“The cost of 2010 Census has escalated to an estimated $14 billion…making it the most expensive in the history of our country,” Senator Tom Carper (D-DE), Chairman of the Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, Government Information, Federal Services and International Security, said in his opening statement at a hearing about a cost-effective and accurate 2010 Census. In his written opening statement, Carper says, “Given the sheer magnitude of such an undertaking, a shortcoming in one area can quickly have a domino effect on other operations… With each census, the challenge continues to grow in terms of cost and complexity as our population becomes larger, more diverse, and increasingly difficult to enumerate… The growing cost of the census at a time when the federal government is facing an unprecedented budget deficit highlights the importance of making sure that every additional dollar spent on the census actually improves the quality of the data.” He says, “We are at a critical juncture. I do not think it is overstating things to say that the 2010 Census is approaching a state of emergency. Significant work still has to be done, and the Bureau does not have a director in place to assist them in making these critical decisions.”
The Honorable Barbara Everitt Bryant, the former Director of the Census Bureau, argues that “the big inhibitor to a good count in 2010” will be the issue of illegal immigration. She says, “Fear is very apt to inhibit a full count in Hispanic/Latino and immigrant neighborhoods in 2010. The current Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) raids on employers and neighborhoods to identify and deport undocumented immigrants is bound to make residents unwilling to be found or, if found, to give information to the government. Imagine if you were a census taker and went to the door of a household that housed both legal and undocumented persons… Imagine that you introduce yourself and say, ‘I’m from the Census Bureau and I want to ask you a few questions.’ What kind of cooperation do you think you will get?”
Her written testimony includes a plan of action: “My first recommendation to this Subcommittee is that you do everything in your power…to get a new Census Director nominated and confirmed as soon as possible,” she says. Bryant lists three lessons that can be learned from past censuses that were not done as successfully as they could have been. The first lesson is there needs to be a “timely appointment of a director.” She continues, “I am a supporter of making the job of Director of the Census Bureau a 5-year appointment, starting in the years one and six. The planning cycle for operations as large as the decennial and economic censuses are long and only with a several-year lead-time could a Director have meaningful input to operations.”
The second lesson she lists is that “a major, professional, coordinated communications and advertising campaign is vital to census success and accuracy. Such a campaign requires major financial outlay.” She argues, “Such a campaign has two major components and their theme needs to be coordinated: 1) a large volume of inexpensive promotional materials that can be handed out at the local level; and 2) radio, TV, and newspaper spots professionally produced with goals of reaching both a mass national and targeted audiences. The advertising campaign has to be on a scale comparable to what a large private sector company would use to launch a new product… Good and prime time space must be purchased, whatever the cost.”
Her third lesson is that “outreach to hard-to-count segments of the population through partnerships with geographic, ethnic, and racial organizations can help reduce undercount.” She clarifies, “There is very little overall undercount. The problem is differential undercount. The census historically has fully counted more segments of the population, such as homeowners and older Americans. It falls short of fully counting the very mobile, renters, young people, and particularly those in Hispanic/Latino, African-American, and American Indian communities. Those hard-to-count are best reached with one-on-one contacts from local people and organizations they know and trust… Only trusted sources can convince the reluctant, fearful, or uninformed that the Census Bureau does not give information to the INDS, the IRS, landlords, ex-spouses, or mothers-in-law.”
She also argues that “[i]n addition to implementing these three lessons, three other factors will help improve accuracy in 2010… 1) The America Community Survey. The census will no longer send out the long form with nearly 50 questions to 17% of households. The long form is now replaced by the American Community Survey which acquires the demographic, social and economic data formerly on the long form from a survey of one percent of households every year throughout the decade. 2) The Downturn in Employment… While the downturn in employment is a national tragedy, it does have the effect of making temporary census jobs look very good to those unemployed, and it will create a more qualified pool from which to draw. 3) Undercount Research. Post-census measures coverage at a very detailed level geographically. It pinpoints both the level of coverage and the undercount… Without good coverage measurement, the Census Bureau could not learn lessons from each census to improve the next one.”
Heather Latham is an intern at the American Journalism Center, a training program run by Accuracy in Media and Accuracy in Academia.
