extension Office is or not, but
when the last census was taken, I was not the county executive,
so I did not know what that process was.
Mrs. Maloney. That might be something that you could add to
your efforts.
Mr. Ryan. If I could add, the mayor of Racine, who will be
testifying in the next panel, Jim Smith, is implementing LUCA.
Mrs. Maloney. Oh, he is, so it is being done through your
mayors and not----
Ms. Jacobson. It could be done through an entirely
different level of government.
Mrs. Maloney. And I understand last time your legislature
participated greatly in giving moneys and everything to get an
accurate count or to donate services, and I hope they plan to
do the same in 2000. Are you aware of any efforts of the cities
or the State to supplement the efforts?
Ms. Jacobson. No, those questions should be directed
directly to those municipalities.
Mrs. Maloney. Thank you very much, thank you for your
efforts.
Mr. Miller. Mr. Ryan.
Mr. Ryan. Well, I know you have to get going, Jean, so I
will just be very brief. Thank you for coordinating this and
putting this together.
The Extension is a very sensible idea, it makes perfect
sense to use the UWE system, which is a very, very impressive
system here in the State of Wisconsin. And thanks for
participating in this.
I just want to ask you the same question I asked Senator
Moore and Representative Ladwig, which is in putting together
this system and in working with LUCA, such as the mayor, do you
believe that it would be appropriate and wise to have local
input on the data after the data had been collected, but before
it is finalized, to make sure that the Census Bureau does not
miss anything? Do you think that would be a----
Ms. Jacobson. Oh, I would certainly agree. I think it is
much better at that time than after. Once it is filed, it is
very difficult to re-address it, and some problems may surface
at that time that are very recognizable.
Mr. Ryan. OK, thank you.
Mr. Miller. Mr. Petri.
Mr. Petri. Just briefly, if you do not think of the answer
and you think of it later, I am sure the committee would be
happy to hear from you. This will probably be the tightest
labor market in which we have ever conducted a census. I was
thinking back every 10 years. I do not think we have had one in
time of national emergency or war in the past. An awful lot of
people are hired on a part time basis, quasi-volunteer basis,
to go out and actually conduct the count. Do you have any ideas
or suggestions about how we can reach out to involve people to
actually do the count, since so many more people are working or
busy than ever before?
Ms. Jacobson. You bring up an excellent point. We have been
very concerned about that in Racine County. Our unemployment
rate is extremely low. We have a state-of-the-art work force
development center which could help in that regard and to use
that data base to hire people. I think we are going to find it
very difficult to find those people; however, I think there
still are people available who would be willing to work on a
part-time basis without going to work full-time. Perhaps
mothers and even teachers in the off season. I think there are
a lot of innovative things that we could do. But our work force
development center could be of service in our own particular
county to work in that regard.
Mr. Petri. Thank you.
Mr. Miller. Thank you very much for being here today. We
appreciate it.
Ms. Jacobson. Thank you.
Mr. Miller. Now if we could have Mayor Smith and Mayor
Antaramian--I am getting better.
Mr. Ryan. Mayor Antaramian representing the Armenian
population.
Mr. Miller. If you would let me go ahead and swear you in
before you get seated. Raise your right hands.
[Witnesses sworn.]
Mr. Miller. Let the record show that the witnesses answered
in the affirmative.
First of all, let me say, Mayor Smith, thank you very much
for letting me sit in your chair today. I never sat in a
mayor's seat before.
STATEMENTS OF JAMES M. SMITH, MAYOR, CITY OF RACINE, WI; AND
JOHN M. ANTARAMIAN, MAYOR, CITY OF KENOSHA, WI
Mr. Smith. Thank you, Chairman Miller and the Congressmen
who are here today. I think it is an honor that we can host
you. I appreciate you having a hearing here in Racine.
I have some remarks that I would like to give at this time,
because the census 2000 is very important to the city of
Racine, for a number of reasons. I appreciate the opportunity
to appear before the subcommittee to share with you the
importance of an accurate census count. The efforts the city
will be undertaking to help ensure that all the residents of
Racine are counted and to indicate my support for the passage
of H.R. 472, known as the Local Census Quality Check Act.
The city of Racine is a wonderful community located on the
western shore of Lake Michigan. The community is blessed with a
diversity of ethnic groups that make up its estimated 1998
population of 85,552. This variety of ethnic groups within our
community includes many of those groups that were considered to
be under-counted in the 1990 census. It is very important to
the city of Racine that the year 2000 census results in a
census count that is as close to 100 percent as possible. To
that end, the city of Racine is committed to working with the
Census Bureau to ensure that the goal is met.
As stated earlier, it is important that all people in the
city of Racine be counted in the year 2000 census. We know from
past census experience that there are segments of our
population that, for whatever reasons, either do not answer the
mail-out questionnaires or do not respond to personal followup
contacts at census time. We recognize that we, along with the
Census Bureau, need to make a special effort to ensure that all
the people of Racine are counted in the census.
In the late fall of this year, I will be appointing a
complete count committee which will consist of a broad cross-
section of people, organizations and media of our community.
This complete count committee will work to establish a network
of information regarding the census, arrange for the
distribution of materials for posting in public places, develop
a media campaign and contact as many of our citizens as
possible so that they are counted in the census.
In addition to the efforts of our local complete count
committee, we anticipate working very closely with the local
staff of the Census Bureau to ensure that a successful census
is conducted within the city of Racine.
I would also like to take this opportunity to express the
city's support for the passage of H.R. 472, known as Local
Census Quality Check Act. A local census quality check was used
in the 1990 census as a tool for local governments to help
ensure the accuracy of the census count. This was a
particularly valuable tool for communities the size of Racine.
Local staff was provided the opportunity to review addresses
and counts before the census was finalized. I believe a similar
local census quality check for the year 2000 census will be a
very valuable tool in ensuring that as accurate a count as
possible is secured. It is especially appreciated that the
proposed legislation provides for a 45-day period for local
review.
And I thank you for the opportunity to appear before the
subcommittee today.
Mr. Miller. Thank you very much, Mayor Smith.
Mayor Antaramian.
[The prepared statement of Mayor Smith follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED]61509.006
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED]61509.007
Mr. Antaramian. Thank you, Chairman Miller, and Members of
Congress--that was very good.
I, too, have a statement that has been given to you and I
am not going to read it. I am going to touch on a couple of
areas in the statement and then a couple of other areas I would
like to touch on as I have listened to the conversation.
First off, the LUCA program, we think, has been a wonderful
program. However, one of the problems that we have is that as
the program was implemented and explained to us was that you
were going to have a detailed feedback and a final
determination. The detailed feedback has now been eliminated.
That goes back to the process of the local unit of government
being involved at an earlier stage to review what exactly was
happening and what the addresses looked like so that we could
enter into this at an earlier time and help to correct any
problems that we may see. I think the change that has occurred
with that being removed is a mistake. I think that one of the
things this committee should look at is to try to keep the
number of things that you do small, but done correctly and
accurately. And so I would again recommend that at least for
the LUCA program, that you relook at that and make sure that
the local units of government are involved at an earlier time
than what is presently going to be happening.
I am going to touch a little bit on the American
factfinder, though I do not know that anyone has talked about
that, on the computer process. According to staff, at least my
staff, as they have been working through this process, what we
have discovered is that the program that is in place is not one
that is very good. It is difficult to get information. The
previous 1990 census look-up program that you had is much
easier to use and, actually, we get a great deal more
information off that than we do off the new one. So I would
recommend, at least, that you look at those types of things as
to how we are able to generate our data and get our
information.
I guess that my information is a little more technical as
my staff has started to work through some of these things and
explained it to me. And I do not necessarily wish to go into
those other than to say that for the city of Kenosha, it is
very, very important that the numbers be correct. It is not
only because of the Federal Government and what you have, as to
revenues that come back to us, but it is also very important as
to how the State determines revenues back to the city of
Kenosha. The shared revenue formula is based off, in part, a
head count, so that if your numbers do not totally reflect the
numbers of the city of Kenosha, it cannot only affect my
Federal dollars, but State dollars that come back to me. And so
that becomes another issue to us, that it is important to make
sure that your numbers are as accurate as possible.
Kenosha has been one of the few communities that has
challenged the State in the past on those numbers and has been
successful in getting the State to modify its population
numbers. And it was done in such a way in which we used drivers
licenses, housing and statistical processes along with
neighborhood groups to determine how and where the numbers were
that we needed to show to the State that they were off.
So I think a combination of things need to be done if we
are going to get an accurate number.
And so with that, I appreciate you allowing me to come here
today and to speak before you.
[The prepared statement of Mayor Antaramian follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED]61509.008
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED]61509.009
Mr. Miller. Thank you very much and thank you again for
making this facility available for us today.
You mentioned the local census quality check, or as was
used in 1990, the post-census local review. The House passed
it. Unfortunately, the administration is opposed to it, which
we think is unfortunate. The National League of Cities, which I
suspect you all might be, or the National Association of Towns
and Townships, were very supportive of that plan because it was
helpful in 1990, and I am a little baffled why we do not want
input.
But what makes it even more concerning to me now is, as you
mentioned, the detailed feedback process has been dropped. We
all say how we need local input and local support, and now the
administration does not want to have the post-census local
review or the local census quality check to give local
communities a chance to check the numbers. Now even under the
LUCA program, which I am glad we are doing, you are not going
to have a chance to have the detailed feedback process because
they say they do not have enough time to do that. That is
disappointing to me, too.
Let me ask a question. In your opinion, what is the most
undercounted and hardest to count population of your individual
cities? I know you were in the detailed process in 1990 or
certainly before that, but who do you think would be the most
difficult to count, and maybe why, and maybe, what can be done
to help go after that?
Mr. Smith. Speaking for the city of Racine, I think first
of all, the homeless population is very difficult, even in a
city the size of Racine. I know it is perhaps an even larger
problem in our larger cities in the Nation, but that certainly
is a problem. And you know, I think the Hispanic population in
the city of Racine is the fastest growing group in our city,
and I believe, for a number of reasons, that was undercounted
in 1990 and it is going to be very important that we get a
correct count, as close to a correct count as we can in the two
groups.
Mr. Antaramian. The minority population in Kenosha would be
the most difficult at this time. And I would also add that the
Hispanic community is the fastest growing population in the
city of Kenosha and that it as a group, if I were to break it
down, would be the most difficult at the present time.
Mr. Miller. The Hispanic community, does it have its own
media, radio, newspapers? Are there organizations that work
closely with the Hispanic population? I know when we were in
Miami, you have a Cuban and a Haitian population and there are
very targeted areas. Is that true in these communities?
Mr. Antaramian. In Kenosha, there is a Hispanic community
group, a Spanish center that is a very cohesive group and one
that the city works with closely.
Mr. Miller. The Census Bureau has something called the
partnership programs, and hopefully they should be part of this
partnership program because, as the earlier panel said, Senator
Moore was saying when you go to the Hispanic community, make
sure you have people from that community that are going out
knocking on doors. So, I hope they are already part of the
partnership program, but this is a program that the Census
Bureau offers to any group that is interested, to get involved
in.
Did you have another comment?
Mr. Smith. We have identified some of the Hispanic
leadership in our community already that are going to be
involved in our committee and I think the churches are very
important along with a weed and seed program here in the city
of Racine. They have a Hispanic liaison person there who will
be working very hard to make sure that the count is as correct
as it can be.
Mr. Miller. Your Hispanic population is Hispanic from
where? Is it from Mexico, Central America--is there one special
area or is it just----
Mr. Smith. Well, I think the Hispanic population in the
city of Racine, the one area that we believe is the fastest
growing area of Hispanic population, is on the north side of
town around St. Patrick's Church. You are not familiar, of
course, with Racine, but it is not too far from where we sit
here, but that is a high concentration of Hispanics. St.
Patrick's Church has Hispanic service, a great outreach program
and they will certainly be involved.
Mr. Antaramian. It is pretty much from around the country.
They are not any from any specific location.
Mr. Miller. From what country?
Mr. Antaramian. All around--from all parts of this country,
the Spanish community has been moving into this area. Since
employment has increased, we have seen more and more people
coming to this region to relocate. So it has been just, I would
guess, a natural type of situation, but it is our largest
growing population at this time.
Mr. Miller. How has your experience been so far in working
with the Census Bureau, or have you had much dealings directly
with the Census Bureau?
Mr. Antaramian. Again, I will speak in the sense of having
discussions with my staff. In general, they have felt fairly
positive about the Census Bureau and working with them. The
concerns that they have had has been in some cases, some lack
of training that they feel is necessary for getting certain
types of information back to people, and also, as I said
before, the concern about maintaining the programs that you
have there and actually following through with what you are
telling us that you are going to do. That becomes a concern for
staff.
Mr. Miller. Anything to add, Mayor Smith?
Mr. Smith. Well, I just asked city development to give me
our latest stats on our population and we have looked at the
white population in the city of Racine, which has gone down
about 8 percent from 1980 to 1990. The African-American
population has gone up 23 percent, and other, which for the
most part is Hispanic, has gone up 51 percent. So, that kind of
shows why it is so important to make sure that the minority
population is counted as correctly as it can be.
Mr. Miller. The forms will be in Spanish and five other
languages besides English. We think it should be in even more
languages, but it will be at least 5, and instructions in 30
some languages.
Congresswoman Maloney.
Mrs. Maloney. I would like to follow up on a point that was
raised that the Address List Correction Act is not being
followed appropriately. As you know, in 1990, there was post-
census local review and according to Dr. Bryant, who was
appointed by former President Bush, it was neither cost-
efficient, nor effective. And specifically, about 12 percent of
the 124,000 people added to the census count were added
erroneously and half of the units added were in two cities
alone--Detroit and Cleveland. And about 25 percent of the
governmental units participated in the program and less than 20
percent filed challenges that met the specified criteria. So
Congress, in a bipartisan way, acted to approve it, and in a
bill that was passed by Representative Sawyer from Ohio and
Ridge from Pennsylvania, they passed the Address List
Correction Act, which created a pre-census local review
process. It allows the Census Bureau to share its address list
with local governments, which they were prohibited from before,
so that they are sharing, supposedly, these address lists. They
should be sharing these address lists with you, and the address
list should be modified based on local input. You should be
able to get back to them and tell them whether or not this list
is correct. And the bill also called for an appeals process to
be designed by the Office of Management and Budget. This is
what should be implemented.
And if that is not being implemented, I want to know about
it and in fact, at all of our hearings, there is a
representative from the Census Bureau. Is there one here today?
Is there somebody from the Census Bureau here today? We have
got one person.
Can you meet with the two mayors, and I want to hear, and I
am sure the members of the panel want to hear. That is the law.
They are supposed to give you the list. You are supposed to be
able to get back with any corrections and this is supposed to
improve the count.
I think one of the statements earlier by Senator Ladwig was
very important. You should not miss the home; you should be
able to count it; you should be able to count the addresses.
The problem is, in her words, you could miss who is in the
home. But you should be able to get the addresses. I want a
written response from Dr. Prewitt on how this is working and I
want this sent to the mayors because you should be able to use
the process as it was bipartisanly passed earlier.
I really want to get a sense of what is happening in your
cities. You mentioned earlier, Mayor Smith, that there were,
you know, some changes in the population. First of all, I want
to know, have you designated one person in your office to work
with the Census Bureau, so you have a direct contact that can
help you and they know who to contact? That would be helpful.
Have you done that?
Mr. Smith. There is going to be an alderman who is going to
be the chairman of that committee.
Mrs. Maloney. OK.
Mr. Smith. But for the most part, I think the city
development office and Dick Lensmeyer will be coordinating that
as far as the city of Racine.
Mrs. Maloney. Can I ask you both a few questions? What is
the current population of your city?
Mr. Antaramian. The city of Kenosha is roughly 87,000.
Mrs. Maloney. 87,000. And----
Mr. Smith. I believe I mentioned that in my testimony, but
it is about 85,200 or so. Our population has decreased. You
know, we used to be larger than Kenosha not that long ago and
Kenosha passed us up because of some border issues we had here
in the city of Racine. We have two townships that surround the
city of Racine, the two largest townships in the State, and the
projections are that those townships will equal the city of
Racine's population by----
Mrs. Maloney. But the city of Racine is roughly 85,000.
Mr. Smith. Correct.
Mrs. Maloney. Now what is the current population estimate
of the number of Hispanics, black Americans, Asians and other
minorities in your city. Not a percentage, but do you have a
number? Is it 10,000, 20,000, 30,000, 5,000--an estimate.
Mr. Smith. The estimates for the city of Racine for 1990
was 64,378 Caucasian, 15,551 black and 4,364 other. And we know
that the Hispanic population is grossly undercounted there.
Mrs. Maloney. That was in 1990, but what is it now? What do
you estimate it is now in numbers?
Mr. Smith. I do not have that number now, ma'am.
Mrs. Maloney. Do you have a sense?
Mr. Smith. I believe I could get that, but I do not have it
here with me.
Mrs. Maloney. Do you have it?
Mr. Antaramian. I would roughly estimate the minority
population in the city of Kenosha ranges between 11,000 and
12,000 right now.
Mrs. Maloney. And what was it in 1990?
Mr. Antaramian. It was probably about 8,000.
Mrs. Maloney. About 8,000, so it has been growing. Well, my
time is up. I have some more questions, maybe I will submit
them in writing, but anyway, I think mayors are great. You are
on the firing line taking care of people's problems, and you
are going to be part of the real important link in getting good
counts for our cities. It is vital to you, because, as you
know, the funding formulas are tied to senior centers, roads,
bridges, houses, day care--everything.
Anyway, my time is up. The chairman is being tough on us
today. He wants to keep us on schedule so we do not miss our
planes back to Washington.
Mr. Miller. Mr. Ryan.
Mr. Ryan. Thank you very much, gentlemen.
Mayor Antaramian and I just participated in the Kenosha
parade yesterday, so we are fresh from the parade trail.
I would like to start with you, John, if I could. You
mentioned your experience with the LUCA program has been less
than perfect, a little troubling. Your involvement with the
Census Bureau has been welcome, it has been friendly, but that
the Bureau omitted the detailed feedback portion of the process
is the troubling portion. In your opinion, given the fact that
they have eliminated this process, what do you think of the
opportunity to participate in a post-census local review to go
over the data to help make sure we get the most accurate count?
Mr. Antaramian. I think any opportunity we have to review
the data and to try to make it correct or to at least point out
where we think there may be problems is a positive. I still
think, though, the Census Bureau would be better served in
getting this done and moving it forward as they had initially
proposed it. Though that may now create some time restraints, I
still think that would be a better process to get a more
accurate number.
Mrs. Maloney. Point of information. As I said from the law,
they are supposed to be giving you feedback or allowing you to.
No. 1, you should be able to get the address list and you
should be able to correct it now. And if they are not doing
that, then something is terribly wrong, and as I said, I want a
report from the Census Bureau on what is happening here and
they will work on it. As I understand it, they have not changed
the procedure at all. They should be giving you that
information and giving you a chance to respond. And if they are
not, they are not following the law that was passed in a
bipartisan way back in 1994.
Mr. Ryan. Just to add--actually to answer my colleague's
question about the Hispanic populations here in Racine and
Kenosha--I have on my staff a former interpreter at the Kenosha
Hispanic Center, Theresa Chavez-Moore, who is here with us
today, who helps us offer bilingual services in our constituent
service centers, which are located here in Racine and Kenosha
to these populations. We are helping them, you know, with
problems they may have with the Federal Government, INS
problems. But what I wanted to point out is that Theresa has
informed us that we do have a couple of radio stations here--I
am going to butcher this, but it is La Tremenda and Radio
Ombiente and local TV stations, Univision and Galavision, which
are based out of Chicago, which do serve the Hispanic
populations. Which to answer your question, Chairman Miller,
the vast majority of them come from Mexico, as far as
nationality, but we do have Hispanic populations here that do
come from El Salvador and other countries.
But going into this extension, Mayor Smith and Mayor
Antaramian, I wanted to ask you; hopefully, we can work
together with the bilingual communities, with the Hispanic
communities, in the Kenosha and Racine Hispanic Centers to try
and make sure that these privacy concerns can be addressed.
One of the concerns I have heard is the immigration
concerns. A lot of the Hispanics in Racine and Kenosha are
concerned that this may have something to do with immigration
policies--the census. It does not, but we need to do a good job
of communicating that.
But I wanted to ask you, Mayor Smith, because you also are
participating in the LUCA program, what your thoughts are at
this stage about the LUCA program and do you think it would be
advantageous for you to have the ability to, with the alderman
you are putting in charge of this, with your CCC and working
together with Jean Jacobson and others, to participate in a
post-census local review. Having a chance to look at the census
data after the census was conducted, before it is etched in
stone, to make sure they did not miss anything. Do you think
that that would be advantageous?
Mr. Smith. I believe that is critical, Congressman. I
chaired the 1990 correct count committee for the city of Racine
as alderman in 1990 and we had very little feedback from the
Census Bureau at that time. So if indeed this is a reform
committee on the census, we look forward to your cooperation to
make sure that we have a good count here in the city of Racine
and Wisconsin.
Mrs. Maloney. Point of clarification. Have you gotten the
address lists from the Census Bureau? They are supposed to give
you their address lists, have you gotten those?
Mr. Antaramian. I do not believe so.
Mr. Smith. I am not aware of that, unless it went to
another department.
Mrs. Maloney. Are they supposed to have been out by now? If
we have someone from the Census Bureau--are the address lists
supposed to be out to the local governments now?
Mr. Miller. Well, he is not sworn in and he is not at a
microphone. We will get it clarified.
Mrs. Maloney. OK, I request this be clarified in writing,
the timeframe of when the address lists are supposed to go to
local governments, and according to the law that we passed,
local governments are supposed to be able to respond to the
address lists and if they do not like what the Census Bureau is
doing, then they can appeal that process. That is the law that
I think Mr. Petri and Mr. Sawyer and others passed.
Mr. Ryan. Well, reclaiming my time, I see the light is out.
This could be a troubling development if the LUCA program is
not working within the spirit of the law that was passed. And
if that is the case, hopefully we can work together here in
southern Wisconsin to put together teams to focus on
participation in the census. If LUCA is not being implemented
as it was envisioned, hopefully the Census Bureau can rethink
its position on post-census local review and allow that local
participation to take place.
Thank you.
Mr. Miller. Mr. Petri.
Mr. Petri. Just briefly and broadening the concern about
undercount or non-counted populations. You both represent sort
of a dwindling breed in America in some parts of the country,
and that is larger, medium-sized cities that are home to
statewide or national or even international headquartered
companies. And one area of non-count now are private American
citizens working overseas. Congress has acted to make sure that
they can vote; the IRS keeps after them to make sure they pay
taxes. Would it be helpful to your cities if the people who
work for Johnson Wax in other countries, in Russia and
everywhere else, who are American citizens, who are basically
long-term residents of this city but who are on assignment
overseas, as there are tens of thousands at Exxon and all kinds
of other American corporations, that they could be counted to
and attributed back to the area in the United States where they
have permanent residence.
Mr. Smith. Well, you know, that is a very good comment. I
am sure in 1990, we did not do any work in that area, but our
business community in the Racine area, manufacturing commerce,
I think would be very cooperative in polling the companies that
are international to make sure that we do get those individuals
counted.
I think the other area that I am concerned about, I talked
to Congressman Ryan about it, and that is the out-of-state
prison population. I do not know how Congress is going to deal
with that, but I understand there was at least some talk about
those individuals not being counted as State residents, perhaps
city of Racine residents.
Mr. Ryan. If Congressman Petri will yield, to answer your
question, Jim, Congressman Mark Green, who is a former
colleague of Mayor Antaramian's from the assembly, he is a
Congressman now from Green Bay, has introduced legislation to
count prison populations in their home of record.
Wisconsinites, we actually export quite a bit of prisoners to
other States such as Texas. He has introduced legislation to do
that. Unfortunately, the Census Bureau opposes that
legislation. I have introduced legislation to count domestic
military personnel. Wisconsinites who are sent to military
bases right now overseas will be counted in Wisconsin at their
home of record. I have introduced legislation to make sure that
that extends to domestic military bases. So if you are a Racine
resident, you vote in Racine, you pay taxes in Racine, you are
coming back to Racine after you are done in the military, but
you are stationed at Fort Benning or the 82nd Airborne in North
Carolina, then you would be counted in Racine as a resident.
Right now, we are not sure where the Census Bureau is on that
piece of legislation, but just to give you an update on some of
these dynamics, that is where we are with that.
Mr. Miller. One of the things I have found involved in this
job, I did not realize you export prisoners until we had a
hearing--that was a new one to me.
Mrs. Maloney. We move them around the State. Where are they
going to be counted, upstate or downstate?
Mr. Miller. I also find interesting the large Hispanic
population in Wisconsin. I would not have thought this far from
Central America that they would be such a growing population. I
know that is true obviously out in Arizona, Texas, California
and Florida, but actually, you have a much larger Hispanic
population than I have in my congressional district in Florida.
So, I found that interesting up in this area.
Mrs. Maloney. Ask them about the American Indian
population.
Mr. Miller. How about your American Indian population, do
either of you have very much in your cities?
Mr. Smith. Very small.
Mrs. Maloney. But what is the number of the population, I
am just curious?
Mr. Miller. Well, let me thank both of you for coming today
and again, Mayor Smith, thank you very much for making
available the chambers today. We appreciate that and we find
this very worthwhile, very beneficial. Thank you very much.
Mr. Smith. Thank you for being here.
Mr. Antaramian. Thank you.
Mr. Miller. Our next panel will be Mr. Robinson, Mr. Kehl
and Dr. Voss.
If you will stand, we will go ahead and swear you in. Raise
your right hands.
[Witnesses sworn.]
Mr. Miller. Let me again welcome you. I apologize for the
delay in getting started this morning and I appreciate you
sitting through the other panels. We will begin and we will
start with Mr. Robinson.
STATEMENTS OF NATHANIEL E. ROBINSON, ADMINISTRATOR, DIVISION OF
ENERGY AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS, OFFICE OF GOVERNOR
TOMMY G. THOMPSON; ALLAN K. KEHL, KENOSHA COUNTY EXECUTIVE; AND
DR. PAUL VOSS, DEPARTMENT OF RURAL SOCIOLOGY, UNIVERSITY OF
WISCONSIN AT MADISON, WI
Mr. Robinson. Mr. Chairman, thank you. I would like to
welcome both you and Congresswoman Maloney to God's country,
the great State of Wisconsin. On behalf of Governor Tommy
Thompson, he asked me to specifically say those words to you,
our very special guests.
My name is Nat Robinson and I am administrator of the
Division of Energy and Intergovernmental Relations, and it is
within that Division that our Demographic Service Center is
housed, the Demographic Service Center oversees, or we are the
link between the U.S. Census Bureau and the implementation of
the census taking process here in Wisconsin.
It is Wisconsin's goal to have the best--when I say best, I
am talking about the most accurate and complete--census in the
Nation. Today, I will outline Wisconsin's efforts to help local
units of government achieve that objective and I will also
summarize some of our concerns as we approach census 2000.
Let me first talk about partnering. In conjunction with the
U.S. Census Bureau, the Wisconsin Department of Administration
and its Demographic Service Center and our partners to include
the University of Wisconsin's Applied Population Laboratory and
its partners, we are administering several initiatives to
enhance the quality, as well as the accuracy, of the census
2000 process.
Efforts that are being undertaken, or have already been
undertaken, include updating the address lists, updating census
maps to facilitate the process of census taking next year, as
well as the post-census local review process.
In addition, we are assisting local officials and their
State representatives and encouraging them to participate in
what we call the preparation for census 2000.
We have also employed what we call a full-time 100 percent
person who is devoting 100 percent of time to providing
technical assistance, training and hands-on assistance to the
Census Bureau and local units of government within Wisconsin.
This person works very closely with the Bureau's government
partnership specialist to establish the complete census count
committees in Wisconsin, and as a result of that collaboration,
we have over 150 complete-count committees to date and we are
currently expanding those throughout the State of Wisconsin.
To make this program even more effective, Mr. Chairman, we
would ask that funding, if at all possible, be provided by the
Census Bureau to assist with making sure that our preparation
for achieving that accurate and complete census count starting
next April 1 is made a reality. Or in lieu of moneys, we ask
that more government partnership specialists be hired in the
field. We have an excellent working relationship with our
specialist, but she has a large territory and even with our
efforts, our combined efforts, there is still lots of work to
be done.
Our census outreach specialist performs a variety of
technical assistance, as I said, and other duties for the
purpose of enhancing the capability of the local governmental
units, including designing promotional material and
distributing to the public things like brochures, along with
meeting with any group who wish to meet with us. All of these
activities are geared on promoting that complete and accurate
census goal that I previously talked about.
To help us in this endeavor, we want to assure that
Wisconsin residents benefit from the fair share of the Census
Bureau's planned public awareness budget. Governor Thompson has
already written to Dr. Prewitt, asking that Wisconsin receive
our fair share, which will amount to some $6 million of what we
understand to be an anticipated $300 million budget for the
census awareness campaign. The fair share of $6 million
represents about 2 percent of the total, which Wisconsin's
population translates into about 2 percent of the Nation's
population.
Also, Wisconsin has asked the legislature to appropriate
about $750,000, as was appropriated for the 1990 census, to
further assist with the preparation process for census 2000.
According to the current population estimates and
projections from the Census Bureau, Wisconsin definitely would
have to work very hard if we want to maintain all of our
congressional seats and continue our very strong voice in
Washington. And by the 1990 census results, we know that we can
do this in partnership with the Bureau and with our partners
throughout Wisconsin. As you know, and as has been noted here
today, in 1990, the census showed that Wisconsin had the
highest response rate to the census questionnaire and one of
the lowest undercount rates in the Nation. We had 30,000
undercounted in Wisconsin, so while we did well in terms of
being the first in those other things, obviously a lot of work
still needs to be done.
If the 2000 census were to yield the same number of
undercounted residents, it would be equated to the city of West
Bend, Mr. Chairman, a city in the State of Wisconsin that has
about 30,000 residents. So, that gives you a magnitude as to
what the 30,000 population undercount does for the State of
Wisconsin. And of course, you have already heard about the
number of Federal dollars over the 10 year period that would
result from the undercount if it were the same in 2000 as it
was in 1990.
So, it is imperative that we continue these partnerships
and we are intending to do that.
Someone mentioned prisoners. Our position is that out-of-
state prisoners, for which we have contractual obligations and
Wisconsin pays the bill, should be counted in the home area
from which they came, and that is the State of Wisconsin. In
conjunction, we know that Congressman Ryan has a bill for
military personnel. We would ask that a similar advice that you
rendered to the U.S. Census Bureau regarding prisoners be the
same. We believe that if the State pays the way for them, they
should be counted toward our role.
In conclusion, these are the things that we would
specifically advise for you to take back to the Census Bureau--
count our military in conjunction with an effort already begun
by Congressman Ryan, count our prisoners and those out of State
where we pay the bill, give money to supplement the $750,000,
assuming that the legislature does concur with Governor
Thompson's request as the legislature appropriated in 1990, and
we ask that you advise the Census Bureau to talk about another
matter that was mentioned with the first two speakers. We have
to provide more trust within the minds of those people for whom
we want to complete the census forms. That is critical. You
have already heard about distrust and that translates into a no
response. We would urge that the Census Bureau find some way to
help local units of government and States to come up with our
own response for improving that trust.
So we are doing a lot, but we have got to do even more if
we are going to achieve our goal--training, technical
assistance support, financial support, all designed toward
achieving the goal of a complete and accurate census for 2000.
Again, on behalf of Governor Thompson, thank you and thank
you, Congressman Ryan for bringing this forum to Wisconsin, we
appreciate that very much.
Mr. Miller. Thank you. Mr. Kehl.
Mr. Kehl. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, on behalf of Kenosha,
where I am the county executive. We very much appreciate your
time and efforts in coming to fine southeastern Wisconsin's
heat and humidity this time of year. I cannot guarantee you it
is any better in December, but thanks for coming.
Mr. Miller. Would you pull the microphone a little closer,
please?
Mr. Kehl. Sure. I have got a low voice anyway.
I am going to move from my text just a little bit, with
your permission. What I think is a major issue here is how we
can best coordinate our efforts at the local level with the
Census Bureau.
Kenosha County has moved in this direction. Our land
information office has been working diligently in more
accurately computerizing census maps on the county geographic
information systems. In fact, the GIS is now devoted totally
toward the census, because we feel it is that important. The
population is currently around 143,000 and we are experiencing
a phenomenal growth rate that we do not see lessening any time
in the near future.
As a result of that, in response to a border and annexation
survey recently completed from the census, Kenosha County will
be sending information showing boundary and annexation changes
that have occurred since January 1998. This is an ongoing
project that we will utilize with our local council of
governments to bring forward the best information that we can,
because of the importance, obviously, it relates to the
community and the dollars that can be brought in for our
operations.
Census counts are certainly used for reappointment, and an
accurate and complete count is important to ensure
representation in Congress. And, I might add we have a great
guy in Paul, and we thank you for being here and bringing this
so that at least there will be a local forum and we can address
those concerns.
Data from the census is powerful information for planning
and land use, schools, economic development and more,
specifically delivery of service.
So, we do want to be actively involved in the census
because we feel that is a must.
Understanding fully well the importance of a complete and
accurate count, Kenosha County has, as Racine County has, been
working through our various divisions and departments, and
using the County's University of Wisconsin's Extension. A
series of community meetings will be planned, because the more
information we bring forward and the more people we create the
interest and understanding of what this is all about, the
better responses we feel we have.
Without belaboring, I just do want to say to you that we
know the importance of this and we are using the full extent of
our resources to work with the Census Bureau for the accuracy
of the count.
And again, we thank you, at least from Kenosha County's
government, as others have, for your interest in being here and
realizing you have a tight schedule. I have said all that I
should say.
Thank you.
Mr. Miller. Thank you very much. Dr. Voss.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Kehl follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED]61509.010
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED]61509.011
Dr. Voss. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate
the invitation to be here and to share my comments this morning
on issues of census accuracy in the upcoming census.
I am a professor of rural sociology at the University of
Wisconsin in Madison. I also direct a small unit called the
Applied Population Laboratory, which has been mentioned this
morning. It is a part of that Extension partnership in this
State where a number of parties, within Extension and outside
of Extension, are working to make the count as good as possible
in this State.
I have chosen to focus my comments very narrowly this
morning. I realize I am sitting between the esteemed members of
the subcommittee and their lunch, so I am going to try to be
quite brief and focused.
I am absolutely convinced that State and local promotional
activities, the census complete count committees, a strong
advertising campaign, curriculum materials and the countless
other innovative census outreach programs initiated by State
and local census partners do result in a better census. And I
am very encouraged this morning by some of the testimony that
we have heard that relate to those local activities.
For the 1990 census, as you have heard, the State of
Wisconsin allocated substantial State resources for a
successful statewide census awareness campaign and a grant
program for local complete count committees. I am certain the
effective use of these State resources was an important reason
why Wisconsin led the Nation in 1990 in the return of mailed
out census questionnaires. Advertising, promotion, effective
census outreach, these things do improve census response rates,
I am absolutely convinced of that.
Sadly, however, the record shows rather conclusively that
such efforts do not appear to have much effect on census
accuracy; that is to say, on coverage and on differential
coverage. On this matter, I agree with Mrs. Maloney in her
opening statements this morning. Despite increasing resources
allocated by the Congress to the census in recent decades and
despite extraordinary efforts on the part of the Census Bureau
and its partners to narrow the stubborn, unyielding gap in the
undercount between the majority white population and race and
ethnic minority populations, that gap persists.
The 1990 census was a particular disappointment in this
regard. While reducing the differential undercount was the No.
1 goal for 1990, the gap widened. This caused many observers at
the time to conclude that traditional census taking had pretty
much already achieved as much as it possibly can in terms of
improving census accuracy. More money, more advertising, more
highly visible promotional campaigns, more complete count
committees, more attention to making census questionnaires user
friendly, more census assistance centers--none of this appears
to hold much promise for counting perhaps the last 2 percent of
the people in this country or for reducing the differential
undercount below 4 percent.
As a demographer and as a member of the Commerce
Department's 2000 Census Advisory Committee, I have followed
the debate regarding sampling and coverage improvement methods
for the 2000 census with considerable interest. I, likewise, am
familiar with the limited ruling of the Supreme Court on
January 25. And I know it is the Census Bureau's intention to
release, prior to April 1, 2001, both the field counts from the
2000 enumeration as well as the corrected counts based on
census errors revealed by the accuracy and coverage evaluation
survey, or the ACE survey.
I believe this to be a correct legal and ethically
defensible intention. This would seem to me to be our only hope
for census data users who want census data with the least
possible error.
I believe that accuracy in the census is fundamentally a
matter of fairness and equity for the American people and for
the places where they live. It would be my strongest hope that
fairness in the census not become a partisan or a parochial
issue where elected leaders and others hold positions about
census errors, depending on whether their State or their city
gains or loses because of those errors. Errors in the census
must be a concern to each of us.
The matter goes beyond which data are used for drawing
political boundaries or are used in Federal funding
allocations. Rather, it seems to me, Mr. Chairman, that at its
foundation, this is about the methods we use to produce a
portrait of the American people and of the urban neighborhoods
and the rural villages where they live. It is my opinion that
none of us should advocate a portrait that knowingly excludes
some people. None of us should want a portrait that is not as
absolutely accurate as we are capable of producing or a
portrait that fails to reflect our fundamental American ideals
of fairness and equity.
In summary, Mr. Chairman, I believe local partnership
efforts are an essential strategy for improving census response
rates. Regrettably, however, I believe the evidence shows that
none of these activities can close the overall coverage gap or
reduce the stubborn problem of differential coverage.
I thank you, Mr. Chairman. That concludes my formal
remarks, but I am happy to answer any questions.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Voss follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED]61509.012
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED]61509.013
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED]61509.014
Mr. Miller. Thank you.
Let me start with Mr. Robinson first. Is the legislature
still in the process of coming up with the appropriation that
Governor Thompson requested? Is the budget process still going
on?
Mr. Robinson. Yes, it is, Mr. Chairman. That process is
going on as we speak. I just got an update prior to the
commencement of the hearing this morning, and I understand that
at least one of our houses has added, at least for discussion
as of this time, $100,000 to the Governor's $750,000 request.
So, we are still very much in the ball game.
Mr. Miller. And in 1990, money was made available and it
was made as a grant to local communities; is that the way it
worked?
Mr. Robinson. It was a two-pronged process, Mr. Chairman.
There were moneys for grants and there was also moneys for
campaign, a public advertising campaign as well.
Mr. Miller. Well, it obviously helped get the mail response
rate up.
Dr. Voss, this is really not a hearing on sampling, but I
am a little surprised. You say you think sampling is the only
way to solve the problem. Do you believe that is true at the
census block level when you get down there? Will you say that,
yes or no? Do you think adjusted census block numbers are
better than adjusted numbers? Yes or no?
Dr. Voss. You want a yes or no answer? No.
Mr. Miller. So, adjusted numbers are not more accurate at
census block levels?
Dr. Voss. I do not think we know the answer to that. I
think there is evidence that error gets introduced at the block
level. Just as there is error in the block level in the census
raw counts. There is error at that very small level of
geography and it is not solved by something like the ACE
survey.
Mr. Miller. OK. When you get into redistricting and, you
know, you must work with block data, I mean you are working
with very small numbers, relatively small numbers.
Dr. Voss. Oh, absolutely.
Mr. Miller. And as you start adjusting that, the error
becomes magnified.
Dr. Voss. Not necessarily. There are enormous offsetting
errors, you see, that take place. As you aggregate up, there is
no question in my mind that at a congressional district level,
the corrected numbers are better than the uncorrected numbers,
at a city level and even at a neighborhood level, I am
convinced----
Mr. Miller. Are you familiar with the adjustment that was
attempted in 1990?
Dr. Voss. Oh, absolutely.
Mr. Miller. And do you feel that the adjusted numbers would
have been better than the unadjusted numbers?
Dr. Voss. At what level of geography?
Mr. Miller. At any level?
Dr. Voss. Oh, yes, absolutely.
Mr. Miller. Wisconsin would have lost a congressional seat
if they used adjusted numbers, did you know that? And
Pennsylvania.
Dr. Voss. Oh, that is a different question. I understand
that question too; but yes, for every State, I believe the
count would have been closer to the true number of people in
that State.
Mr. Miller. How about the census block data in 1990,
adjusted?
Dr. Voss. No, I cannot say that a given block would be more
accurate or less accurate.
Mr. Miller. I will tell you, I believe it is less accurate.
That is the problem you have when you start working with block
data. As you know, you may only have 20, 30, 40, 50 people in a
block and----
Dr. Voss. May I followup, Mr. Chairman?
Mr. Miller. Pardon?
Dr. Voss. May I followup on that?
Mr. Miller. Yes.
Dr. Voss. I agree with you, I mean I completely agree with
you on that point. But blocks are used as building blocks, as
aggregate, they aggregate up to neighborhoods, they aggregate
up to villages and towns and cities; so that I think that at
the block level, we should not wring our hands over the very,
very small errors that occur, but worry about the aggregation
that happens at a much higher level.
Mr. Miller. We can assume away errors and that is nice to
have that ability to assume. But the bottom line is, anyone
that draws lines, and when the State legislature does that,
they work with block data. And when you start creating the
errors I do not totally buy that particular argument that they
will average out in the end.
Let me go back, Mr. Kehl, in your community, do you have
somebody designated to be responsible for the census yet?
Mr. Kehl. Yes.
Mr. Miller. How much of this person's time will be devoted
to census matters?
Mr. Kehl. As much time as necessary. He works directly out
of our office.
Mr. Miller. And you have one full-time person at the State
level right now, is that right?
Mr. Kehl. Yes.
Mr. Miller. And they will work together. Is there any
organizational meeting where your person is meeting with the
people in other communities in the State?
Mr. Kehl. We do a quarterly meeting as it relates to local
government bringing together issues, and the census is one of
those. So we will be meeting again in July and we are at
Madison quite a bit, which is our State capitol unfortunately
for a lot of other reasons, but we live there.
Mr. Miller. Who do you think is going to be the hardest to
count population segment?
Mr. Kehl. I am concerned--as was mentioned, the minority,
certainly, but when we look at being as divested as we are, I
become a little concerned about our rural areas and that is why
we are coordinating with local governments to make sure there
is an accuracy there, sir.
Mr. Miller. You say the rural areas?
Mr. Kehl. Uh-huh, yes.
Mr. Miller. Why?
Mr. Kehl. Well, because of it being so spread out and so
diversified, and I think as we bring our council of local
governments together and meet on these issues, the accuracy
will come from that, and that is the role that county
government should play in coordinating those.
Mr. Miller. Mrs. Maloney.
Mrs. Maloney. Thank you. I thank everyone for their
testimony. It is wonderful, Mr. Robinson, to hear the efforts
of your State, to share financially and otherwise in striving
for an accurate count. And I appreciate very much your
comments, Mr. Voss, and I would like unanimous consent to put
in the record an editorial from the Racine Journal Times that
ran December 2, 1998, which really mirrored many of the
statements of Dr. Voss. May I put that in the record, Mr. Voss?
Mr. Miller. Without objection.
Mrs. Maloney. Thank you.
[The information referred to follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED]61509.015
Mrs. Maloney. Mr. Voss, my understanding of Milwaukee's
experience in 1990 is that there were great efforts in time and
cost by local governments to increase the mail rate return.
However, the undercount in Milwaukee was well above the
national average and nearly four times the undercount in the
State. Does this suggest that the Milwaukee example is useful
for increasing the mail return rate but not for reducing the
undercount?
Dr. Voss. The figure you gave, I will have to accept; I
cannot verify those. I think that it does. I think that
Wisconsin did not have a complete count in 1990, even though
our response rate was highest in the Nation. And I think the
sort of disconnect between achieving a high response rate and
achieving a complete and accurate count, those two things are
very different.
Mrs. Maloney. Will more promotion and outreach reduce the
differential undercount?
Dr. Voss. No. That was essentially the gist of my
testimony, that it will not.
Mrs. Maloney. So it did not work in 1990 and it is not
going to work now. There would be an undercount unless it is
corrected?
Dr. Voss. I think all of the evidence points to a yes
answer to that question.
Mrs. Maloney. Some people believe that correcting the
undercounts with modern scientific methods would boost the
population figures in other States more than in Wisconsin and
could cost the State a seat in the U.S. House of
Representatives. I have reviewed a number of reports, including
one that was written by the Congressional Research Service,
which indicates that Wisconsin will lose a seat in 2000
regardless of whether or not modern scientific methods are
used. Do you think the use of modern science will affect the
number of congressional seats held by Wisconsin?
Dr. Voss. I am sitting here with people who may have a very
different opinion on that and I should guard my comments. It is
my belief that the ninth seat has disappeared. And what I mean
by that is, as the population shifts have taken place over the
course of this decade, that if you were to have redistricted
say in 1998 or this year in 1999, if the Census Bureau's
estimates are even close to being accurate, regrettably for all
of us, I think the ninth seat is gone. Now this pertains to the
Supreme Court decision--your question relates to would adjusted
or unadjusted numbers affect our count and that is no longer an
issue because of the court's ruling. But I do not think it will
come into play at all.
Mrs. Maloney. Will it affect the State legislatures?
Dr. Voss. The use of adjusted numbers rather than
unadjusted numbers?
Mrs. Maloney. Uh-huh.
Dr. Voss. The ``A'' word is frequently frowned upon. Yes, I
think that it could, but in very small ways, not in dramatic
ways, but in small ways.
Mrs. Maloney. Some people suggest that modern scientific
methods will add errors into the census--we just heard those
comments--regardless of whether or not modern scientific
methods are used. But isn't the base line census erroneous?
Dr. Voss. Well, of course it is, and all the coverage
improvement evaluations that have been made since 1940 show
that. So, the census is in error. The ACE survey will not
correct appropriately all of those errors, but it will bring us
closer to a true count of the population in all larger areas
and cities and counties, and for the United States.
Mrs. Maloney. You are unique in that you have had extensive
experience in studying rural areas. Could you expand a bit on
why it is so difficult to achieve an accurate census count in
America's rural and small town communities? And do you think
the expanded outreach and promotion efforts planned for 2000
will address the disproportionately high undercount in poor
rural areas?
Dr. Voss. Well, one would certainly hope that it will. I
hope that our outreach efforts are not based solely on our
cities. In addition to the undercount being related to race and
ethnicity, it also is highly related to poverty and it is
widely known that rural America has large pockets of rural
poverty and that the poverty is fairly widespread in rural
areas. So, there is a problem of undercount in rural areas and
I would hope that our statewide promotional campaigns here in
this State and in other States address that.
Mrs. Maloney. Can I ask one more question that is totally
about Wisconsin? I know my time is up.
We hear and we talked about extensively today about how
Wisconsin's low undercount rate of 0.6 percent was due to the
outreach and promotion, the State funds, the whole effort by
the State. Can you explain why Ohio, which did not have
extensive outreach and promotion, as your State did, also had
an undercount rate of 0.6 percent?
Dr. Voss. Is that question addressed to me?
Mrs. Maloney. Yes, uh-huh.
Dr. Voss. No, I cannot.
Mrs. Maloney. I was looking at the numbers last night and I
said hey, they had the same amount and they did not do all the
things that you had done in the legislature. Thank you, very
much.
Mr. Miller. Mr. Ryan.
Mr. Ryan. Thank you. Just for the folks in the audience, I
would like to step back and talk about the sampling adjustment
and how it works with the higher aggregation levels. I think it
is safe to say that the higher the aggregation, the more
accurate the adjustment may be; but when you get down to the
lower aggregate levels, experts have agreed that adjustment is
much less accurate for towns and cities and areas with
populations below 150,000. It is important to note that almost
every town in Wisconsin has a population below 150,000. There
is not one town in the First Congressional District that
exceeds population of 150,000. We just have a handful of cities
that are actually that large.
So this adjustment question, as it relates to Wisconsin,
suggests that according to expert witnesses and reports, that
it is less accurate at those levels below 150,000.
But I wanted to go back to the block data. Allan Kehl,
county executive, I wanted to ask you how important is the
block data in what you do and in your estimates and in your
population counting and then, how does it affect your job and
the services you deliver? And also, Mr. Robinson, I wanted to
ask you how the block data affects us to be doing redistricting
for the assembly seats. Senator Moore on earlier testimony said
it takes about 15,000 votes to swing an election in the State
assembly, and we just elected the first Hispanic to the State
assembly very recently. And with a 15,000 vote swing, isn't
that accuracy at the block level in those historically
undercounted areas so important?
I will go to Mr. Kehl first.
Mr. Kehl. Thank you, Mr. Congressman. Extremely. When you
look at planning and you look at land use and you look at
development, where should it start--certainly in the block
concept. It gives us an overall perspective and we build from
there. To me, that is the most important. And especially in the
rural setting, which, as you look at Wisconsin, even in
southeastern Wisconsin, with the phenomenal growth rate we are
experiencing, we are still rural. And as a result, if you take
that concept, when you get to the lower level, we see great
success and more accuracy. That is my opinion, sir.
Mr. Ryan. Mr. Robinson.
Mr. Robinson. I, too, agree. I believe that the count
should be a verification at the lowest level possible, the most
manageable level, and that is block. And you should build from
there. Absolutely, I agree with the county executive.
Mr. Ryan. Do you think that getting the most accurate count
at the local level down to the block level is our best chance
of getting a better count for those historically undercounted
areas so we can get that minority representation into the
minority neighborhoods that are actually undercounted?
Mr. Robinson. Absolutely. And I was very struck by the
testimony of Representative Ladwig, in terms of you have got to
go door to door, house to house, face to face. Those
activities, coupled with doing it at that very basic level, are
absolutely critical if we are ever going to achieve that
accurate and complete count that we constantly talk about--
absolutely.
Mr. Ryan. Dr. Voss, I would like to ask you briefly. Do you
agree with statements by other experts that when you get the
aggregation down to the lower level, the block level, towns
below 150,000, that it is less accurate, and also do you think
that post-census local review--I notice in your testimony, you
advocated several of the things that we are trying to do to
promote the census, promote the enumeration--do you think that
post-census local review, in addition to these efforts, is
something that will help us get a better number?
Dr. Voss. Well, there are two questions there. I think you
know my answer to the first one. I am not so worried about the
very, very small and I will say close to trivial errors that
occur at the block level. It is when you have populations in
neighborhoods that are counted by 5 percent that it seems to me
that all of us ought to start getting concerned and figure out
ways of correcting for that. The block numbers will have error;
some will be incorrectly increased and some will be incorrectly
decreased. But you lose a lot of that inaccuracy as you
aggregate up and it is at aggregations, it is at neighborhoods,
it is for communities, it is for villages, it is for towns,
that those data become important. So, I guess I disagree with
the two gentlemen to my left on that.
With respect to post-census local review, I am really
pained in trying to come up with an answer on that one. I
understand the 1990 program and how it worked extraordinarily
well, and the disappointments that existed here in Wisconsin
when that program was concluded. We, in the unit that I said
that I was involved with and Nat Robinson's unit in State
government, jointly, we put on over 40 workshops trying to
educate our local communities on the ground rules for
challenging their numbers in post-census local review and how
to go about that in the very brief time that they had.
For the most part, I think local review was deemed as a big
disappointment. I do not remember the exact percentage, I think
it was 18 or 19 percent of eligible communities took part in
post-census local review; well over 80 percent did not, despite
this effort to get involvement.
I think, just very briefly, I can say it very quickly, the
program sounds wonderful and to ask a mayor, would you not like
to see your numbers before they are certified as final--you are
not going to get a no answer to that. But for the Census
Bureau, and I think for your subcommittee, there are some real
issues that have to be addressed. The Census Bureau, for one,
is on a very, very tight time schedule to get the certified
counts out by December 31 so that if the subcommittee, through
legislation, is successful in requiring a post-census review,
you are going to have to work with the Census Bureau to figure
out where the time and the money is going to come from to fit
that into this very tight time schedule. That is why the Census
Bureau decided to try this time around to front end load that
process, to put in the local review of census addresses and
block counts before the count, rather than after the count, to
give more time, in fact, to that process.
Three, I will say that throughout the country, I think
post-census local review was not a terribly effective program.
It did not find all that many housing units or people, but it
did correct geographic misallocation, which is certainly
important.
I think the Census Bureau's largest fear for post-census
local review is that the overwhelming majority of communities,
the 39,000 or so general purpose governmental units, the
majority of those that have chosen not to participate in LUCA,
for whatever reasons, but who are not participating in this
program, this front-loaded program, will, in a post-census
local review, weigh in and they will be doing it for the first
time and they will not have understood the sort of rules that
surround how one goes about comparing the Census Bureau's
addresses and your local addresses, and the Census Bureau will
be overwhelmed in terms of the requirement to respond back to
those communities.
I much favor the front-end loading, it seems to me that it
makes sense, but I know that LUCA is not working as
successfully as the Bureau was hoping.
Mr. Ryan. Yes, that is a very interesting point. And I
think those of us on the committee who support front and back
end, you know, LUCA and post-census local review, as the best
way of doing it, that is a very compelling point, that there
are 39,000 communities who, by their own choice, because it is
a voluntary program, did not participate in the LUCA program. I
guess where we may disagree is that I do not necessarily see if
those 39,000 communities have a chance of participating in
post-census local review as really a problem, but as an
opportunity to get a chance at going in and really getting the
accurate count. Does it mean more work for the Census Bureau?
Of course, it does.
Dr. Voss. Sure.
Mr. Ryan. Does it help us get to the accuracy of counting
those neighborhoods, of counting the geography so those
neighborhoods, those historically undercounted neighborhoods,
actually have the kind of representation that they deserve?
Absolutely.
Dr. Voss. Yeah.
Mr. Ryan. Congressman Tom Barrett and I are planning on
doing some bipartisan promotion of the census around
southeastern Wisconsin in these areas that are historically
undercounted. We are hoping that we can get post-census local
review in here so we can get to those neighborhoods that are
historically undercounted.
One more point I just wanted to add before closing, I see
my time has expired, is that in Wisconsin, when we are talking
about reaching this threshold where aggregation of statistical
adjustment is preferred or better, that threshold is at that
150,000 town population level and that puts just about every
single town and city in this State out of the threshold.
So, I just wanted to thank each of you for coming and
participating. Did you want to add something there, Nathaniel?
Mr. Robinson. If I may, Mr. Chairman, I want to comment on
the pre- and post-review of census data. One of the things that
we learned in the updated lists, we sent a confirming letter to
city clerks, all of them, stating the importance of their money
being tied to this base. A lot of them are busy. They do not
really realize for the next 10 years, that it is the base not
only for Federal money, but local revenue sharing is also going
to be tied to that. It does make a difference. What is my
point? It may be in the message, Paul. Paul and I are good
partners. We can disagree agreeably even in a public forum and
still be friends and go out and have a beer. I think it is in
the message in terms of letting them know the impact for the
next 10 years, their estimates from 2001 on to the next census
is going to be based on that. So, if you hit home where it
really counts, it does make a difference in their grasping the
importance of it. So I think it is critical to keep both. And
the way we sell that in terms of the money impact is the way to
go.
Mr. Ryan. Very good point.
Mr. Kehl.
Mr. Kehl. Is there something wrong with a check and balance
on the post-census? Is there something wrong with
accountability? What am I missing here? I think this is what
this is supposed to be about.
You know what happened 10 years ago? I guess I was not in
the picture. I am very concerned about that as we represent our
communities. And although what the good doctor has stated may
have been in the past, believe me, there are government
officials today at your level, certainly down to ours, who are
very concerned about this. I believe in post-census, I believe
in the block counts because again, as you represented
Congressman Ryan, we do not have a community here that is above
150,000 folks. And this is very important to us. And this is
pretty much mainstream Nation here. It does not get any more
Midwest. Thank you.
Mr. Ryan. Thank you.
Mr. Miller. Mr. Petri.
Mr. Petri. Thank you. Just maybe to wrap this up, in
painting a little bit of a black and white picture when it is
really probably not that way, we certainly want to use modern
telecommunications, printing, tabulation, every other sort of
modern thing we have learned to do a better and better census,
including statistical adjustment or identification technology
to identify where there may be an undercount. Where the
difference here exists is whether that should trigger then an
extra effort to reach out and count, or whether we should just
go ahead and adjust the numbers and not be able to actually
subject those adjusted numbers to the discipline of an actual
head count check, which is the checks and balances that was
just referred to. That is purely a matter of trust and of
accuracy and whether we want to turn this over to a group of
people who are going to flip numbers to this block and that
block and suddenly, they are set in stone.
But, any of you care to comment on whether as a country,
you think we are doing a better or worse job than we did in
1800 or 1900? Do you think when we had the Pony Express or
before we had radio and television and advertising, when we had
a higher percentage of immigrant populations, people unable to
get out, no roads and cars, we were doing a better job than we
are doing today, or do you think we are holding up for perfect,
when in fact, we are much better than we have ever been before?
Mr. Kehl. I guess as we have grown, not everybody knows
everybody in the community. That was the case maybe 30 years
ago. I hope every 10 years we get better, but please understand
our counties or cities are living on nickels and dimes as it
relates to the census. These are very important issues to us as
far as programming is concerned, as far as operations are
concerned, and our very existence. You are going to see
communities dying on the vine unless there is some degree of
accuracy. We always think you get the message out. We like to
believe we get the message out. I can tell you from the local
level when we think we do, you can rest assured we have not.
And, that concerns us. If I can find a better way, other than
knocking on doors, if we have to rely on the mass media, fine.
Thank you, sir.
Mr. Robinson. Well, history has showed us that Americans
have always had a healthy skepticism; that is why we have
checks and balances in our three branches of government. But I
think that America is much more skeptical now. We have to craft
a message where each individual not only should exercise that
personal responsibility but a message that shows how the
census-taking process relates to that individual, to make it
more personalized. And once we do that, I believe that will
make a difference in terms of not only our overall quality as
defined by accuracy, as well as completeness, but it will make
the process a whole lot easier.
Mr. Miller. Well, let me thank the three of you for being
here today and testifying. We very much appreciate it. I think
it has been a good hearing and I appreciate the citizens of
Racine to make available their facilities today. It is a
pleasure to be in southern Wisconsin.
I ask unanimous consent that all Members' and witnesses'
written opening statements be included in the record.
Without objection, so ordered.
In case there are additional questions that Members may
have for our witnesses, I also ask unanimous consent for the
record to remain open for 2 weeks for Members to submit
questions for the record and that the witnesses submit written
answers as soon as practicable.
Without objection, so ordered.
Thank you once again, and we stand adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 12:43 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
-