[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 106 (Thursday, July 24, 1997)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1505]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

[[Page E1505]]



                       THE BEST GUESS U.S. CENSUS

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. NEWT GINGRICH

                               of georgia

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, July 24, 1997

  Mr. GINGRICH. Mr. Speaker, today I submit to the Congressional Record 
an important column on the topic of the 2000 census by Matthew J. 
Glavin, president of Southeastern Legal Foundation in Atlanta. 
Published in the July 15, 1997 edition of the Washington Times, Mr. 
Glavin's column is entitled, ``The Best Guess U.S. Census?'' Mr. Glavin 
points out that while Congress has delegated to the Commerce Department 
the census-taking responsibility, we have not given away the 
constitutional mandate that the census be an actual enumeration.
  In addition to being inconsistent with the Constitution, statistical 
sampling techniques are open to partisan political manipulation of 
whichever administration is in charge of the Commerce Department at the 
time. We must not go down that path. I strongly commend Mr. Glavin's 
column to all my colleagues.

               [From the Washington Times, July 15, 1997]

                      The Best-Guess U.S. Census?

                         (By Matthew J. Glavin)

       The 19th century British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli 
     warned, ``There are lies, there are damn lies, and then there 
     are statistics.'' Last month, Congress heeded the warning. 
     One of the amendments to the Disaster Relief bill passed by 
     Congress was a requirement that the Census Bureau suspend its 
     plans to use statistical sampling and adjustment in the 2000 
     Census. It was a simple requirement, really--count actual 
     people; don't fudge the numbers.
       President Clinton, deriding the bill as a ``political wish 
     list,`` vetoed the package. Promising instead to ``rectify'' 
     perceived inaccuracies among minorities in past Census-
     taking, the president's plan to use statistical sampling in 
     the next Census flies in the face of one of the clearest 
     mandates in our Constitution.
       Article 1, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution calls for the 
     ten-year national census and demands an ``actual 
     Enumeration.'' The purpose was to ensure that all American 
     citizens are properly represented by district in the U.S. 
     House of Representatives. The Founders, aware of the keen 
     competition among the states for power in the nation's 
     Capital, required the ``actual enumeration'' of our shifting 
     population to guarantee that no group, state or special 
     interest could gain an undemocratic advantage. The 
     Constitution delegated the power to conduct the Census to 
     Congress, which has this year made clear its intent.
       Now, the President and his Commerce secretary, William 
     Daley, who supervises the Census Bureau, have proposed a so-
     called ``dual estimation system'' (DES) to redress perceived 
     undercounting of certain minority groups--by some accounts as 
     high as 4.8 percent in the black community. Under this 
     system, the Bureau would make its ``best guess'' as to where 
     the population count was imagined to be low, add a magical 
     percentage to the head count for that area, and apply those 
     statistical percentages to similar areas across the nation.
       In the 1990 census, for example, the Census-takers' ``best 
     guess'' demographic group was black women homeowners in their 
     20's in Chicago and Detroit. Under the Clinton/Daley DES 
     program for the 2000 Census, this demographic group would be 
     statistically ``puffed,'' and the estimated figures would be 
     applied to all similar urban areas across the nation. In 
     addition to the fact that the estimates may not reflect real 
     population figures, statistical sampling will unfairly lump 
     individuals into stereotypical groups.
       Presto, chango, ``actual'' Census figures are gone, 
     replaced by the best guess of a bureaucrat in the Clinton 
     Commerce Department. Still more unsettling is the fact that a 
     ``statistically estimated'' Census is subject to the 
     political agenda of the executive in power. The potential 
     impact on congressional districts, particularly in those 
     states containing large urban centers, is staggering.
       The ``no-statistics'' rule vetoed by the president should 
     be enforced. Lawmakers on Capitol Hill recognize that the 
     power to call for a ten-year Census comes to them directly 
     from the Constitution. While Congress has properly delegated 
     the Census-taking responsibility to the Commerce Department, 
     it has not given away, and indeed could not give away, the 
     constitutional requirement that the census be an ``actual 
     enumeration.'' That requirement still applies no matter what 
     administration implements the Census.
       The Clinton administration's ``best guess'' plan lacks 
     compassion, offers a poor solution to a real problem, and 
     flies in the face of a clear constitutional mandate. Should 
     the 2000 Census be comprehensive and accurate? Of course. 
     Will it reflect the true population of our nation? By law, it 
     must. ``Actual'' versus ``estimated'' enumeration is a 
     distinction with significant legal consequences. As required 
     by the Constitution, Congress has made clear its intent.
       It may fall to the third branch of American government, our 
     courts, to decide the fate of the Clinton ``best guess'' 
     census plan. The politicization of the national census must 
     be avoided. Real justice, and our Constitution, demand it.

     

                          ____________________