[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 19 (Tuesday, March 3, 1998)]
[House]
[Pages H694-H695]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              2000 CENSUS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 21, 1997, the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney) is 
recognized during morning hour debates for 5 minutes.
  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, last week one of my colleagues 
came to the House floor and said that the planning for the 2000 census 
was done in secret. I am here today to put the facts on the table so 
that the American people can decide for themselves. Designing the 2000 
census has been one of the most public processes in the history of the 
census.
  Dr. Barbara Bryant, the director of the Census Bureau for President 
George Bush, began the process in 1991 shortly after the conclusion of 
the 1990 census. She took over the Census Bureau less than 4 months 
before the 1990 census began, and she knew that it could be improved. 
The results from the 1990 census reinforced that decision.
  In partnership with Congress, Dr. Bryant began the process that 
resulted in the census design we are debating today. To achieve a 
better census design, Congress turned to the National Academy of 
Sciences.
  The gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Rogers) testified before the House 
Subcommittee on the Census in 1991 and said there is a need for ``an 
independent review of the census that is fundamental in nature, a back-
to-basics, zero-based study that begins with no preconceived notions 
about what we collect or how we collect it. For that reason, I have 
pursued the idea of having the National Academy of Sciences conduct 
such a review. The Academy is credible, experienced, and more 
importantly, independent. Plus, I have been satisfied they can pull 
together a panel of fine minds, capable of blending fresh policy 
viewpoints with an understanding of statistical methods.''
  In 1992 Congress passed H.R. 3280, ``a bill to provide for a study to 
be conducted by the National Academy of Sciences on how the government 
can improve the decennial census of population, and on related 
matters.'' That study laid out the blueprint for the 2000 census.
  It has been alleged that there has been no congressional involvement 
in planning the census. But how can that be, when the design for the 
census is based on a study mandated by Congress? In addition, between 
1991 and 1994 there were 15 House and Senate hearings on the 2000 
census.
  If there has been any neglect, it has been since 1995 when Congress 
abolished the Subcommittee on the Census. In 1995, 1996 and 1997 there 
were only 4 hearings on the 2000 census.
  My colleagues have suggested that there has been no public 
involvement in designing the census. Again, I would like to have the 
facts speak for themselves. In 1992 the Secretary of Commerce 
established an Advisory Committee on the 2000 Census made up of nearly 
50 organizations. I would like to put a list of those organizations 
into the Record.
  The list referred to follows:

       The National Governors Association, the American 
     Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, 
     the American Statistical Association, the Association of 
     State and Territorial Health Officials, the Business 
     Roundtable, the Council of Chief State School Officers, the 
     Federation for American Immigration Reform, the National 
     Association of Counties, the National Association of 
     Secretaries of State, the National Association of Towns and 
     Townships, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
  Mr. Speaker, these organizations met over 20 times since 1992 and 
each meeting has been open to the public.
  The activities of public involvement were not just here in 
Washington. The director of the Census Bureau and the Under Secretary 
for Economic Statistics at the Department of Commerce have gone to 
scores of cities and held town meetings to get public involvement. At 
each of these town meetings they have solicited public input on the 
plans that they have put before the public for conducting a fair and 
accurate census for 2000.
  My colleagues have criticized the administration for developing a 
census designed by the experts. I wonder why they would want a census 
designed by amateurs.
  The facts are that developing the design for the 2000 census has been 
one of the most public processes in the history of the census. The 
process has included major constituent groups, Congress and the public. 
The design for the census has been endorsed by experts and nonexperts 
alike.
  It is very simple. In 1990 the census had an error rate of over 10 
percent. Those who oppose a more accurate census want to go back to the 
way it was done in 1990, even if it costs more, because they believe 
that the errors in the census work to their advantage. The 
administration has put forward a plan to reduce the errors in the 
census and make it more fair and accurate.
  The choice is simple. Do we move into the 21st century with a census 
that uses modern, scientific methods to count absolutely everyone? Or 
do we do it the old way and pay more to get a census that has millions 
of errors in it? I say we follow the plan of Dr. Bryant and the 
National Academy of Sciences.

                  Organizations That Support Sampling

       American Jewish Committee, National Association of 
     Counties, American Statistical Association, U.S. Conference 
     of Mayors, Council of Professional Associations on Federal 
     Statistics, Children's Defense Fund, Arab American Anti-
     Discrimination League, American Sociological Association, 
     National League of Cities, and Cuban American National 
     Council, Inc.
       National Association of Business Economists, Japanese 
     American Citizens League,

[[Page H695]]

     Association of University Business and Economic Research, 
     National Asian Pacific American Legal Consortium, Association 
     of Public Data Users, Americans for Democratic Action, 
     National Community Action Foundation, Asian Pacific American 
     Labor Alliance, Consortium of Social Science Associations, 
     and AFL-CIO.
       Labor Council for Latin American Advancement, Leadership 
     Conference on Civil Rights, League of United Latin American 
     Citizens, Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, 
     NAACP, National Council of La Raza, National Urban League, 
     Organization of Chinese Americans, Teachers of English to 
     Speakers of Other Languages, California Rural League 
     Assistance, and American Association of State Highway and 
     Transportation Officials.

                          ____________________