[House Hearing, 107 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
AMERICANS ABROAD, HOW CAN WE COUNT THEM?
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE CENSUS
of the
COMMITTEE ON
GOVERNMENT REFORM
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
JULY 26, 2001
__________
Serial No. 107-13
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Government Reform
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpo.gov/congress/house
http://www.house.gov/reform
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
75-727 WASHINGTON : 2001
____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpr.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512�091800
Fax: (202) 512�092250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402�090001
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 MAJOR R. OWENS, New York
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York
JOHN M. McHUGH, New York PAUL E. KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania
STEPHEN HORN, California PATSY T. MINK, Hawaii
JOHN L. MICA, Florida CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York
THOMAS M. DAVIS, Virginia ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, Washington,
MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana DC
JOE SCARBOROUGH, Florida ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland
STEVEN C. LaTOURETTE, Ohio DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio
BOB BARR, Georgia ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH, Illinois
DAN MILLER, Florida DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois
DOUG OSE, California JOHN F. TIERNEY, Massachusetts
RON LEWIS, Kentucky JIM TURNER, Texas
JO ANN DAVIS, Virginia THOMAS H. ALLEN, Maine
TODD RUSSELL PLATTS, Pennsylvania JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois
DAVE WELDON, Florida WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri
CHRIS CANNON, Utah ------ ------
ADAM H. PUTNAM, Florida ------ ------
C.L. ``BUTCH'' OTTER, Idaho ------
EDWARD L. SCHROCK, Virginia BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont
------ ------ (Independent)
Kevin Binger, Staff Director
Daniel R. Moll, Deputy Staff Director
James C. Wilson, Chief Counsel
Robert A. Briggs, Chief Clerk
Phil Schiliro, Minority Staff Director
Subcommittee on the Census
DAN MILLER, Florida, Chairman
CHRIS CANNON, Utah WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri
MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York
BOB BARR, Georgia DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois
------ ------
Ex Officio
DAN BURTON, Indiana HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
Chip Walker, Staff Director
Erin Yeatman, Professional Staff Member
Dan Wray, Clerk
David McMillen, Minority Professional Staff Member
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on July 26, 2001.................................... 1
Statement of:
Betancourt, Edward A., Director, Office of Policy Review and
inter-agency lIAISON, Overseas Citizens Services, Bureau of
Consular Affairs, Department of State...................... 13
Fina, Thomas, executive director, Democrats Abroad; L. Leigh
Gribble, member at large, Executive Committee, Republicans
Abroad; T.B. ``Mac'' McClelland, American Business Council
of the Gulf Countries; and Eugene Marans, attorney,
Representing the Association of Americans Resident Overseas
[AARO], American Citizens Abroad [ACA], and Federation of
American Women's Clubs Overseas [FAWCO].................... 45
Gilman, Hon. Benjamin A., a Representative in Congress from
the State of New York...................................... 25
Letters, statements, etc., submitted for the record by:
Betancourt, Edward A., Director, Office of Policy Review and
inter-agency lIAISON, Overseas Citizens Services, Bureau of
Consular Affairs, Department of State, prepared statement
of......................................................... 17
Clay, Hon. Wm. Lacy, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Missouri, prepared statement of................... 37
Fina, Thomas, executive director, Democrats Abroad, prepared
statement of............................................... 48
Gilman, Hon. Benjamin A., a Representative in Congress from
the State of New York, prepared statement of............... 27
Gribble, L. Leigh, member at large, Executive Committee,
Republicans Abroad, prepared statement of.................. 58
Maloney, Hon. Carolyn B., a Representative in Congress from
the State of New York, prepared statement of............... 11
Marans, Eugene, attorney, Representing the Association of
Americans Resident Overseas [AARO], American Citizens
Abroad [ACA], and Federation of American Women's Clubs
Overseas [FAWCO], prepared statement of.................... 81
McClelland, T.B. ``Mac'', American Business Council of the
Gulf Countries:
Letter dated July 25, 2001............................... 64
Prepared statement of.................................... 68
Miller, Hon. Dan, a Representative in Congress from the State
of Florida, prepared statement of.......................... 4
AMERICANS ABROAD, HOW CAN WE COUNT THEM?
----------
THURSDAY, JULY 26, 2001
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on the Census,
Committee on Government Reform,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 1:30 p.m., in
room 2247, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Dan Miller
(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Present: Representatives Miller, Clay, and Maloney.
Staff present: Chip Walker, staff director; Erin Yeatman
and Andrew Kavaliunas, professional staff members; Daniel Wray,
clerk; David McMillen, minority professional staff member; and
Earley Green, minority assistant clerk.
Mr. Miller. Good afternoon. We'll go ahead and begin. There
is a vote going on on the floor and I know Mrs. Maloney and Mr.
Clay and Mr. Gilman on are their way back over here from the
vote. I went directly to the vote, and so we may shift things
around depending on the arrival of individual Members. But let
me go ahead and begin with my opening statement, and then we'll
see who's here at that time.
Today we revisit the issue of counting Americans abroad.
When we first held a hearing on this issue in 1999, the Census
Bureau testified to the operational and timing difficulties
that they felt would make it nearly impossible to include these
Americans in the 2000 census.
Now, with the 2000 census behind us we have the time, but
do we have the ability to do the job? The reasons behind the
desire to count overseas Americans are clear, reasonable and
justified. Many Americans abroad continue to pay taxes and vote
here in the United States. Many are only overseas temporarily
and will soon return. When they return of course they begin to
use the resources in the States and communities where they will
reside. Many overseas Americans recognize the civic importance
of participating in the census and want to do their part.
Many of the groups who will give us testimony today
represent well-defined groups of Americans abroad. However, any
effort to count Americans abroad and include them in the
apportionment count must be equal in its efforts for all groups
of Americans, in all countries, or it will run the risk of
being subject to painstaking litigation. There is just such
litigation going on now between the States of North Carolina
and Utah.
So the question Congress is faced with is a difficult one.
Can we count Americans abroad legally, accurately and at what
price? I have been an advocate of counting Americans abroad.
Just last week I supported Mrs. Maloney's amendment to the
Commerce-Justice-State appropriations bill to provide funding
for research to be conducted by the Census Bureau in this area.
And in accordance with language we placed in last year's
appropriations bill, at the end of September of this year, the
Census Bureau is due to submit a report to the Congress on how
they can count Americans abroad. I expect that this report will
be a thorough and detailed report and will provide us with
something that we can all use as a blueprint.
While I'm an advocate, I'm also a realist. The more I hear
about this endeavor, the more questions I have as to its
feasibility. It is daunting enough to simply say that the
Census Bureau must take a census of Americans that reside in
every nation in the world, but it's much more than that. Before
we undertake such an objective certain questions must be
answered.
We must first decide who's actually a citizen. While
citizenship is defined in law, how will the Census Bureau
verify citizenship around the globe? Keep in mind that in the
domestic census everyone is counted. Citizenship is not an
issue.
And what about outright fraud? If non-citizens attempt to
fraudulently send in census forms in an attempt to gain an
advantage in immigration or some other issue, some other form
of U.S. assistance, how can this possibly be verified?
Some say use administrative records. Well, administrative
records assisted tremendously in counting--in fact, it was the
sole source of counting overseas military government employees
and their dependents. How reliable and accurate would
administrative records be from other organizations? What of
Americans overseas who are not listed on any official register?
Is it fair to exclude them? Would it be legal to exclude them?
Another question is whether participation in overseas
enumeration should be voluntary, as some have suggested. Can
Congress support a voluntary census of overseas Americans while
it supports a mandatory domestic census. Could such divergent
approaches be supported legally?
Some have suggested that a data base maintained by the
State Department would simplify things. We cannot and must not
forget the all important privacy issues. It is our government's
policy that Americans are not forced to register with the State
Department when traveling abroad beyond obtaining a passport.
Such a registration system would also put a tremendous burden
on individuals.
At a recent subcommittee hearing Census Bureau Acting
Director Bill Barron said an enumeration of overseas Americans
would be a daunting task. That is clearly an understatement.
Our Nation, however, has taken on and conquered many a daunting
task in our day. Making the 2000 census more accurate than the
1990 census was just such a daunting task and one the Bureau
accomplished to its credit.
This Congress must decide whether the task of including
overseas Americans in future censuses is feasible and within
reasonable fiscal constraints. The witnesses here today have
been invited because they have insight into the complexities of
this issue and hopefully can provide us with their expert
guidance.
I look forward to everyone's testimony, and I thank
everyone for coming before the committee today. The question
now is not whether we count them, it's just how do we
accomplish the task. It is a difficult job and I think working
together--this is not a partisan issue--that hopefully we will
have some ideas today and can proceed when we get the report
from the Bureau in September.
Mrs. Maloney.
[The prepared statement of Hon. Dan Miller follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.002
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.003
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.004
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.005
Mrs. Maloney. I just would like to begin by thanking the
chairman for calling this important hearing to discuss how we
can count Americans living abroad. We have disagreed on many
issues regarding the census, but I believe we are ready to come
together on this issue of counting Americans living abroad. I
would also like to thank all the witnesses here today for
taking the time to testify and help us better understand the
issue. I am hopeful that we can work together to get a good
count of Americans abroad as quickly as possible.
However, I'm disappointed that the Census Bureau was not
asked to come and testify. I think all of the witnesses today
are in agreement that something should and must be done to
count Americans abroad, and we should not let another census go
by without at least trying to get an accurate count. The
problem is with the Census Bureau.
I understand the concerns and difficulties that the Census
Bureau has in this challenge, but it seems that the Census
Bureau would rather continue to list the challenges than come
up with the possible solutions. I don't want to minimize the
hurdles that are before us. I think that if we can resolve the
issues on how the count of Americans overseas will be used then
we can move quickly to ensure there is a count. Yet these
hurdles can only be surmounted by hard work, not bellyaching on
the part of the Bureau.
Last year the chairman put report language--and I
congratulate the chairman for having put report language in the
Census Bureau appropriations bill--asking the Census Bureau to
report back on steps that could be taken toward counting
Americans abroad. To the best of my knowledge, very little work
has been done by Census. In fact, I look forward to asking the
witnesses if any of the groups have today sat down with the
Census Bureau to discuss these matters since the appropriations
bill was enacted nearly a year ago.
As my colleagues know, I am very concerned that Americans
abroad have not been counted. Two years ago I submitted
legislation, H.R. 2444, in the 106th Congress, the Census of
Americans Abroad Act. My bill was the first bill ever to direct
the Census Bureau to start to plan and implement counting of
Americans abroad and to allocate money for that purpose.
With Chairman Miller's support, I recently passed an
amendment to the Commerce-Justice-State appropriations bill
that I believe is the next concrete step to ensuring that we
will at least, at the very least, try to count all of the
Americans living abroad. In the bill, we allocated $2.5 million
to begin making the count. I hope that I will have the
chairman's support to try to ensure that it survives, this
important allocation, in the conference committee and in the
final bill that goes to the President.
But what is before us now is the job of pressing the
Census, now that it has the money specifically for this
purpose, to move forward and finally present us with a concrete
plan for counting Americans living abroad as soon as 2004, as
called for in my original legislation, so that we don't have to
wait another--to the next census in 2010. And believe me, if we
don't start trying to do something in this particular census,
we will be there in 2010 again throwing our hands up in the air
and wringing our hands saying why don't we have a plan to count
Americans abroad.
The Census Bureau has avoided this issue again and again.
We need to act now to make sure they do not shortchange
Americans abroad once more. We have 9 years before the 2010
census. I ask for Chairman Miller's support for my bill, H.R.
680, to press the Census to start counting Americans residing
outside the United States.
I hope that the chairman will set up a time in the near
future, now that we have heard from the people excluded, so
that we can hear from the Bureau on what needs to be done and
what are their concrete plans to finally count the really
patriotic citizens and Americans living abroad. They pay their
taxes. They vote. They are very proud of being Americans.
They're unofficial Ambassadors for our country. They do so much
good work for our country. We can at least include them in what
is a great civic ceremony, really the only real civic ceremony
that includes every single American. That is the census. And it
is the responsibility that is cited in the Constitution and we
should allow our citizens to be counted.
It's important. Particularly as we move into a global
economy, it becomes even more important as more and more
Americans will be living abroad. I again congratulate the
chairman, and I want to note that I am so glad that he
supported this amendment and how much I've enjoyed working with
him on this committee. I regret that he has made a choice to
retire after 6 years in Congress, and I feel that----
Mr. Miller. It's our 9th year.
Mrs. Maloney. 9th year. Oh, he's going to retire after his
9th year. And that was some type of pledge that he made. But I
think that's unfortunate, and we will lose a great leader,
great advocate. But one reason that I'm very sad that he is
resigning is that he will not be here in 2010 to have the
papers thrown in his face by the Americans living abroad who
will be saying that, you know, you promised us, you promised
us. You said you'd get it done. It hasn't been done.
So he's retiring. So I'm afraid to let him out of here
until we have this plan in place because he's worked on this
project. He understands it. He cares about it. He can get the
job done and we have to get it done before he leaves office
because I don't know what will happen after he leaves with the
Republican majority. No one has the expertise and the depth of
knowledge and I would say the commitment that the chairman has.
So therefore, we are under a timeframe to get this done
before the chairman leaves Congress. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Hon. Carolyn B. Maloney
follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.006
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.007
Mr. Miller. Thank you. I think we hope to have another
hearing in October once the Census Bureau presents their
report, which is due at the end of September. But today we want
to hear from other groups. Lets start with the second panel
initially--and then if Mr. Gilman or Mr. Clay come in and want
to have an opening statement we'll have those. But if Mr.
Betancourt would step forward. In this subcommittee of the
Committee of Government Reform we do swear in our witnesses, so
if you'd remain standing and raise your right hand.
[Witness sworn.]
Mr. Miller. Thank you. Thank you very much and I appreciate
your being here today, and I have read your statement, but I
would like to have you proceed to give us a report.
Before you start, I have visited many Embassies around the
world and when congressional Members visit an Embassy they
don't usually ask for the consular office, but I have on a
number of occasions. I don't know if you have ever known that
or not, but I did so most recently actually in El Salvador, and
I've learned a lot about the challenges they are faced with. I
know that's where a lot of the people in Foreign Service start
their careers, but it's really one of the toughest jobs to be
there to make decisions that affect the lives of so many
individuals in these countries around the world. So I admire
the work the consular office does. It's where you find some of
the unsung heroes are at the State Department. So I give you
congratulations for the work that you do and the challenge that
you have.
But, Mr. Betancourt, would you like to make a statement
please?
STATEMENT OF EDWARD A. BETANCOURT, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF POLICY
REVIEW AND INTER-AGENCY LIAISON, OVERSEAS CITIZENS SERVICES,
BUREAU OF CONSULAR AFFAIRS, DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Mr. Betancourt. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of
the committee. Thank you for this opportunity to testify on
behalf of the Bureau of Consular Affairs of the Department of
State regarding the census and the possibility of counting U.S.
citizens overseas.
The Bureau of Consular Affairs is charged with exercising
the Secretary of State's responsibility to provide consular
protection and services to U.S. citizens abroad. There is no
higher priority of the Department of State than the protection
and welfare of Americans overseas. While for workload and
crisis planning purposes we compile internally estimates of
U.S. citizens within a country, we currently have no means or
ability to count them. These estimates are prepared by our
Embassies using as a base Embassy registration numbers,
information from local immigration authorities, and informal
surveys of employers and institutions in the American community
such as the American Chamber of Commerce. We have, however,
neither the expertise nor the resources at present to conduct
an accurate count of U.S. citizens in a given country.
Americans travel, study, work and reside abroad in ever
increasing numbers. While we and our colleagues and our U.S.
Government agencies do have some statistical information on
Americans overseas, we do not have comprehensive information on
how many Americans reside overseas at any given time. The
Departments of Commerce and Transportation travel and tourism
statistics reflect that Americans make more than 60 million
trips abroad each year. According to the Department of
Education, the number of U.S. students studying abroad each
year has grown to 114,000. The Department issued over 7 million
U.S. passports in fiscal year 2000.
The population of Americans abroad is very complex.
Americans abroad include, for example, the more than 44,000
children who were born abroad to U.S. citizen parents for whom
we issue Consular Reports of Birth Abroad. We also issue 6,000
Reports of Death of U.S. citizens abroad each year. More than
2,500 U.S. citizens are arrested abroad each year and serve
sentences in foreign prisons. There are also some 400,000
recipients of U.S. Federal benefits such as Social Security and
veterans benefits abroad, which include both citizens and non-
citizens. Again, we have some statistical data, but it is not
of the nature sought by the Census.
We recognize the many and important contributions of our
overseas citizens and we appreciate their desire to be counted.
It is our understanding that for census 2000 the Census Bureau
did count U.S. military and their dependents assigned overseas
as well as Federal civilian employees and their dependents at
their home of record or other home State designations
determined by using employing agency administrative records.
The Census Bureau did not to our knowledge conduct an
individual count of U.S. Government official personnel and
their dependents abroad.
Although we have noted that we lack both the staff and
resources to conduct a worldwide count, of particular concern
is the fact that we lack within the Department of State any
expertise in conducting or validating the census. We recognize
fully that conducting a census is a highly developed exercise
utilizing complex methodologies created by experienced
statisticians who validate the soundness of their programs
based on years of sampling. The difficulties inherent in
conducting a census within our country increase exponentially
when projected to a global scale. We at the Department of State
are simply not equipped to undertake a full scale census
overseas.
It should also be noted that there is no accurate source of
information regarding the location of U.S. citizens abroad to
which U.S. census questionnaires might be addressed. U.S.
Embassy and consulate registration records are based on purely
voluntary self-reporting by citizens and at any given time we
estimate that there are more than 3 million U.S. citizens
abroad, figures which include short-term visitors. Consular
registration records cannot be considered complete or accurate,
since U.S. citizens are not required by law to register with
the U.S. Embassy or consulate when they travel or reside
abroad.
U.S. passports are issued to adults for a 10-year period.
Addresses for our mobile population change rapidly, as we find
when we try to use a passport or registration address or
telephone information to contact families in emergencies.
Experience shows that most citizens do not register and even
for those who do, the registration information does not remain
valid for very long. On an annual basis we try to update our
registration and crisis warden systems. In addition, we find
that many citizens leave the foreign country without notifying
the U.S. Embassy or consulate.
We are now exploring new ways to make it easier for
Americans to register with the U.S. Embassy or consulate,
including Web-based systems which will enable our citizens to
update their location information securely from any laptop,
cyber cafe or hotel. Several U.S. Embassies have modest on-line
registration capabilities at the present time. The data is
received by e-mail and must then be keyed into our consular
automated registration system. Our intention is to develop a
worldwide system that will replicate the data securely and
allow citizens to update their own information frequently. We
anticipate that such a system would not be available for
several years. It is our hope that once that kind of process is
made simpler, more citizens will choose to register, but again
it is not mandatory.
Moreover, we note a threshold issue in any discussion
necessarily involves criteria for an enumeration. Counting U.S.
citizens is itself an exercise which involves far more than
merely counting. If citizenship must be verified, it would
involve an independent and extremely labor intensive process to
confirm that the person who declares him or herself a U.S.
citizen is in fact entitled as a matter of U.S. citizenship law
to assert that status.
This will not always be obvious. There are hundreds of
thousands of persons in Canada and Mexico alone who are U.S.
citizens but may lack documentation such as a U.S. passport to
establish that fact, especially since U.S. citizens are not
required to have a U.S. passport in order to travel to those
countries. Moreover, there are thousands of persons around the
globe who are in fact U.S. citizens, but have never chosen to
make that fact of record by applying for documentation as a
U.S. citizen. Yet a person's status as a U.S. citizen is
determined by the laws enacted by Congress regardless of
whether a person has come forward to confirm that status.
Additionally, there are a universe of persons of unknown
size, who while clearly U.S. citizens at birth, lack current
evidence that they remain U.S. citizens. In some instances this
involves complex adjudications, retrieval of records pertaining
to past generations, and other protracted procedures to
determine if a person acquired, has retained or may have lost
U.S. citizenship even before one gets to the question of how to
count such persons. Yet the failure to determine or confirm a
person's self-declaration of U.S. citizenship could undermine
the validity of any count of U.S. citizens unless it is
determined that verification of citizenship is not required.
We must again stress the Consular Affairs Bureau lacks the
resources personnel and, most significantly, the means to
conduct citizenship adjudication and verifications of hundreds
of thousands or perhaps even millions of persons abroad.
There is also a question as to how the home State
determination would be made. Would it be the self-declared last
State where the citizen lived before going abroad? The State
they claim for tax purposes? The State in which they vote or
their State of birth?
A large number of U.S. citizens born abroad continue to
reside abroad and may never have been to the United States.
Would they claim a U.S. citizen parent's or grandparent's last
State of residence as a home State? How would duplication of a
count be avoided and what information could be used as an
identifier? U.S. passport numbers or Social Security numbers
would not suffice, since U.S. citizens residing in the Western
hemisphere are not required to have U.S. passports and not all
U.S. citizens abroad have Social Security numbers.
The Department of State is not in the position to provide
extensive staff support regarding Census Bureau enumeration
activities abroad. Consular sections at U.S. Embassies and
consulates provide a variety of essential services to ensure
the protection of the interests of the United States and its
citizens on the most fundamental level. We assist Americans
abroad in routine and emergency situations, facilitate the
travel of immigrants and non-immigrants, and deter the travel
of persons likely to remain illegally in the United States or
engage in activities harmful to our country. Our consular
offices must focus primary attention on these key consular
services.
We would anticipate that it would be necessary for the
Census Bureau to make arrangements to send or retain trained
agents to act on their behalf in the overseas enumeration. We
can of course coordinate with foreign governments to obtain
country clearance, if possible, for Census Bureau activities
abroad and publicize Census Bureau activities through our
overseas consular emergency warden systems. We can issue public
announcements about an overseas count which would be
highlighted in the Bureau of Consular Affairs home page. Our
home page has seen as many as 600,000 hits a day, or 13 million
or more hits a month.
Another service we could provide to support Census Bureau
enumeration activities abroad would be to include the subject
in our consular outreach program to key stakeholders such as
tourism, travel, education, and other organizations of U.S.
citizens overseas. Similarly, we would be pleased to make
available to the Census Bureau our contact information
regarding stakeholder organizations, or a link to our Web page.
We appreciate that it is very important to U.S. citizens
overseas who are called upon to exercise the responsibilities
of citizenship, such as voting and paying taxes, to be counted.
We are supportive of the concept, but believe the subject will
require considered study by demographic experts at the Census
Bureau to design and develop procedures, methods and plans to
conduct such an operation. The State Department is willing to
work with and advise the Census Bureau, as it does with other
Federal agencies, on such a study.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. Thank you for
the opportunity to speak to the subcommittee today. I will be
happy to answer any questions that you or the Members have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Betancourt follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.008
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.009
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.010
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.011
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.012
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.013
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.014
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.015
Mr. Miller. Thank you. I appreciate your statement and
we're going to have some questions. But I think what we want to
do because we kind of got a little bit out of order, is first
allow Mr. Clay to make an opening statement. Unless--do you
have to rush off, Mr. Gilman?
Mr. Clay. Mr. Gilman can go ahead.
Mr. Miller. Why don't we let Mr. Gilman, if you don't
mind----
Mr. Clay. That's fine.
Mr. Miller. Let Mr. Gilman make a statement because of the
vote confusion. Thank you very much.
You have been obviously a leader on this issue in Congress
for a number of years and you have been pushing it, and so we
appreciate your continued interest in and advocacy of the
issue. Mr. Gilman.
STATEMENT OF HON. BENJAMIN A. GILMAN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Mr. Gilman. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and my
colleagues, for this opportunity to come before you on this
important issue, the enumeration of Americans living abroad and
the bill I have introduced H.R. 1745, called the Full Equality
for Americans Abroad Act.
As a long time member of our House International Relations
Committee, and this Member served on a former Post Office and
Civil Service Committee where we had a specific Census
Committee, and now as a senior member of our Government Reform
Committee, I've had the opportunity to work on this issue for
many years. And I think American citizens living abroad need
some sort of equality when we discuss the census of our Nation.
Over these years it's become clear to me that our Americans
living abroad place an increasingly important role in our
Nation's economy and our foreign policy and in our relations
with other nations and with their citizens throughout the
world.
Moreover, as we move into this new century and increased
globalization, we must continue to recognize the important role
played by the export of overseas goods and services to our
Nation's economy. Not only are we reliant on those Americans
abroad to carry out our Nation's exports for the creation of
U.S.-based jobs, but we're reliant on those citizens to promote
and advance U.S. interests around the world. They become
virtually our informal diplomats.
Nevertheless, our U.S. Census Bureau currently does not
count private sector Americans residing abroad, this despite
the fact that U.S. Government employees working overseas are
included in the U.S. census. So there really is a
discriminatory practice with regard to our Americans living
abroad. If we want to make certain that all Americans are
counted, and that our Nation's decennial census is going to be
the most accurate that we can obtain, we must change this
inconsistent policy.
Accordingly, Mr. Chairman, my colleagues, I've introduced
H.R. 1745, the Full Equality for Americans Abroad Act,
legislation that will make certain that all Americans living
overseas are going to be counted for purposes of apportionment
in the decennial census beginning in the year 2010. They tell
me there are over 3 million Americans living in that situation.
The issue of counting all American citizens living abroad
has the support of Members on both sides of the aisle. In fact,
my good friend and colleague from New York, Congresswoman
Carolyn Maloney, has introduced legislation expressing the
sense of Congress supporting an interim count of American
citizens living abroad by the U.S. Census Bureau in 2004, and I
fully support that proposal. I just hope she will be a
cosponsor of mine as I became a cosponsor of her measure.
Moreover, during consideration of the fiscal year 2001
Commerce, Justice, and State appropriations bill, report
language was included in that measure directing the U.S. Census
Bureau to prepare a report to Congress detailing the number of
Americans living and working overseas as well as any
methodological, logistical or other issues associated with the
inclusion in future decennial censuses of Americans residing
abroad.
So it's apparent that the enumeration of all Americans
abroad is supported by a wide array of Members throughout the
Congress as well as by those members on our subcommittee here.
Accordingly, I'm hopeful that with the leadership of
Chairman Miller, and with our ranking member, Mr. Clay, whose
father used to be very active in census matters in our former
Postal Committee, will draft a piece of legislation to make
certain that the enumeration of all Americans abroad for
apportionment purposes in the 2010 census and all decennial
censuses thereafter. Such legislation could, as proposed by
Congresswoman Maloney, include an interim census, thus
providing the Census Bureau with the opportunity to work out
all of its bugs prior to that 2010 count.
So I look forward, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Clay and my
colleagues, to working with both Chairman Miller and with all
of your members on your committee on this proposal. Together
I'm confident that we can produce a bill to count all American
citizens living abroad beginning in the year 2010.
In closing, I'd like to reiterate the need for the U.S.
Census Bureau to count all Americans, including private
citizens, no matter where they live and work. Not only will
such a policy provide an accurate census, but it will allow our
Congress and private sector leaders to realize how best to
support our U.S. companies and our citizenry, and more
important, we'll have a fair estimate for redistricting
purposes of all the people in each district.
U.S. citizens abroad vote and pay our taxes, yet they are
discriminated against by our government solely because they're
private citizens and not working for the government overseas.
Mr. Chairman, my colleagues, I urge you to please work on
changing this policy and include the private sector Americans
residing overseas for the next census.
Thank you for the opportunity to appear before your
committee.
[The prepared statement of Hon. Benjamin A. Gilman
follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.016
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.017
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.018
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.019
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.020
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.021
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.022
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.023
Mr. Miller. Thank you, Mr. Gilman. We appreciate your
continued advocacy for this issue and that we all agree on. The
problem is not whether, it's a question of how, and that's what
we're in the process of working on, and we hopefully will be
able to move toward a test census within the next few years and
then be prepared for 2010.
Mr. Gilman. And, Mr. Chairman, I hope we can do it before
you leave this committee, and we're going to regret your
leaving, going on to other things. Thank you very much.
Mr. Miller. Thank you. Thank you. Did anybody else have a
comment or question?
Mrs. Maloney. I would just like to applaud the
Representative from the great State of New York and thank him
for his work on this issue and his leadership really on this
and so many other areas. He's done extremely outstanding work,
and we all appreciate it.
Mr. Gilman. I want to thank Congresswoman Maloney. We've
worked together on this issue through the last session, and
hopefully we'll now see it come to fruition.
Mrs. Maloney. Absolutely.
Mr. Gilman. Thank you very much.
Mr. Miller. Thank you, Mr. Gilman.
Mr. Clay, would you like to make an opening statement?
We're kind of a little bit out of order, but I've already done
mine.
Mr. Clay. Do you mind if I share your microphone? Thank
you, Mr. Chairman. Let me also thank Mr. Gilman for his
testimony. We appreciate that. Thank you.
I appreciate you having this hearing today, and I look
forward to the other testimony. There seems to be a groundswell
of opinion in Congress that this should happen. At the same
time, the Census Bureau keeps telling us that this is a task
that is almost impossible to carry out. I must admit, seeing
the kinds of errors that occur in trying to count the people in
this country, I'm not optimistic that we can do a good job on
counting the Americans overseas.
I would like to raise three questions that I would hope
that the panels would consider as they discuss the plans for
counting Americans overseas. First, what is the purpose of this
count? Is it for apportionment, redistricting, State and local
boundaries?
Second, how do we define the universe of who should be
counted? Should it be all citizens? Should it include the
foreign spouses and dependents of citizens? Should it include
anyone who has ever lived in the United States or only those
who vote?
Third, what is the implication of adding this voluntary
component to the Census? In the United States people are
required by law to cooperate with the census. There is no way
of demanding or enforcing cooperation overseas and, thus,
participation is strictly voluntary.
The politics of who gets counted in the census is an
interesting one. One of the shameful compromises of our
Constitution was the agreement to count slaves as three-fifths
of a person. Part person, part property. While this was
rectified in the 14th amendment the politics of counting
African-Americans did not end there. The 14th amendment not
only abolished the three-fifths clause, it put in place section
two, which says when the right to vote at any election is
denied to any male inhabitant or in any way abridged, the basis
of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion
which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole
number of male citizens. In other words, if a State denies
former slaves the right to vote, their representation in
Congress will be reduced.
The 1870 census was supposed to measure how many male
citizens were disenfranchised. According to the census
director, the numbers of disenfranchised males was bad and had
not been collected properly. In 1880, the question of
disenfranchised males was dropped from the census and the
enforcement of section two of the 14th amendment became moot.
It was not until the passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965,
almost a century later, that Congress addressed the problems of
disenfranchisement in the South. As Margo Anderson points out,
the men who drafted the 14th amendment wanted to remind
Americans of their duty to equal suffrage and civil rights. She
goes on to say in that duty the 1870 census failed. It did not
maintain the statistics of suffrage restriction and civil
rights, and later generations of Americans suffered the
consequences of that failure.
The state of Americans overseas is not so severe as that
faced by African-Americans between the ratification of the 14th
amendment in 1868 and the passage of the Voting Rights Act in
1965. But they are a part of the politics of the census
nonetheless. My colleague, Mr. Cannon, awoke to the problem of
counting Americans overseas when Utah lost a seat in the House.
In the last Congress, Representative Ryan from Wisconsin
introduced legislation on where prisoners were counted, because
it was clear that Wisconsin was in danger of losing a seat.
Former Census Director Kenneth Pruitt was fond of calling
the census an American celebration. It is understandable that
Americans living overseas would want to be a part of that
celebration, particularly those who intend to return. But
another part of the census is fairness. If in the process of
including Americans overseas in this celebration we disrupt the
fairness and equity of the census, we have done the job badly,
just as the Census Bureau did in 1870, when they dropped the
ball on suffrage.
I look forward to today's discussions, and I hope that we
can keep our eyes on fundamental questions of the purpose of
this count, who gets counted and how including this count in
the census affects others.
Thank you Mr. Chairman. I appreciate that opportunity.
[The prepared statement of Hon. Wm. Lacy Clay follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.024
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.025
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.026
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.027
Mr. Miller. Thank you, Mr. Clay. Mr. Betancourt gave his
statement. If you'd come forward, I think we have a few
questions and then we'll continue and get back to the schedule
here.
Let me start with some questions about who the U.S.
citizens are in countries. And I guess it's quite different
from country to country, from a Canada to an El Salvador to an
Israel to an India, I guess.
Mr. Betancourt. There's an enormous diversity of persons
who are long term, short term, sometimes a generation or two.
Our citizenship laws are written in such a way that citizenship
will not extend indefinitely. It will not extend, for example,
beyond the stage of which a grandparent will have lived in the
United States. So you--those laws preclude successive
generations of absentee Americans. But that said, again,
there's quite a mix and it varies from country to country. In
places like Mexico, for example, we know that we estimate that
we have somewhere between 800,000 and a million American
citizens. There are other countries, very small countries,
where we have a very good number in terms of the--there's a
high percentage of people who register because the country----
Mr. Miller. What countries would have the best percentage
registered would you say?
Mr. Betancourt. Well, to generalize, it would be a country,
for example, that might be experiencing instability. We find
that the highest registration levels occur in countries where
there is some threat or need of evacuation or some civil
unrest. Very often these are smaller countries. The other end
of the spectrum are countries in Western Europe. I've mentioned
Canada and Mexico, where we have a very small percentage of
Americans who register. And then there are a great number of
countries which are in between.
Mr. Miller. You have to have U.S. citizenship to have a
passport, can you generalize, how many people with U.S.
passports have no intent of ever coming to the United States? I
mean a U.S. passport is one of the most valuable commodities
probably abroad.
Mr. Betancourt. Yes.
Mr. Miller. And maybe because that person was born in the
United States, I mean how often does that happen and can you
generalize at all about----
Mr. Betancourt. It's very difficult to generalize. The
passport is valid for 10 years. There is no law that requires
that a person who is born a citizen ever return to this
country. They can--a person can remain a citizen and be abroad
indefinitely and at least for a generation or two. They could
either have been born abroad as U.S. citizens and never return
to this country. But it is very difficult. As I mentioned in
the testimony, they are too mobile a population to estimate how
many people who get U.S. passports have no intention of coming
here. Generally, the reverse is true. Most people who obtain
passports have fairly immediate travel plans. We know that in
many instances people who apply for passports take only one
trip in their life. They live in the United States. We issue 7
million passports a year and that's the purpose of getting a
passport. So there's not even a direct correlation between the
number of passports and the number of citizens abroad because
most people who have passports use them for travel.
Mr. Miller. I remember being questioned in Central America
about a child who was born in the United States and then the
parents return to their own country. But that child is a U.S.
citizen.
Mr. Betancourt. Under the 14th amendment, yes.
Mr. Miller. Right. But would parents normally get a
passport for that child? Because that costs money.
Mr. Betancourt. Well, it does and it is not a requirement
that a person have a U.S. passport to travel in the Western
hemisphere. It would be simply discretionary, although there
are instances when our own government does not require the
person to apply for a passport. But, for example, the country
of destination in Central America may require the person enter
on a U.S. passport. Such a child, though, would probably also
be a citizen of, say, Costa Rica or Guatemala.
Mr. Miller. Explain dual citizenship. How does that work?
Mr. Betancourt. Well, dual citizenship occurs in precisely
the circumstance that you just named. That is where the child
acquires one citizenship, for example, through the parents and
the other citizenship by virtue of the place of birth. Or the
child has parents, one of whom is a U.S. citizen, the other of
whom is a citizen of another country. Again, that is a fairly
common, I have to say increasingly common, circumstance that we
see. Now, the U.S. law does not operate to automatically strip
that person of U.S. citizenship. The laws of the other country
may or may not do so. But in many instances we are aware of,
and again with the increasing number of marriages between
people from different nations, there are increasing numbers of
dual nationals and that's simply a fact of life that we live
with.
Mr. Miller. If someone is a dual citizen, for example say
with Israel, do they pay taxes in both countries?
Mr. Betancourt. The laws relating to taxation have to do
with income and residency and factors which include, but go
beyond, nationality. We have to occasionally acquaint ourselves
with them. And I have found no simple formula which is
applicable in terms of citizenship and many times there are
filing requirements but there may not be taxes paid.
Mr. Miller. You mentioned that the estimate in Mexico is
800,000 to a million U.S. citizens. How do you come up with
that estimate?
Mr. Betancourt. Our Embassy in Mexico City, using both
registration records, immigration records, information from a
variety of sources, has come up with that estimate. It's--in
fact, I checked on that number yesterday because I myself was a
little bit skeptical about it, and because I was familiar with
the number 800,000. I was told that the more recent estimate
was that it was more likely closer to a million, but again that
just shows you how wide ranging these numbers can be.
Mr. Miller. Do you have any idea of the state of residence
of, say, the people overseas?
Mr. Betancourt. Among the information that is solicited in
the registration process, usually is a U.S. home address, if in
fact there is one.
It is not a category that we routinely keep track of. We
may look at the registration for the purpose of contacting
somebody in terms of an emergency. But we don't, because there
is no purpose served by our, for example, compiling states of
residence. They are U.S. citizens overseas and our services are
available to them without regard to their home State of
residence.
Mr. Miller. Thank you. Mrs. Maloney.
Mrs. Maloney. I want to thank the gentleman for his
service. And I agree with the chairman that your participation
is one of the most important in our whole foreign affairs. I
think that we really need to know what are we going to use this
for.
Now, if it were just to learn something, maybe there
wouldn't be this great opposition to counting Americans abroad.
But are we going to use it for apportionment, redistricting
State and local boundaries? I guess that is not really a
question to ask you, but I am just saying that sometimes people
object to it because they don't know what the ramifications are
going to mean in terms of reapportionment, which is highly
political and highly powerful, and is really the root of
government.
So we really don't know what the purpose of it is or what
we are going to use it for, and I think that question needs to
be addressed, probably before we go forward or maybe we just
define that we are not going to do anything with it, we are
just going to learn and just try to get an understanding of
what the ramifications are going to be.
Second, my colleague, Mr. Clay, raised the point, who
should the universe be? And I think that is a fair question to
ask you as an American citizen, not in your own--you have a lot
of great experience from this living abroad many years and the
positions you have held.
But should it be all citizens? Should it include foreign
spouses, dependents of citizens? Should it include anyone who
has ever lived in the United States? Do you have a sense of--
should it only be people who vote? Who do you think this
universe should be?
See, I think that there are those fundamental questions
that people see and don't go forward because the fundamental
questions haven't been answered.
I wonder, who do you think the universe should be?
Mr. Betancourt. Well, that is a little bit beyond the scope
of my testimony. To the extent----
Mrs. Maloney. I am asking you as an American citizen.
Common sense, who do you think it should be?
Mr. Betancourt. Well, that is difficult. I mean, I would--
it was my presumption really that we were talking about U.S.
citizens. We know that for many purposes in terms of our
dealing with people, we are dealing with situations in which
the U.S. citizen is a member of a family. The other family
members may or may not be U.S. citizens. You have a
circumstance which might be fairly common where one of the
spouses is a U.S. citizen, all of the children are U.S.
citizens, but the other spouse is not a U.S. citizen. That is a
family unit.
But it really depends upon the purpose. Those questions
come first. And I would think the purpose would define the
universe.
Mrs. Maloney. And in our census here, of course, here in
the United States we count everybody, citizen and noncitizen.
But, the importance of that is that we need to know
demographically what is happening in our own country. Possibly
in a foreign country we don't need such a universe of
information. So maybe defining it more pointedly might help us
get to the solution faster.
Mr. Betancourt. And our estimates are just solely for the
purpose of deciding how many people we need in a given country,
because there is a correlation, although it is a rough
correlation, between the number of citizens and the number of
services that are going to be required.
The other reason is for in the event of there being an
extreme emergency, whether there may be a need to evacuate
people. So our estimates are based solely on those very needs.
Mrs. Maloney. Then there is another point that the chairman
raised, and Mr. Clay also raised it, that in our Nation we call
it the great civic ceremony. It is not voluntary, it is really
required by law. There are very few responsibilities that are
defined for the American citizen, and one that is clearly
defined in the Constitution is that we must be counted every 10
years, every American resident.
That is not in the Constitution for people who decide to
live abroad. It is a voluntary component. Anything that is
voluntary may possibly skew the numbers, and that is another
aspect that raises concerns that we have many questions about.
In any event, I think that with the global economy, which
is a reality, we are living and participating for the American
economy in many cases in foreign countries, and I feel that has
raised really the importance of counting Americans abroad even
more.
In any event, I thank you for your service and your
testimony. And if you have any other ideas that could help us
with these questions, get back to us, and thank you for being
here.
Mr. Betancourt. Thank you.
Mr. Miller. Thank you, Mrs. Maloney. As we go through this
process, I am sure that we will be relying on the State
Department for input, as well as the Census Bureau.
Have you all been meeting with the Census Bureau at all?
Mr. Betancourt. Yes, we have. Earlier this summer we did
have a visit from a number of Census Bureau personnel. They
inquired about precisely the estimates that I referred to in my
testimony, the estimates of Americans that are based upon
considerations of workload and evacuation planning purposes.
They asked how we developed those estimates, what the
factors are that are used in compiling them. It is my
understanding that they received country by country reports of
our current estimates.
So we have had several meetings with them at my office in
the last 2, 3 months.
Mr. Miller. Well, that is encouraging. Thank you very much.
Thank you for being here today.
We'll take a very brief break while the four members of the
next panel would step forward, and we'll get the name tags
changed. If you all remain standing.
[Witnesses sworn.]
Mr. Miller. Let the record show that, let's see, Mr.
McClelland, Mr. Fina and Mr. Gribble said I do.
Mr. Fina is the executive director for the Democrats
Abroad. Mr. Gribble is representing Republicans Abroad. Mr.
McClelland is testifying today on behalf of American Business
Council of Gulf Countries, and Mr. Marans is here on behalf of
American Citizens Abroad, the Association of American Residents
Overseas and the Federation of American Women's Clubs Overseas.
Let me thank you all for being here, and we'll have opening
statements. We are going to try to stick with the 5-minute
rule. There is a little timer here. We have your written
statement. If you want to just not read it, that would be fine,
however you all want to proceed.
And so we'll begin with Mr. Fina.
STATEMENTS OF THOMAS FINA, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, DEMOCRATS
ABROAD; L. LEIGH GRIBBLE, MEMBER AT LARGE, EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE,
REPUBLICANS ABROAD; T.B. ``MAC'' McCLELLAND, AMERICAN BUSINESS
COUNCIL OF THE GULF COUNTRIES; AND EUGENE MARANS, ATTORNEY,
REPRESENTING THE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICANS RESIDENT OVERSEAS
[AARO], AMERICAN CITIZENS ABROAD [ACA], AND FEDERATION OF
AMERICAN WOMEN'S CLUBS OVERSEAS [FAWCO]
Mr. Fina. Mr. Chairman. First of all, let my say that I am
disappointed to learn that you are planning to step down from
this position. We have been looking forward to your continuing,
because this is a long-range job and you know so much more
about it than any of the rest of us, and we are counting upon
you to see it through. So we hope that----
Mr. Miller. We are going to get a lot done in the next year
and a half. Thank you.
Mr. Fina. Mr. Chairman, Mrs. Maloney, and members of the
subcommittee. My name is Tom Fina, and I am the executive
director of Democrats Abroad. I have been doing this now for 16
years. Before that I was a Foreign Service officer. I was
Consul General and I served as general manager of an American
corporation in Italy.
Democrats Abroad has about 30 chapters around the world. We
have got about 10,000 adherents. We encourage Americans abroad
to vote. We try to represent their interests here in the United
States. We have been doing that now for about 40 years.
We thank you for the opportunity to testify before your
committee. Let me begin by thanking you, the subcommittee, for
its very important support of the House decision on July 18th
to allocate $2.5 million for planning to include overseas
Americans in the census in 2010.
This is a milestone in the long process of getting this
count, and it is an objective that my colleagues here and the
organizations which we represent have all been fighting for for
many years.
So we are grateful. We hope that you will now move to
direct the Bureau of the Census to conduct a preliminary count
in 2004, as provided in Congressman Maloney's bill H.R. 680.
That would be a very important step.
Ideally, we should like to see an enumeration of Americans
abroad to be sufficiently accurate that it would rise to the
level required for apportionment. We know that no one knows at
this particular point how reliable the census data will be, and
that is why we would like very much to see a preliminary count
done in 2004 to smoke out both the possibilities and the
limitations of a count in 2010.
Only the professionals in the Bureau of the Census are in a
position to imagine and to design a meaningful Census for
Americans abroad that will be subjected to a minimum of
litigation. They have the professional skills and the network
of professional relations with foreign governments, statistical
agencies to know how to approach this terra incognita.
We know that the design of a meaningful census will take
time, resources and testing. For our part, we are ready to work
with the other overseas citizen organizations and the Bureau of
the Census to help wherever we can.
But it will only be after we have seen the results of the
best efforts of the Bureau of Census that you and we will be
able to judge the quality of the data gathered.
Even if it is not up to the standards required for
apportionment, there are other benefits in this exercise that
completely justify the expansion of our statistical x ray of
our whole citizen body.
A census will respond to the patriotic desire of the
American community around the world to be counted, to be
measured, to be seen in its proper proportions as a dynamic
part of our society. It will reveal the importance to our
economy and to our society of our overseas citizens. And the
conduct of the census will help to dispel the notion so
prevalent among Americans abroad that our government doesn't
care about their interests and values, their contribution to
the well-being and the richness of our society.
An enumeration will help the Congress, the executive branch
and the public to measure the adequacy of the resources
provided to the Department of State, to the Department of
Commerce, and to other Federal agencies for the provision of
services to Americans abroad.
There has been a sharp decline in the post-war period in
the number of consular posts abroad and therefore in the
availability of government services to American citizens and to
American business abroad.
It is in the national interest that these services continue
to be adequate.
In the same way an accurate count showing geographical
distribution and demographic composition will be of significant
assistance to those Federal agencies responsible for planning
emergency evacuations and assistance to American citizens in
times of natural disaster and political turmoil. This is a
major task and a service on which Americans count upon their
government when things get tough.
One of the sorest points, Mr. Chairman, for overseas
American citizens is the denial to them of Medicare benefits
while outside of the United States. Although they pay their
Medicare premiums with their taxes, overseas Americans must
return home to enjoy the benefits of coverage. The demand for
an extension of Medicare to qualified citizens abroad is a
political problem that will not go away until this need is met.
We need to know the dimensions of the Medicare qualified
universe abroad and an actual projection of its dimensions in
the outyears.
Mr. Miller. If you can try to bring it to a conclusion.
Mr. Fina. I think there are other benefits. But let me say
the things that we think should be included in the census. We
should like to know of course the numbers. We would like to
know the age of those who are counted, whether they have an
additional nationality, the nationality of their spouse, the
nationality of their children, their occupation and profession,
their income, both foreign and domestic, their country of
residence abroad, their voting residence in the United States,
the date of their last vote in the United States, the nature of
their medical insurance and their Social Security coverage.
Mr. Chairman, that is a tall order, but we know that the
Bureau of the Census is likely to be able to figure out a way
to do it, and we believe that it is essential that be done.
Thank you for the opportunity to speak.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Fina follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.028
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.029
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.030
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.031
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.032
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.033
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.034
Mr. Miller. Thank you.
Mr. Gribble.
Mr. Gribble. Yes. Good afternoon, distinguished chairman
and committee members. My name is Leigh Gribble. I am a retired
naval officer and the owner of a consulting firm that is
incorporated and registered in the State of Florida.
My family and I have lived in Kuwait in connection with my
military service and now my business for the past 9 years.
However, we pay taxes and vote in Florida's Fourth
Congressional District, which is where we hope to return to
live full-time within the next few years.
Among the various civic activities that I am involved with
overseas and within the United States, I am honored to serve as
vice chairman of the American Business Council of the Gulf
Countries, and as a member of the Executive Committee of
Republicans Abroad.
Today I am testifying on behalf of Republicans Abroad, the
international arm of the Republican Party, which has over
13,000 members in approximately 60 countries.
I am humbled today as I was on June 9, 1999, when I was
privileged to appear before this august committee prior to the
2000 census to give voice to the concern of thousands of my
follow Republicans around the world.
I am also saddened today that my appearance here is
warranted by the fact that there is still an ongoing debate in
Washington as to whether American citizens overseas should be
treated on an equal basis with their fellow citizens resident
in the United States with regard to being included in the
decennial census.
Rather than take up your valuable time reiterating the
points that I made in my previous testimony, I would
respectfully request, Mr. Chairman, that you accept my
testimony from your June 9, 1999 hearing as attached to my
written testimony today for inclusion in the record of this
hearing.
Mr. Miller. Without objection we'll include it.
Mr. Gribble. Thank you. I would like to offer some
additional thoughts on why it is imperative from the
standpoints of accuracy and fairness to include overseas
Americans in the census process.
The mission of the Census Bureau is to accurately enumerate
our growing population through the decennial census process.
However, this mission has never been completely fulfilled due
to the simple fact that private Americans living overseas are
not included in the census.
The population of Americans living and working abroad is
estimated to be at least 6 million U.S. citizens, a population
larger than that of 24 individual States in America. Imagine if
1 of those 24 States was excluded from the census.
The residents of that State would conclude that the
government views them as invisible U.S. citizens. This is the
status which American citizens in the private sector abroad
currently find themselves in because they are not included in
the census.
Americans living abroad are vital to the competitiveness of
the United States on the global economic stage. Overseas
Americans directly represent U.S. business and trade interests,
market our goods and services, and are truly Ambassadors of our
culture and the American way of life.
Indeed, they are anything but invisible, because they are
actively promoting our Nation's beliefs, values and trade.
Their pro bono work in promoting U.S. products and services is
of critical importance to the U.S. Department of Commerce's
efforts to enhance overseas trade, and yet Commerce's own
Census Bureau does not consider it critical to enumerate them.
Private Americans overseas certainly matter to the U.S. economy
and they should matter to the Census Bureau, too.
Over the past few years Republicans Abroad has conducted
town hall style events in more than 47 nations. Many of these
events included Members of Congress. During these forums,
overseas Americans consistently expressed a strong desire to be
counted in the decennial census.
They do so for several reasons. First, they believe it is
the duty of the Census Bureau to be as accurate as possible in
detailing the current population of the United States. It is
impossible for the Census Bureau to conduct a truly accurate
census while knowingly excluding a large population of
Americans simply because they are overseas. By not counting
Americans abroad, the Census Bureau cannot credibly state that
the census is accurate.
Second, Americans overseas can and do vote. They must pay
U.S. income taxes and they are inextricably linked to their
home communities in America. By excluding them from the census
the U.S. Government denies these American citizens equal
protection under the law. They are not considered in
apportionment for representation in Congress, nor in the
allocation and distribution of Federal funds and benefits that
are determined by population figures.
The U.S. Government collects overseas Americans' tax
dollars willingly enough, but they are not willing to count
these overseas citizens and provide them with the same funding
and benefits that they rovide to all other American citizens.
This is just plain wrong, and certainly violates the
Constitution's guarantee of equal protection for all Americans.
Third, the Census Bureau enumerates Federal employees
working abroad in the census, but they discriminate against
private Americans, those who do not work for the government by
not counting them. All overseas Americans deserve to be
included in the census regardless of their employment status or
who their employer is. Again, why should private American
citizens overseas be denied equal protection?
Fourth, the Census Bureau has routinely argued that
counting overseas Americans would be too complex, too
expensive, and nearly impossible to do. They claim that
overseas Americans would be difficult to locate. However, when
income taxes are due, the Internal Revenue Service seems to
know the location of virtually every American abroad.
How come the IRS can find overseas Americans but the Census
Bureau says they cannot? Americans abroad can be found. Their
are eager to participate in the decennial census and it is
their right to be counted.
Republicans Abroad hopes that in the interests of fairness
and accuracy, our elected officials in Congress and the
administration will on a bipartisan basis ensure that the
Census Bureau enumerates our citizens overseas in the 2010
census and in every decennial census to come.
To that end we ask that you take whatever steps are
necessary to accomplish this, including giving your full and
careful consideration to supporting H. Res. 1745, the Full
Equality for Americans Abroad Act, which has been offered by
Representatives Ben Gilman and James Moran.
Thank you for allowing me to testify today.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Gribble follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.035
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.036
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.037
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.038
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.039
Mr. Miller. That was almost exactly 5 minutes. Thank you
very much.
Mr. McClelland.
Mr. McClelland. Sir, I have come from Dubai. If I run over
a little bit, please excuse me. Chairman Miller, Ranking Member
Clay and members of the House Subcommittee on the Census, thank
you for the opportunity to testify today.
I know that I speak for all Americans abroad when I tell
you how grateful we are to make our case this afternoon before
this subcommittee. My name is Mac McClelland. I am here today
on behalf of the American Business Council of the Gulf
Countries, a nonpartisan nonprofit organization representing
the nine American Chambers of Commerce, or AmChams in the Gulf.
In addition to my ABCBG role, I am here today in three
other capacities, as President of the American Business Council
of Dubai and the Northern Emirates, as a retired Marine Corps
officer and, most importantly to me, as a husband and a father
of three American children, all of whom are residing with me in
the United Arab Emirates.
A decade ago as part of Desert Shield and Desert Storm, I
participated in reconnaissance operations inside Kuwait before
the air campaign started. I was able to evade the entire Iraqi
military. However, I was not able to evade being counted in the
decennial census. The Census Bureau found me along with more
than 500,000 other American men and woman serving in the Gulf
war.
By the time census 2000 rolled around, I had become
invisible in the eyes of the Census Bureau, which refused to
include me in its enumeration simply because I had retired. I
vote and pay taxes in the United States. Yet I was one of the
estimated 3 to 10 million private Americans living overseas who
are not counted in the decennial census, despite the Census
Bureau's claim that everyone counts. And I have a larger one,
Everyone Counts. I did get this neat pencil, but I didn't get
the census form to go with it.
So why are overseas Americans important to the United
States and why do we deserve to be counted, Mrs. Maloney?
Willard Workman, vice president at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce
states that ``in this era of growing globalization Americans
working overseas play an essential role in strengthening the
U.S. economy, creating U.S.-based jobs, and serving as the
world's most effective promoters of U.S. goods and services.''
With your permission, Mr. Chairman, I would like to enter
the complete text of this letter for inclusion in today's
hearing.
Mr. Miller. Without objection, we will include it in the
record.
[The information referred to follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.040
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.041
Mr. McClelland. The AmChams represent much more than just
business, however. We often serve as the backbone of the
American communities worldwide. We build, invest in, and send
our children to American schools abroad. We play a leading role
in helping to get out the vote during national and State
elections. We serve as a resource for families who have just
moved overseas, kind of a ``welcome wagon.''
We are deeply involved in security measures taken to
protect Americans abroad, and more often than not we serve as a
vital linchpin on a wide variety of issues between U.S.
diplomatic missions and our overseas communities.
My family's story as Americans abroad is not unusual. I
retired honorably from the U.S. Marine Corp in 1996 and
continued working and residing abroad. I am now a private
consultant involved specifically in developing business for
U.S. companies and promoting U.S. trade abroad.
My wife, Rhonda, is a member of the American Women's
Association, Dubai, a philanthropic organization of 600
American women. Our children, Jonathan, Caroline and Emily
either are or soon will be attending the American School of
Dubai.
American institutions and the American way of life remain
very important to me and my family. The same can be said for
every overseas American I know. In encouraging such
institutions as Junior Achievement, Little League, Veterans of
Foreign Wars, the Scouting Movement, and even the U.S. Chess
Federation, we are building people-to-people relationships
between the United States and friendly nations all over the
world.
Mr. Chairman, if I were the Census Bureau with a mandate
from the U.S. Congress to count overseas Americans, I would
concentrate my energies on reaching out through the U.S.
Diplomatic Missions abroad, American Chambers of Commerce
abroad, American citizens groups abroad, and they are all
represented here, Republicans Abroad, Democrats Abroad, the
American and International Schools, USO, the U.S. military
installations abroad, global media in the English language,
local overseas media in the English language, U.S.-based
organizations with international affiliates, alumni
associations at U.S. universities and colleges, major
corporations that employ a large number of Americans overseas
and U.S.-based food establishments in overseas markets like
McDonald's and Burger King.
The Census Bureau worked with more than 25,000 partners
here in the United States to get the word out and make Census
2000 a success. There is every reason to believe that if the
Bureau forms partnerships with some of the groups that I have
just mentioned the Census Bureau's same basic methodology will
work for us Americans overseas.
Mr. Chairman, we want to thank you for your leadership and
for requiring the Census Bureau to prepare a report this year
on what it will take to count Americans abroad.
We would also like to thank Congresswoman Maloney and
Congressman Cannon for their respective Census bills. However,
the bill that goes to the heart of what our AmChams want is the
Full Equality for Americans Abroad Act, H. Res. 1745, promoted
on a bipartisan basis by Congressmen Gilman and Moran.
The Gilman-Moran bill is the only legislation introduced to
date that requires the Department of Commerce to accomplish two
things; that is, to include all Americans abroad in the
decennial census and to ensure that the data collected by the
Census Bureau are used meaningfully, for apportionment and
other purposes.
Without these two elements, any overseas census count is
hollow and meaningless, and quite frankly it would be a waste
of my tax dollars. Over the years Americans abroad have had to
earn the U.S. Government's recognition and respect one battle
at a time. In each of our victories the U.S. Congress has
played an instrumental role in helping overseas Americans to
gain full equality with our fellow Americans living back home
here in the United States.
And as Democrats Abroad and others have argued, the Census
Bureau counts aliens, convicted felons, persons committed to
mental institutions who do not have the right to vote.
Shouldn't the Bureau count the millions of Americans abroad who
do have that right to vote? And I am not suggesting that there
are some overseas who should not be in mental institutions.
But these are just some of the examples of how Americans
abroad overcame odds with the active support of Congress to do
away with the wrong-headed policies that were long overdue for
reform. With help from this subcommittee, we hope to chalk up
another victory for common sense because Americans abroad count
too.
A year ago, Mr. Chairman, you and Mrs. Maloney directed the
Census Bureau to figure out how to count overseas Americans. We
will find out very soon how the Bureau intends to do that, on
how they have spent the last year.
We sincerely hope that they come up with more answers than
they do questions. Last week on the House floor, Mrs. Maloney
expressed concern that like Moses, we could be in the desert
for 40 years if we do not receive a concrete plan from the
Bureau.
We couldn't agree more. And, Mr. Chairman, you hit the nail
on the head when you said, it is not fair that Americans abroad
are left out of the decennial census just because it is a
difficult job to count them. As one overseas American put it,
by excluding me from the decennial census my government is
telling me that my vote counts and my taxes count, but that I
as a U.S. citizen do not.
There is broad bipartisan support for counting all
Americans abroad. Let us work together in the weeks ahead to
ensure that this count becomes one of the most important and
most durable legacies of this subcommittee.
Thank you again for the opportunity, and I will answer any
questions that you have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. McClelland follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.042
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.043
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.044
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.045
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.046
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.047
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.048
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.049
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.050
Mr. Miller. Thank you very much. We have a vote going on,
and I think rather than rushing you, Mr. Marans, let's go ahead
and take a recess and then come back. I did read all of your
statements. I especially enjoyed yours, Mr. Marans, because you
had some very concrete suggestions. I appreciate that. So I
think it would be easier to take a recess right now. There may
be two votes, so it may be 20 minutes. So we'll be in recess.
[Recess.]
Mr. Miller. The hearing will resume.
Mr. Marans. I understand that you had requested the
witnesses be sworn previously.
Mr. Miller. If you would go ahead and stand and raise your
right hands.
[Witness sworn.]
Mr. Miller. As I said before, I did read your statement. I
appreciated it. I would like to ask you to proceed with your
opening statement, observing the 5-minute rule. Then we'll have
time to question.
Mr. Marans. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Clay, my name is Eugene
Marans. I am a lawyer with the international law firm of
Cleary, Gottlieb, Steen & Hamilton. Our firm has for 40 years
served as pro bono counsel to a number of organizations in the
overseas citizen community. I was heavily involved as pro bono
counsel in the bipartisan effort that led to the passage of the
Overseas Citizens Voting Rights Act of 1975. So I have a strong
vested interest in what comes after that in this hearing today.
I am privileged to be able to appear today in support of
the overseas private citizens census on behalf of three leading
organizations of overseas American citizens, American Citizen
Abroad [ACA], the Association of Americans Resident Overseas
[AARO], and the Federation of American Women's Clubs Overseas
[FAWCO].
And I ask the chairman's permission also to submit the
brief separate statements of those organizations into the
record.
Mr. Miller. Without objection.
Mr. Marans. Also, I would like to take this occasion to
acknowledge my indebtedness to David Hamod of Intercom, who has
played a significant role in focusing this subcommittee's
attention on the census and working closely with Mr.
McClelland's organization, the American Business Council of the
Gulf Countries. He has been a tremendous help in making sure
that we focus on the realities of this important issue.
ACA, AARO and FAWCO have asked me to stress three main
points to you today. First, they want to be counted. And I
won't have to go over all of the reasons why, because you have
heard those from other people.
Second, they want to help in the count, and they are
willing to devote whatever resources are necessary to do that.
Third, they applaud your efforts to start planning now.
AARO, ACA, FAWCO and other leading organizations of
overseas private Americans applaud the subcommittee's desire to
start early to develop a plan with the Census Bureau to count
overseas private Americans in the 2010 census, including for
purposes of apportionment, and we urge the Congress to direct
the Census Bureau to devise a preliminary plan by September 30,
2002 for the inclusion of overseas private citizens in the 2010
census and to appropriate sufficient funds for this purpose.
We thank Congresswoman Maloney for her proposed
appropriation of $2.5 million to start this process. It is a
good step in the right direction.
We also support the concept of an interim census to get
ready for 2010. But I would say at the start that these
organizations believe that the requirement in the Gilman-Moran
bill that the 2010 census count overseas private American
citizens is a good provision, because with that provision we
believe the Congress will be able to encourage the Census
Bureau to come up with a plan for an overseas census that will
meet the standard necessary to count overseas citizens for
purposes of apportionment. It if turns out that it is a
complete failure after an interim census, Congress can always
back down.
But if we don't start now, we are concerned that just as
you said, Mr. Chairman, we'll end up back here in about 2008,
and it will be too late then to develop a plan that will really
work for purposes of apportionment.
Now, the overseas organizations believe this comes down to
really two issues for purposes of need. One is just a plain
matter of civics. Twenty-five years ago the Congress assured
overseas citizens the right to register and vote absentee in
Federal elections in their State of last residence in the
United States, even though that State may not be their current
State for purposes other than voting in Federal elections.
Second, it is a matter of economics, as the other witnesses
have indicated.
Now, how can the overseas organizations help? We know the
Congress must rely on the Census Bureau to design the
appropriate mechanism, but we also know how important it is for
the Census Bureau to be able to have the support of Congress in
this effort.
Indeed, the U.S. Supreme Court emphasized the importance of
congressional support and direction in turning away a challenge
to the 1990 census.
Now, we recognize that it is vital that any kind of
overseas private Americans census achieve a high level of
distributive accuracy. That is what the courts have said it has
to have, a high level of distributive accuracy. We understand
that technologies for counting overseas private Americans must
be designed to avoid, to the extent reasonably possible,
favoring overseas citizens from one country over another or
from one State over another or one line of employment over
another.
Now, what are some of our ideas? I will be very brief,
because I see the red light is already on.
First, we think that the Census Bureau could consider
designing a census reply form along the lines of our Uniform
Draft Overseas Citizen Census Card that we provided to the
staff and the subcommittee.
Second, we think that the Census Bureau could consider
developing an integrated master control list of private
American citizens believed to be living abroad.
Third, the Census Bureau could consider what should be the
most appropriate techniques to get an OCCC to overseas private
Americans. For example, would it be appropriate to send the
OCCC by foreign equivalent of certified mail to specific
individuals whose names and addresses are shown on a reasonably
correct master list of private American citizens believed to be
living abroad? This might help also in following up with
nonrespondents and help assess uncounted ones.
Now, we talk about this being a voluntary census overseas.
It does not have to be considered completely voluntary. If
overseas citizens are properly identified and they get a form
that says, this is a form that you need to fill out, I think
there is a question, even under the present statute, whether
they could be completely exempt from filling in that form and
sending it in.
Now, that is just a quick take. I'll look at a couple of
other issues. We have already heard from the State Department
about some of the resources they could offer in this effort and
their offer should be given further consideration.
But they had a good idea which was, in effect, to have the
Census Bureau consider making a kind of preliminary profile
through its own personnel of the composition of the private
American community in each foreign country using the resources
of the consular services to the extent useful, but, also taking
into account the knowledge and experience of the local
businesses and other private organizations.
Now, we recognize that there is a question of potential
fraud. We have heard reference to that issue, and, as I
mentioned, I was heavily involved in overseas voting rights for
nearly a quarter of a century. Overseas American citizens have
used the FPCA, the Federal Post Card Application form, to vote
by absentee ballot. According to the U.S. Department of
Defense, which administers the Federal voting program, there
has never been a pattern of abuse or fraud by Americans living
abroad during this period. Any allegation of fraud concerning
overseas absentee ballots in the last Presidential election
concerned the counting side, not the voting side.
Moreover, information submitted on an overseas citizens
census card like that submitted on the FPCA would be subject to
Federal false statement criminal penalties, which are contained
already in the census legislation itself. It would not be such
an easy thing for an overseas citizen to consider intentionally
filling out a false card.
Now, another issue that comes up besides the question of
fraud--is whether the inclusion of overseas private citizens
would be inconsistent with the prevailing concept of usual
residence for overseas Americans. The answer is no.
We have already crossed that bridge. The Census Bureau has
already departed from the so-called traditional usual domestic
residence standard in counting federally affiliated Americans
abroad for purposes of apportionment. And indeed the U.S.
Supreme Court in 1992 expressly validated inclusion of
federally affiliated overseas Americans for purposes of
apportionment in the 1990 census, noting that the term ``usual
residence'' can mean more than physical presence for overseas
private Americans. We believe that the congressionally mandated
right to register and vote absentee in Federal elections is a
significant part of that.
In closing, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Clay, we recognize that
counting private Americans overseas will be a major challenge,
but we also know that the U.S. Census Bureau is the preeminent
population data collection agency in the world, and we have
full confidence that the Census Bureau, with appropriate
congressional direction, guidance and funding, can design and
meet a reasonable standard for counting the citizens abroad and
that standard and the results of that count will meet the
standards of Congress and the Federal courts.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Clay, for the opportunity to
appear before you today.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Marans follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.051
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.052
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.053
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.054
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.055
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.056
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.057
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.058
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.059
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.060
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.061
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.062
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.063
Mr. Miller. Thank you. Thank you for continuing to be an
advocate for this purpose.
Let me start off with a couple of questions. As we were
talking with the gentleman from the State Department, we
discussed whether we count all U.S. citizens, what about a non-
U.S. citizen, a spouse of a U.S. citizen living overseas? It
gets down to this defining the universe. This is going to be
the problem. Do we only count them if they plan to move back to
the United States? What about the child that just happens to be
born in the United States and moves back to their native
country and hasn't been back to the United States for 30 years?
How do you define the universe, Mr. Gribble, first of all
on the child that is born in America and, you know, to foreign
parents, and it goes back to their home country with maybe no
expectation of ever coming back to United States?
Mr. Gribble. Mr. Betancourt failed to point out that
children's passports have to be renewed every 5, not every 10
years. So at least every 5 years that foreign resident child
with an American passport is going to have to go down to the
U.S. Embassy and declare their citizenship again.
Mr. Miller. With a passport. What if they have a birth
certificate, if they are in----
Mr. Gribble. If they would have--I guess the concept as far
as an American passport being there, and they obviously have
some intention of maintaining their affiliation with America,
they are going to have to renew that affiliation on a 5-year
basis while they are minor children.
As far as the foreign spouse goes, I am not totally
conversant with what the census forms here in the United States
require as far as how various members of the household are
counted.
Mr. Miller. See, we count illegals, but we don't count you.
Mr. Gribble. Not only illegals in the United States, but
you counted 450-some thousand in American Samoa and 108,000 in
the U.S. Virgin Islands.
Mr. Miller. They are U.S. citizens.
Mr. Gribble. Well, but they don't pay Federal income tax,
and I do.
Mr. Miller. Right. Good point.
Mr. Gribble. I guess we keep running on there, I know--how
do the folks on this side of the panel fix these problems? What
procedures do we come up to give the Census Bureau to make this
all right and make sure it is 100 percent fair for everybody.
It certainly is unfair that we are not counted now. But I don't
want things to be fair for me and unfair for everybody else.
But my good friend Congresswoman Maloney has offered up
some things that we have already brought before the committee
in 1999. But I don't think the onus should be on us any more
than the Department of Defense puts the onus on the standard
American citizen to come up with a strategic integrated
operating plan or national defense policy.
Mr. Miller. Right.
Mr. Gribble. Nobody calls Mr. Gribble from the DOD and
says, how do you think we ought to do that? That is what we are
going to the Census Bureau for.
Mr. Miller. Does anyone else want to comment?
Mr. Fina. Mr. Chairman, it seems to me that a reasonable
way of approaching the question of the universe is to say that
it is anyone who is an American citizen.
We can't determine, and most citizens don't know, what
their intentions are, whether they are going to return or not
going to return, when they are going to return. But there is a
body of legal opinion that will enable us to determine who is
and who is not a citizen. And all of our discussions thus far
in our advocacy of inclusion of Americans abroad has been based
upon a request that we should count American citizens, whether
big citizens, little citizens, old, young citizens, whether
they have been there for a while or not for a while. We would
think that would be the appropriate criterion.
Mr. Miller. You brought up the legal issue. There are going
to be some legal questions about apportionment purposes. Is it
for apportionment purposes? I can see this in courts. You
brought up the issue of distributive accuracy, and I can see
where--in fact, Mr. Clay and I were just chatting on the way
over to vote.
Florida, for example, has no State income tax, and a lot of
people like to claim Florida as their State of residence for
that purpose. Well, Florida may be a winner in this.
Texas shares a big border with Mexico, and the State
Department thinks there are 800,000 to a million U.S. citizens
in Mexico. Well, that would be a benefit to Texas.
In the same way you could say New York would have benefited
because it is in close proximity to Canada. Then a State like
Missouri may not have as much benefit. So one of the things you
could find out is it is going to be not a partisan issue, but
geographically, because you are going to have a winner and
loser.
So there are potential legal problems, to make sure it is
accurate and all countries are counted fairly and this and
that. And being a lawyer--and that is another question. There
are some of them that are easy to count, U.S. people that pay
taxes, you know, registered voters, people that receive Federal
payments, Social Security checks. Those are easy.
But then once you get beyond that, where do you go? You
have 800,000 or a million in Mexico. How do you find them? If
we are talking about over in the Gulf States, is it fairly well
defined who is in the Gulf States, as far as, you know, in the
American Emirates?
Mr. Gribble. I would say that probably the American
community in Kuwait, because we do live under threat conditions
on a predominant basis, probably 95 percent of the American
citizens over there are registered. It is a small enough
community, 6,500 folks. If you wandered through the American
food court that Mac talked about, you know who your friends and
neighbors are. We certainly are recognized within the Gulf.
Using State Department registration records would probably get
about 90 percent accuracy.
Mr. Miller. What do you do when you go to Mexico and you've
got a million to count, or El Salvador where there's a very
large number? To be fair about this, maybe we can get 99
percent count in Kuwait and that's great, but you only get 50
percent count in Mexico. That's where the potential legal
challenge could come.
Mr. Fina. Mr. Chairman, one reason that I mentioned the
importance of the relationship which the Bureau of the Census
has with foreign statistical agencies is that some governments
do conduct, do include the question of foreign citizenship in
their census. Canada, for example, does have some sort of a
count of people who claim to be or whom they have identified in
some way as being American citizens. That is also the case, I
gather, in the case of Ireland. I don't know how many other
countries do the same.
I do know from my own experience, when I was trying to
count American citizens in Italy for the purposes of the
Department of State's data base, that it was largely a matter
of looking out of the window and saying to a colleague: ``You
know, looks like there are a few more people here this year
than last year. Don't you think so? Yeah. Well, maybe we'd
better increase it by 5 percent.'' I would think most of the
large industrial countries in Western Europe probably don't
have a very good count. But there may be some that do and
that's a place where the Bureau of the Census can at least go
to make some judgment about who's there and how to verify their
qualification for being counted.
Mr. Gribble. A lot of those other countries do have
restrictive immigration as to who they're allowing into their
country and they keep very, very accurate tabs on who's there
and where they live. And again, you know, if our Census Bureau
and the State Department started talking to the immigration
departments in some of these other countries, they might be
able to glean that data from their records.
Mr. Miller. I think that, you come from the easier
countries to count. The countries in the Western hemisphere
where you don't even need a passport to go are going to be the
greatest challenge to count and probably where the greatest
numbers are going to be. I remember, the Census Bureau has an
international division that does consulting. One time I was in
Ankara, Turkey and was meeting with them. And of course in
Turkey they have a mandated census day and everyone is required
to stay inside for the day. That would not work certainly in
this country, let alone trying to say we are going to make them
do it and count U.S. citizens over there. But there are some
legal challenges. But it may be worth doing even if it doesn't
meet the legal standard of apportionment.
Now, you know, we can try to shoot for that as a goal. But
the question is, if you can only count 30 percent of the U.S.
citizens in Mexico but you can get 100 percent in Kuwait and
then I can see the political fighting, that Mr. Clay would say
Missouri's hurt, Florida's helped, that's not fair. I mean it's
not a race or anything else. It's just a geography thing that
would be in there.
So, you know, I'm looking forward to hearing, seeing the
Census Bureau's proposal come September, and I look forward to
hearing it in October.
Mr. Clay.
Mr. Clay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The first question for
Mr. Gribble, one of the main arguments you make is that persons
who vote and pay taxes in the United States should be counted
in the census. Would it be acceptable to count only those
persons and their dependents in the census?
Mr. Gribble. No, No. I just use that as an example of why
should I pay taxes and vote in this country if the country
doesn't count me? My Federal taxes come up here, my Federal
income taxes that I pay come up here and never go back to the
Fourth District because I don't count there. You know, I don't
have to pay income tax in the State of Florida, but I pay
corporate tax in the State of Florida.
Mr. Clay. OK. Let's take that----
Mr. Gribble. So I use that as a jumping off point.
Mr. Clay. Sure. But let's take it a step further. If the
enumeration is completely voluntary and if there's no
documentation needed to prove State ties, could imaginary
people be created?
Mr. Gribble. To what reason? To what purpose?
Mr. Clay. Well, we hear a lot about concerns about the
manipulation of data, maybe to create more people to vote. You
know.
Mr. Gribble. I certainly understand that can be a concern.
But again, you started your question off with saying if it's
voluntary. Why would we want to make it voluntary? It's
mandatory for everybody in the States. It's mandatory for
overseas citizens to file U.S. income tax returns. Why would we
make it voluntary for them to participate in the census?
Mr. Clay. Let me ask you, obviously, you represent a group
of individuals that are very interested in being counted. Do
you think that you are a representative of the entire Americans
overseas population? The Bureau has indicated that. Private
citizens abroad are not willing to be enumerated. Is this true?
Mr. Miller. It's time to let someone else share.
Mr. McClelland. I'll speak to that if I may.
Mr. Clay. OK.
Mr. McClelland. If you don't mind. What do they base that
on? Have they gone overseas? Have they talked to people? Have
they done some type of poll?
Mr. Clay. This is what the Bureau tells us. I mean, I'm
going off of what they tell me.
Mr. McClelland. Sir, Mrs. Maloney called it Census's
bellyaching. Census's bellyaching, sir, will stop if you enact
legislation requiring them to count Americans abroad and give
them the money to do so in a census that will provide
appropriate and unbiased data for apportionment and other
purposes. All the bellyaching will stop. And I can tell you
that American citizens groups abroad, those represented at this
table and others who aren't here, are better organized and have
better communications tools today than they ever have in order
to put the word out to collect Americans, if it's collect them
at a central location, the American school, consulate or
wherever, and to help in that effort.
We're here to help. We're not fighting this. We're fighting
for it to help every State.
Mr. Clay. Let me hear your opinion about who should be
counted.
Mr. McClelland. American citizens.
Mr. Clay. People having United States and second nation
citizenship? Should they be included?
Mr. McClelland. If they are an American citizen, regardless
of whether they have a second, third or fifth passport. If
they're an American citizen they should be counted. They would
be here in the States.
Mr. Clay. OK. All persons born in the United States? Even
though some of these persons may have become citizens of the
country in which they currently reside?
Mr. McClelland. That's a personal opinion that I would have
to express and not that of the American Business Council of the
Gulf Countries. In talking about American citizens abroad,
every American abroad should be counted.
Mr. Clay. OK.
Mr. Gribble. If they give up their citizenship, if they're
not holding a dual citizenship but they give up their U.S.
citizenship to take that of another country, they're no longer
American citizens and they should not be counted.
Mr. Clay. Let me ask Mr. Marans. Should the Americans
overseas have to have documentation to prove ties to a certain
address or State?
Mr. Marans. Well, that's a good question, Mr. Clay. The
OCCC we have here would require the overseas citizen to list a
State, and the OCCC also says that refusal to answer questions
on the form to the best of your knowledge or providing
willfully false statements may subject you to criminal
penalties. So the overseas citizen would have to know that if
he or she puts a particular State on this form, that person has
to be able to validate that residence.
Now, the question is, should the form contain something
more? Should it, for example, contain an address, the so-called
last residence address in the State immediately prior to
departure of this citizen from the United States? That's a
possibility. That's something that the Census Bureau could
investigate, and then the question would be whether the Census
Bureau should seek to validate that address through some other
records for all of the replies, for some of the replies; how
are they going to determine whether these replies are false or
not? But the Census Bureau has that problem already today in
trying to consider whether information that's provided on
census forms is valid. It is a validation issue, just as
overseas citizen listing of U.S. citizenship on their form is a
validation question.
Mr. Clay. Should the form also include what city and
country overseas these people are living in?
Mr. Marans. The present form would.
Mr. Clay. It would? OK.
Mr. Marans. It also has optional entries for e-mail
address, telephone, fax. That's already in this form. But this,
I should emphasize, is just a draft form. The idea is to stoke
discussion in a constructive fashion between the Census Bureau
and the stakeholder constituencies and this committee to move
the process forward.
Mr. Clay. Thank you.
Mr. Fina, should they have a last domicile in the United
States? Should they have an address in the United States?
Mr. Fina. I would think it would be reasonable to ask
people to provide a last domicile in the United States, even if
they no longer live there, because in our present system of
overseas voting we do require that people show where they last
lived and presumably those addresses are verified by local
election officials. So I don't think it's unreasonable to ask
that there be a previous domicile.
Now, what you do with the people who are born in the United
States and were promptly taken back to a foreign country before
they had a domicile here I think is a question you have to
solve by some sort of an administrative regulation. Maybe you
would say the last domicile of baby Smith was Presbyterian
hospital or something like that.
Mr. Clay. In your opinion, do most Americans overseas want
to be enumerated?
Mr. Fina. I think there is very widespread support for the
idea. I don't think that all Americans overseas want to be
enumerated any more than I think that all Americans in the
United States want to be enumerated. There are a certain number
of people who absolutely oppose the idea for all sorts of good
and bad reasons.
Mr. Clay. Thank you. And thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Miller. Let me follow this. Again, I've gone to some
countries, and you run into people--I remember being in a
country in South America actually earlier this year and a lady
that was a translator was born in the United States--no, had
come to the United States in the early 1970's and married a
U.S. citizen. She became a U.S. citizen and she moved back to
this country in the 1970's and it just came out that she has a
U.S. passport. Now she has never been back to the United States
and she has no intent of coming back to the United States.
She's a citizen of that country as far as she's concerned, but
she's got a U.S. passport. So I guess what you're saying is she
should be counted.
Mr. Gribble. Absolutely.
Mr. McClelland. She's still a U.S. citizen.
Mr. Miller. Then she gets counted twice. She gets counted
in that country.
Mr. McClelland. They don't do apportionment for the U.S.
Congress in that country though, Congressman. She's an American
citizen. She should be counted.
Mr. Miller. But she has no intent to ever come back here.
Mr. Gribble. We don't have classes of citizenship in this
country. If you have a U.S. passport, you're an American
citizen.
Mr. Miller. What happens if you have a birth certificate
from the United States. You don't get a passport and so you're
a U.S. citizen just because you have a birth certificate.
Mr. Gribble. If you have a U.S. birth certificate you're a
U.S. citizen.
Mr. Miller. And you haven't been in the United States for
40 years.
Mr. McClelland. Those are the immigration laws in the
United States, Congressman.
Mr. Miller. I'm just asking the questions how you feel.
Mr. McClelland. Yes, sir. We have cases just like that in
Dubai, where, for instance, a Jamaican man is married to a Sri
Lankan woman and they intentionally traveled to the United
States for both of their children to be born here and then went
back overseas. Now the children carry American passports. They
have no clue what the United States is about, yet they're
American citizens.
Mr. Miller. All right. Using that as an illustration for
apportionment purposes, which is the only thing that the
Constitution requires in the first article that we address the
Census for apportionment purposes. Why should those two
children be assigned to whatever State the hospital was in
where those children were born to affect apportionment which
is, you know, distributing the representation? I mean I can see
counting them and getting that information. I'm not opposed to
collecting information, but getting an apportionment. I mean
why should they affect how our States get apportioned? Was the
hospital in St. Louis versus the hospital in Florida?
Mr. McClelland. OK. Let's bring it closer to my home. My
mother's father, a German citizen, traveled through the United
States, came through Ellis Island, gained his citizenship, went
on to China; this was at the turn of the century. My mother was
born in China to a naturalized American father, raised in
China. Her mother was Japanese. OK? Now----
Mr. Miller. I need a flow chart here.
Mr. McClelland. Do you want me to draw a diagram? She was
born an American citizen because her father had an American
passport. The Japanese went into China, destroyed the consulate
and all the records. The only thing that she had that proved
that she was an American citizen was a passport. She has no
birth certificate, no record of anything other than an American
passport, OK? So should she not have been counted? You know,
were this the question in 1929, when my mother was born, of
course she should have been counted. She's an American citizen.
She ultimately came to the States. But I'm sure at 16 years old
she wasn't thinking I'm going to the States next year so I can
be included in the census.
So, yes, the answer to the question is if they're American
citizens they should be counted.
Mr. Miller. The question is--maybe not in this case, but
say they're living in Ecuador and the children are born there
and the mother has returned, and they don't have a passport.
How do we find them to count them? I mean, you know, they may
not even speak English. Which is, you can still get the form
but we have no record of it, besides they have a birth
certificate and we have no idea where they are. How do we
locate them or how do we locate this lady translator? I'm
saying she doesn't want to be counted, so we don't have any
record. Well, she does have a passport.
Mr. McClelland. We won't get everybody obviously. But I
think the statistics are correct when we hit 66 percent in the
national census, the domestic census, the Census Bureau had a
party celebrating the fact that they'd hit 66 percent. You
know, when do you say it's a success and when do you say it's a
failure? I think if we make an honest effort to count all
Americans abroad by giving the Census Bureau the power and the
money to do it and mandating that they count Americans abroad,
with the definitions that we have, that an American citizen in
the different, the passport and the birth certificate, the
birth right, and I think that's what it comes down to is a
birth right, then count them.
Mr. Marans. Two quick points. One, I think we do have to
keep in mind that we do have a difference between just counting
overseas citizens and counting them for purposes of
apportionment. And the form that we gave out, the draft form,
makes clear that persons may be listed without a State or other
U.S. jurisdiction of last residence in the United States and
may still be counted in the census. But they would not be
allocated to a particular State for apportionment purposes.
So that's a foundation for one principle of how to deal
with it. How you deal with the baby who was resident in Sibley
Hospital for 3 days, it's a different question. That would have
to be worked out in detail by the Census Bureau in consultation
with the various stakeholders.
And that reminds me of one other thing. We know the Census
Bureau is going to have a report coming up soon. In past years
we've had some opportunity to meet with the Census Bureau. We
think it could be very helpful maybe if this subcommittee or
its staff could help facilitate some further meetings with some
of the stakeholders.
Mr. Miller. Well, have your organizations, or are you aware
of, been asked to meet with the Bureau? I mean, I think they
were trying to meet with the outside groups. You have been
asked?
Mr. Fina. I haven't been asked, but I did speak with them
prior to your hearing because I wanted to get a----
Mr. Miller. My understanding is they're going to try to
reach out to the groups, you know, before they come up with
their report to get the input.
Mr. Marans. We'll look forward to that.
Mr. Hamod. We initiated a meeting that came on the heels of
a congressional meeting.
Mr. Miller. Just a second. I'm sorry. You need to identify
yourself and be sworn in.
Mr. Hamod. David Hamod on behalf of the American Business
Council of the Gulf Countries. We did, at the urging of the
subcommittee, initiate a meeting with the Census Bureau. It
lasted for about a half an hour. It was not very substantive.
Mr. Miller. How long ago was this?
Mr. Hamod. That was about 2 weeks ago. The Census Bureau
said they do not intend to consult with stakeholders before the
issuance of the report; rather they plan to consult with the
stakeholders next year.
Mr. Marans. So maybe the point I should make is some of us
stakeholders think maybe it's useful to be consulted as part of
the preparation of this report.
Mr. Miller. I was glad to hear that they have been meeting
with the State Department anyway. But I thought my impressions
were really mistaken. Mr. Clay, do you have any more questions?
Mr. Clay. I'm fine.
Mr. Miller. Do any of you all want a concluding comment
before we adjourn?
Mr. Gribble. Yes. I just repeat our position, sir, and that
is that we hope that whatever enumeration is done by the Bureau
of the Census and we hope that they will work on something by
2004. We would like it to meet the requirements, the
constitutional requirements for apportionment. But that is not
an essential qualification. What we want is a count of the best
information that we can acquire, doing their very best, and we
hope that it will be good enough for apportionment. But if it
can't reach that level, we still think it would be enormously
valuable to us to have the data.
Mr. Miller. One comment, Mr. Fina, you made. There's a lot
of things you'd like to find out on a form, and there's a lot
of privacy concerns in the census, and so it gets down to the
question, and you raised the issue of what are we trying to
accomplish. And when you start getting into income questions
and all that, you're starting to get invasion of privacy and it
affects response rates. But that's something we can proceed on.
And I'm hoping we can do one, say, 2004 to see what--you know,
we don't know what we have until we try it and we want to be
prepared for 2010.
So let me thank you again for coming today, moving the
process along, and looking forward to another hearing with the
Bureau, and then we'll, you know, get further input and
hopefully we'll be ready in a few years to do the test and then
be prepared for 2010.
I ask unanimous consent all members and witnesses who have
opening statements to be included in the record, and without
objections, so ordered. Mr. Marans has asked to have a
statement also. In case there are additional questions that
Members may have for witnesses, I ask unanimous consent for the
record to remain open for 2 weeks for Members to submit
questions for the record and let witnesses submit written
answers as soon as practicable. Without objection, so ordered.
The meeting is adjourned. Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 4 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
[Additional information submitted for the hearing record
follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.064
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.065
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.066
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.067
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5727.068