[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 63 (Wednesday, May 14, 1997)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E923]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                        AGAINST CENSUS SAMPLING

                                 ______
                                 

                            HON. RON PACKARD

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, May 14, 1997

  Mr. PACKARD Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to the Census 
Bureau's proposed use of sampling in determining population figures. 
Counting just 90 percent of our citizens and simply guessing who the 
rest of us are will have a devastating effect on our ability to 
accurately assess our needs and budget for the future.
  Sampling also undermines the integrity of our political system. 
Representation in this very House is determined by population. A State 
could be forced to reduce its number of Representatives solely on the 
basis of a politically tainted guess.
  Mr. Speaker, I do not want to exclude anyone in America from the 
census by relying on a guesstimate. The right to proper representation 
should never be compromised, for any reason.
  Sampling may cost nominally less, and my Republican colleagues and I 
are committed to reducing spending--but why go through the trouble and 
cost of counting 90 percent and then leaving the rest up to 
speculation? Why spend the money at all? We have a census to get the 
most exact count possible of our population and their demographics. 
Anything less than that is just a guess--plain and simple.
  Sampling our population simply has no worth. Our next census will 
cost $4.2 billion. If sampling is used, that price tag will likely fall 
to $4.1 billion. The real difference however, is that the taxpayer will 
not be footing the bill for an accurate count of this Nation's 
population--but instead will be paying a high price for nothing more 
than a guess.
  At a cost of $4.1 billion, Mr. Speaker, the American people will 
surely want more than a soft estimation. Anything other than a full 
count of citizens, where all can be represented, is simply 
unacceptable.

                          ____________________