[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 144 (Monday, October 12, 1998)]
[House]
[Pages H10646-H10647]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
CENSUS LAWSUITS
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Pitts). Under a previous order of the
House, the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney) is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise to discuss the census
lawsuits that will be argued before the Supreme Court on November 30 of
1998. Mr. Speaker, you sued the Department of Commerce to prevent it
from carrying out its plans to use statistical methods in the 2000
Census. A similar case was filed by private citizens, including the
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Barr).
Members must understand the importance of these cases, as my comments
will demonstrate. I am confident that the Supreme Court will rule that
the statutes and the Constitution permit the use of statistical
methods. We must have the most accurate census possible and the use of
statistical methods is the only way to ensure accuracy.
Mr. Speaker, I ran across a very good example of why statistical
methods are the only real solution to an accurate census. It appeared
this morning in the New York Times, and it talked about the Welcome
Wagon. It stated that the Welcome Wagon, this is a program that used to
welcome new residents to their neighborhoods and also do a little
marketing for local merchants. The article says that the Welcome Wagon
is closing its doors. Why? Because people are not home. They cannot
find people at home to welcome when they move into the neighborhoods,
so they are no longer going to be doing it. They will be reaching out
through the mail and other ways.
Mr. Speaker, that is the problem with the census. Knocking on doors
to get information, many people are not home in America. That is the
case in very simple terms.
Six months ago I came to this well to discuss procedural issues
raised in the court cases. As many constitutional scholars suggest, the
Supreme Court could rule on procedural grounds and dismiss the cases or
remand them back to the District Court. The Supreme Court cannot give
advisory opinions. The Constitution states that there must be a case in
controversy in order for it to proceed on the merits.
Today, however, I want to switch from the procedural issues and focus
on the merits of these lawsuits. The lawsuits filed by the Speaker and
by Representative Barr ask the Court to review the Census Act and in
particular two sections which discuss the use of statistical methods.
In addition to alleging that the Census Act prohibits the use of
statistical methods, the Speaker and Representative Barr argue that the
Constitution prohibits their use.
{time} 2000
Because neither the Census Act nor the Constitution creates such a
prohibition, the Commerce Department may and should use statistical
methods in the 2000 census.
The Census Act does not prohibit the use of statistical methods for
the purpose of apportionment. Two sections of the Census Act mention
the use of statistical methods. Section 141 plainly allows for the
broad use of statistics and section 195 states that statistics may be
used. Yes, two district courts, the District court for the District of
Columbia and the District court for the Eastern District of Virginia
recently ruled otherwise. These are the two cases that the Supreme
Court will hear on November 30 of this year.
Both of these courts erred in their rulings. First they ignored the
plain meaning of each of the words of section 141 and 195. Section 141
gives the Secretary broad discretion to take the census in such manner
as he chooses, including the use of sampling. Section 195 limits that
broad discretion by stating that if he considers it feasible, the
Secretary must use statistical sampling for nonapportionment purposes.
However, for apportionment purposes, the Secretary's broad discretion
remains as afforded by section 141.
Second, even if the courts determined that the Census Act provisions
are unclear as to whether the use of statistical sampling is
permissible, they should have deferred to the Census Bureau's
reasonable interpretation of these provisions as required by law.
No one disputes the definition of 141, but the real issue is section
195.
Section 195 is clear with regard to the requirement of the Secretary
to use statistical sampling for non-apportionment purposes if he deems
it feasible. Obviously, Secretary Daley deems it feasible or we would
not be where we are today. The question the courts reviewed was what
Section 195 says with regard to statistical sampling for apportionment
purposes.
The Supreme Court has ruled on numerous occasions that if a statute
is silent or anbiguous with respect to the specific issue, the question
for the court is whether the agency's intrepretation is a permissible
construction of the statute. It should not decide whether the
intrepretation is the same intrepretation that the court would have
made. Therefore, the District of Columbia Court and the Virginia Courts
failed to give the Bureau the discretion it deserved.
Three District Courts, the Eastern District of Michigan, the Eastern
District of Pennsylvania and the District Court for the Eastern
District of New York, have ruled correctly that the Census Act allows
for the use of statistical methods. That is why I am pleased that the
Supreme Court is reviewing the Speaker and Barr's lawsuits.
The Constitution does not prohibit the use of statistical methods for
the purposes of apportionment. Instead, it expressly delegates to
Congress the authority to conduct the census ``in such Manner as they
by law shall direct.'' Congress passed such a law which give the
Secretary of Commerce the authority to take the census. THe Secretary
of Commerce is doing just that, taking the census. The Secretary has
chosen to take the census using the most modern technological advances
available.
Now Congress no longer likes the law it passed and no longer wants
the Secretary to have the authority to take the census. Congress has
the right to change its mind but it must do it by law, not by the
Appropriations process and not through the court system. Until Congress
passes such a law, the Secretary has the authority to use statistical
methods.
I should note that neither the District of Columbia Court nor the
Eastern District of Virginia reviewed the constitutional issue.
However, the Michigan, Pennsylvania and New York Courts did reach the
constitutional issue and they all found that the use of statistical
methods is constitutional.
Mr. Speaker, neither the Census Act nor the Constitution prohibits
the use of modern technology in the taking of the census. I look
forward to the Supreme Court explaining this fact to the House of
Representatives and to the American people.
Mr. Speaker, I include for the Record the following:
[From the New York Times, Oct. 12, 1998]
Welcome Wagon to Make Its Visits Via Post Office
(By Constance L. Hays)
The Welcome Wagon is rolling up the welcome mat.
Since the 1920's, Welcome Wagon's sales representatives,
almost always women, have gone house to house visiting
newlyweds and the newly moved-in, bearing greeting baskets
laden with coupons, magnets, ballpoint pens and other items
sponsored by the local locksmith, the town optometrist and
other merchants. But these old-fashioned visits are coming to
an end, in a testament to changing life styles or perhaps
that traditional corporate desire to cut costs.
The owner of the Welcome Wagon, the Cendant Corporation, is
dismissing most of its 2,200 representatives and will replace
them with direct marketing through the mail.
So rather than a lengthy visit with the possibility of
real-time conversation, each of
[[Page H10647]]
Welcome Wagon's targeted households will get a bound
directory delivered to the doorstep, in which businesses will
have paid to advertise. The point is to reach more people,
Cendant spokesmen say, and these days, people are not at home
as much as they used to be, because of busier families and a
surge in working mothers.
Cendant, which also owns Avis car rentals and Howard
Johnson hotels, has found itself in financial turmoil this
year, but the company says its problems are not related to
its decision to change the Welcome Wagon.
This change, however, appears to have taken many sales
representatives by surprise and was met with sorrow by some
of them. Although they were paid for their work, certain
representatives regarded it as more of a social mission than
a marketing one. For decades, Welcome Wagon thrived on that
very ambiguity, getting over the threshold thanks to its
neighborly demeanor when other marketers might not.
``My heart is in these home visits,'' said Dee Strilowich,
the company's top-performing salesperson, who has worked for
Welcome Wagon in Ridgefield, Conn., and nearby Redding for
the last four years. ``I loved giving the welcome and
greeting to those new movers, new parents, engaged women.''
But Cendant insisted that times had changed, which is why
it decided last month to end the visits and lay off its
representatives. ``It's a different world today,'' said
Elliot Bloom, a spokesman for Cendant in Parsippany, N.J.
``In the past, 20 years ago, when you knocked on people's
doors, Mom was home. Now she's in the work force.''
A vice president for Welcome Wagon in New York and two
other states agreed. ``We had representatives who were
beating their heads against the wall because they had the
names of several people to go and visit but could never find
them at home,'' said the vice president, Dinah Watson. She
said she was offered a severance package, which she will be
taking, and added that the 250 representatives she supervised
have until the end of this month to decide whether they will
stay with the company.
About 500 people will be retained to work in ad sales for
Welcome Wagon, Mr. Bloom said. It is being combined with
another Cendant company, called Getting to Know You, that
specializes in direct mail.
``Whenever you make a change like this, there is some
displacement,'' said Christopher R. Jones, another Cendant
spokesman. Representatives have until the end of the year
to make their visits, and after that, ``we've asked them
to stop.''
Mrs. Strilowich, who was greeted herself by a Welcome Wagon
representative when she moved to Ridgefield 28 years ago,
said she has about 200 visits scheduled through December and
would complete them all. She said most of the representatives
she had spoken to were sorry to see their jobs end so
suddenly. ``A lot of them are in the same situation I was,''
she said, adding that she is the primary earner in her
family. ``They were looking for at least two or three more
years.''
Some Welcome Wagon representatives expressed anger over the
loss of their jobs and the end of their visits with families.
``Cendant sacrificed us for the bottom line,'' said Wendy
Amundsen, one of the company's top-selling representatives,
in Stamford, Conn. ``Sometimes there are just more important
things in life than money.''
Cendant has been struggling this year with other, much
larger business problems, including an accounting error that
stripped $115 million from its 1997 earnings, the subsequent
resignations of a host of senior executives, and a stock
price that has plunged from $41.69 in April to $9 on Friday.
But Mr. Bloom dismissed as ``absolute nonsense'' any
suggestion that Cendant's wider problems has led to the
switch in strategy for Welcome Wagon. He said the company had
peaked in 1968 with 1.5 million visits a year, but that the
number had fallen to 580,000 last year. Still, Cendant has
thought enough of the company to pay $20 million to acquire
it in 1995, back when Cendant was known as CUC International
and the number of visits was estimated at 500,000 a year.
At the time, CUC said it planned to expand the sales force
and did so, adding some 800 positions by this year. The
company saw Welcome Wagon as a marketing device for a
personal credit-history business it already owned. With
little overhead beyond the 100-person management staff, a
toll-free number and a World Wide Web site, profits were
substantial. And sales representatives, who were paid by the
amount of business they solicited from area merchants, could
earn as much as $70,000 a year. Many received benefits as
well.
Welcome Wagon took its name from 19th century Conestoga
covered wagons that would greet frontier settlers as they
arrived, bringing food and fresh water from the nearest
village. The company was founded in 1928 in Memphis. This
summer, to mark its 70th anniversary, the governors of
several states, including Wisconsin, declared part of July
``Welcome Wagon Week.''
``You will visit households when they're celebrating a
move, or an engagement, or the birth of a new child,''
promises the Welcome Wagon Web site, which so far has not
been altered to reflect the newly impersonal nature of the
operation. ``You will also introduce local businesses to
Welcome Wagon's unique, personalized advertising program.
What could be more fun.''
But now the fun is over, ``I thought Welcome Wagon would go
on forever,'' Ms. Amundsen said. ``Welcome Wagon is like
apple pie, baseball, hot dogs. It's an American institution.
I thought I would retire in this job.''
____________________