United States General Accounting Office

GAO General Government Division

May 1998 Decennial Census

Overview of Historical

Census Issues

GAO/GGD-98-103

Preface

The purpose of this report is to furnish context, background, and a

historical perspective for Members of Congress, their staffs, and others

interested in the debate on policy and operational questions related to the

2000 Census. It is organized by general decennial census concepts and

discusses critical issues that emerged during decennial censuses as far

back as the first one in 1790.

This report describes, in general terms, the Census Bureau’s plans for the

2000 Decennial Census, but it does not evaluate the potential for success

of the 2000 Census, nor does it contain recommendations. Many other GAO

reports and testimonies (listed in Selected GAO Products and available

upon request) analyze the 1990 Census and provide our perspective on the

current progress and potential risks of the 2000 Census. In addition,

Census Bureau, congressional, and other reports on technical issues and

planning for the 2000 Census are available.

In developing this report, we researched available literature on the census

(including publications on demography in early America, the framing of

the Constitution, and social history) and interviewed Bureau officials

knowledgeable about census history. We also reviewed publications on

census issues prepared by the National Academy of Sciences’ National

Research Council and drew on available documentation describing plans

for the 2000 Decennial Census. (See Bibliography for a listing of non-GAO

publications.) It should be noted that, as with any effort to put current

events into historical context, alternative interpretations are possible.

Often debated are the intent and motivation of the framers of the

Constitution who created the census. In this report, we have quoted the

Constitution and various laws relating to the decennial census and have

attempted to place their language in an historical context. We are not,

however, providing our own independent review or interpretation of the

constitutional and statutory issues discussed in this report, which, unless

otherwise noted, are based primarily on the analysis contained in the

various publications and documents we relied upon in preparing this

report.

Short answers to some frequently asked questions about the decennial

census are in appendix I. Appendix II contains information on changes in

the apportionment of the membership of the House of Representatives

between the 1920 and 1990 Decennial Censuses by region of country and

on changes in the nation’s population and its undercount by race and

ethnicity between the 1950 and 1990 censuses, as well as a snapshot of the

Page 1 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Preface

growth and cost of census-taking since the first decennial census in 1790.

Major contributors to this report are identified in appendix III.

L. Nye Stevens

Director, Federal Management

 and Workforce Issues

Page 2 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Page 3 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Contents

Preface 1

Chapter 1 

Why Take the Census?

8

The Constitution Requires a Census 8

The Tradition of Recordkeeping 8

The Constitutional Imperative 8

Apportionment and Its Impact 9

Direct Taxation Rarely Used 12

Census Data Have Other Important Uses 12

Congressional Redistricting 12

Managing Federal Agencies 13

Allocating Federal Aid 13

Helping Local Governments 14

Helping Businesses 14

Chapter 2 

Taking the Census

15

Deciding How to Count 15

Changing Conditions in American Society 15

Decennial Decisionmaking 16

Title 13 Governs the Basic Rules of Census-Taking Today 17

Additional Influences on Census-Taking 18

Deciding Who to Count 19

Deciding What to Ask in the Census 20

From Simple to Complex Questionnaire Content 21

Race and Ethnicity Questions Today 23

Counting Methods 24

Associating Addresses With Households 25

Locating Nontraditional Housing 27

Encouraging Public Participation 28

Sampling and Statistical Estimation in the 2000 Census 30

Nonresponse Follow-Up Sampling 30

Using ICM to Adjust Population Counts 31

Constitutional and Legal Issues on Sampling 31

Accuracy of Past Censuses 32

Page 4 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Contents

Chapter 3 

Protecting Privacy

and Controlling Costs

Are Persistent Census

Concerns

35

Protecting Privacy 35

The Evolution From Public Posting to Strict Privacy 35

Privacy Issues Today 37

Rising Census Costs 37

Increasing Number of Housing Units 38

Increasing Use of Technology 38

Increase in Census Staffing 39

Appendixes Appendix I: Most Frequently Asked Questions and Answers

About the Decennial Census

42

Appendix II: Changes and Undercounts in and Growth of the

Decennial Census

43

Appendix III: Major Contributors to This Report 45

Bibliography of

Non-GAO Publications

and Sources

46

Selected GAO

Products Related to

the Decennial Census

51

Tables Table II.1: Changes in the Apportionment of Membership of the

House of Representatives Between the 1920 and 1990 Decennial

Censuses, by Region of Country

43

Table II.2: Changes in the U. S. Population and its Undercount by

Race and Ethnicity Between the 1950 and 1990 Decennial

Censuses

43

Table II.3: Growth of the Decennial Census from 1790 to 1990 44

Page 5 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Contents

Abbreviations

HUD Department of Housing and Urban Development

ICM integrated coverage measurement

INS Immigration and Naturalization Service

LUCA local update of census addresses

MAF master address file

NRFU nonresponse follow-up

OMB Office of Management and Budget

RFD rural free delivery

PES post-enumeration survey

TIGER Topographically Integrated Geographic Encoding and

Referencing System

Page 6 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Page 7 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Chapter 1 

Why Take the Census?

The Constitution

Requires a Census

The United States of America, in 1790, was the first modern nation to

undertake a comprehensive and periodic count of its population as a

regular responsibility of government. But the American decennial

census—mandated in the Constitution—was also a component of a new,

unprecedented concept of representative government.

The Tradition of

Recordkeeping

A decennial census was an extension of colonial habits of recordkeeping

born in the traditions of Europe. Old World religious institutions had long

kept the vital records of their parishioners, and as early as 1611, the

London Company required the residents of Jamestown to keep a record of

local christenings, marriages, and deaths.1

 A few years later, the Virginia

Assembly passed its own law requiring not only the recordation of these

events, but also an annual quantitative report of them. Some colonies

sporadically tracked a range of data about their populations, including

occupation, gender, and age, during the pre-Revolutionary period. Some of

these compilations served a particular purpose, such as determining the

number of military-eligible men; others reflected an English tradition of

tracking population movements that developed during the great social

upheavals of the Elizabethan era. Although the Articles of Confederation

mandated a triennial census for taxation purposes, the revolutionary war

prevented its implementation; no general census of the colonies as a

whole was ever carried out.

The Constitutional

Imperative

The Constitution of the United States established a new, philosophically

innovative, and technically complex form of government, which in turn

established a need for periodic censuses. A principal innovation of the

new government was that it would be representative of the population by

means of elections. One of the principal complexities the framers faced

was how to make the new government representative and, particularly,

how to reflect the interests of the American people both as residents of a

state and as individuals. The Senate, therefore, was designed to represent

the interests of the states, and the House of Representatives was designed

to represent the interests of individuals.

In section 2 of Article 1 of the Constitution, which concerns the

composition of the House of Representatives, the framers wrote:

“Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several

States which may be included within this Union, according to their

1

James H. Cassedy, Demography in Early America; Beginnings of the Statistical Mind, 1600-1800

(Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1969).

Page 8 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Chapter 1 

Why Take the Census?

respective Numbers....” If the Members of the House were to be

apportioned among the states “according to their respective Numbers,”

then the populations of the states had to be determined. The framers,

aware that the states had already demonstrated different ideas about how

to count their populations for apportioning delegates to the Continental

Congress, stipulated the number of representatives for each state until a

census could be taken. Furthermore, they established a requirement for

the national government to undertake the census and described, in general

terms, how it would be accomplished: “The actual Enumeration shall be

made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the

United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such

manner as they shall by Law direct.”

Apportionment and Its

Impact

The first census was duly taken in 1790 in a manner directed by Congress.

The census was to have taken 9 months, but actually took 18 months.

President George Washington believed that the count of 3.9 million people

was too low. Congress, however, accepted the data and proceeded to

apportion the number of representatives in accordance with the census

data. Immediately, the debate about how exactly to implement the

apportionment began, and this controversy has continued in one form or

another for over 200 years.

The Constitution did not specify in precise detail how to apportion the

Representatives; it only specified that there would be a minimum ratio of 1

representative to every 30,000 of the population. It also did not fix the

number of seats there should be in the House, and it was silent on how the

states were to elect their representatives. So, questions arose: How many

people should one Representative represent? When the population of a

state divided by 30,000, or whatever divisor was ultimately selected, had a

remainder, should that remainder be dropped or rounded? Should the size

of the House be fixed first and then apportioned, or should an

apportionment fix the size of the House? The questions about

apportionment method were more than academic; depending on the

answers, states could gain or lose seats in the House of Representatives.

The debates over the years about methods of apportionment focused on

mathematics, but the crux of the matter was political power. Not only did

various apportionment methods affect individual states’ power, but they

also influenced the outcome of national political debates and, over time,

the balance of power between large and small states, northern and

southern states, and the urban East and the agricultural/extractive West.

Page 9 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Chapter 1 

Why Take the Census?

The context of the debate was always the rapidly growing population

revealed by each successive census. From the beginning, the U.S.

population grew at a phenomenal rate: over 30 percent between decennial

censuses until the Civil War and 15-25 percent through 1930.2

 This growth

and the simultaneous shifts in geographical concentration of the

population resulted in dramatic reapportionments among states. To

illustrate, in the 1920s, 91 representatives were apportioned to the Middle

Atlantic states of New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania, but by 1990,

that number had declined to 65. In the 1920s, 19 representatives were

apportioned for the Pacific states of Washington, Oregon, and California,

but by 1990, that number had increased to 66. (Changes in the results of

the apportionment of the House of Representatives between 1920 and 1990

are shown in table II.1.)

In 1911, when Congress fixed the number of representatives at 435—1 per

state with the rest apportioned—the census results had even greater

significance. Before this decision, a state’s loss of population, and

therefore of representation, was mitigated by continuing increases in the

total number of representatives. Before the change, states whose

population declined relative to other states did not often lose

representatives, although their representatives were relatively less

powerful as members of a now larger House. But after 1911, a gain of

representation for any one state came only with a loss of representation

for another state.

Congress failed to reapportion following the 1920 Census. The failure was

in part the result of a difference of opinion over the method of dividing

political power. Throughout the 1920s, Congress debated which of two

mathematical models for reapportionment—whose outcomes for

distribution of House seats differed—would be used. In 1929, one

mathematical method was selected for the reapportionment, but it was not

applied until after the 1930 Census. Furthermore, the debate about

apportionment methods was not over. In 1941, a different model was

chosen called “the method of equal proportions.”3

 It is still in use today.

2

Statistical Abstract of the United States—The National Data Book, Bureau of Census, Department of

Commerce, October 1996.

3

The method of equal proportions is based on complex mathematical calculations whereby each state

is initially assigned one seat while the other seats are assigned to the states based on the “priority

numbers” given to the states on the basis of their relative population numbers. “Congressional and

State Reapportionment and Redistricting: A Legal Analysis,” CRS Report for Congress, American Law

Division, Congressional Research Service, The Library of Congress, 96-732A, September 4, 1996.

Page 10 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Chapter 1 

Why Take the Census?

The failure to reapportion in 1920 was also a reflection of regional power

dynamics. The results of the 1920 Census revealed a major and continuing

shift in population from rural to urban areas, which meant that many

representatives elected from rural districts resisted reapportionment. Also,

the growing number of immigrants entering this country had some impact

on population shifts. Delay followed delay as rural interests tried to come

up with mechanisms that would reduce the impact of the population shift.

Congressmen from rural areas that would lose seats to more urbanized

areas simply blocked passage of reapportionment legislation for 9 years.

During the congressional debates on Pubic Law 71-13, which was enacted

in 1929, language requiring that districts be composed of contiguous,

compact territory and contain the same number of individuals was

deleted. Therefore, the reapportionment law that finally passed in 1929

was silent on the subject of rules for how the states were to establish

districts to elect their representatives. As a result, some states simply

stopped redistricting, despite major changes in the internal distribution of

their populations over time from rural to urban to suburban. A process of

malapportionment—meaning establishment of districts containing unequal

population sizes—continued unchecked for decades.

The difference in population size among congressional districts increased,

setting the stage for the debate that started in the 1960s and continues

today: What are the standards for population size in and shape of

congressional districts? The federal courts, which had declined for 40

years to rule on malapportionment cases, revisited the issue in the early

1960s, and ultimately the Supreme Court accepted the argument that

“one-man, one-vote” meant that districts had to be of equal size.4

 More

recently, issues concerning the ethnic composition of those districts and

their physical shape have arisen. Interpretations of the Voting Rights Act

of 1965, as amended, led to the creation by 1990 of over 50 congressional

districts configured in order to achieve a majority of minority population.

For a time, there was no limit to the peculiarity of the shape of a district

created in the process of meeting the goals of the act. Now, the courts are

reconsidering limits to the eccentricity of the shape of a district.

Census data have been essential to the late twentieth century debates on

the division of representational power, just as they were to the first

apportionment debate in 1791. Block-by-block census data were essential

to the 1960s goal of creating districts of equal population size. The efforts

in the 1990s to achieve majority minority districts relied on census data on

4

Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S.C. 186 (1962).

Page 11 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Chapter 1 

Why Take the Census?

the ethnicity of the people in specific blocks. The debate over how best to

meet the constitutional objective of representative government continues

today, with the census still at the core of the debate.

Direct Taxation Rarely

Used

The census, according to Article I, section 2, of the Constitution, was also

to be used to apportion any direct taxes levied by the federal government.

The founding fathers purposefully linked the two. Their thinking was that

any incentive for a state to boost population in order to gain additional

representation would be offset by the disincentive of raising its tax

burden. Direct taxation, however, was enacted only twice—once in 1798

to try to diversify the federal government’s reliance on tariffs and customs

duties and once to finance the War of 1812. Both taxes were based on the

value of land, houses, and slaves, and both were difficult to assess and

collect. While this authority has never been repealed, direct taxation based

on a decennial census never became practical.

Census Data Have

Other Important Uses

While apportionment is the most widely known use of census data, the

data are also used for congressional redistricting, managing federal

agencies, and allocating federal funds, and are disseminated to state and

local governments, academia, and the private sector as well. Data from a

decennial census5

 provide official, uniform information gathered over the

decades on this country’s people and their social, demographic, and

economic characteristics. They provide the baselines for countless other

surveys and are used to develop sampling frames for a number of other

federal data collections, such as the Current Population Survey, which is

used to measure participation in the labor market and unemployment

rates.

Congressional

Redistricting

The Constitution does not require that states use the census data to

redraw the boundaries of congressional districts following a change in the

apportionment of representatives, but most states have always used the

census data for this purpose. The general perception of the impartiality of

the Bureau and the great cost and administrative effort required to take a

census have been strong arguments in favor of using the Bureau’s data. In

addition, the ready availability of census data is important because

redistricting generally has been required shortly after the census data are

made available. In recent years, immediate and detailed population data

5

Decennial census data are gathered from short and long form questionnaires. Questions on the short

form are asked of the entire population, and questions on the long form are asked of only a portion of

the population for projection of national information.

Page 12 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Chapter 1 

Why Take the Census?

have become especially critical because some states have court-ordered

deadlines to complete redistricting.

Managing Federal Agencies The decennial census is a cost-effective method of providing baseline and

trend data for use by federal agencies and various other census

stakeholders, compared to the alternative of multiple data collections by

other federal agencies for their own purposes. Decennial census data and

data from other Bureau surveys assist federal agencies in managing their

unique mission responsibilities. Federal agencies can use Bureau data to

assist in evaluating established programs, identifying the particular

geographic area of the county where success or problems are occurring,

planning corrective actions, and later determining if their corrective

actions were effective. For example, Bureau data can assist federal

agencies in managing programs under the Government Performance and

Results Act. Under this Act, agencies must measure their performance

against the goals they have set and report to Congress and the public on

how well they are doing.

Federal agencies often turn to census data in managing their programs

because it is mandated by legislation or regulation. The use of census data

is a legal requirement in some federal programs. For example, the

Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is required to use

Census data as the basis for allocating funds for the Community

Development Block Grant Program (42 U.S.C. 5302). Without these data,

HUD would be unable to meet legislatively mandated requirements because

there is no other source of data for the geographic level needed.

Allocating Federal Aid The distribution of federal revenues in order to meet national

socioeconomic objectives started in the late nineteenth century with an

appropriation to each state to establish agricultural experiment stations at

land grant colleges. In the early decades of this century, Congress

gradually expanded its provision of federal assistance. During the

mid-1930s, as New Deal programs, including Social Security, expanded to

account for roughly one-third of the federal budget, the need for greater

detail and higher quality census data increased. To this day, census data

remain an important element in the allocation of federal aid to state and

local governments, and with billions of dollars at stake, the data are

scrutinized intensely for accuracy.

Page 13 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Chapter 1 

Why Take the Census?

For fiscal year 1998, funding estimates indicate states should receive about

$170 billion in aid through 20 federal programs that used census data, in

whole or in part, to allocate that aid. The largest of these programs is

Medicaid, which plans to distribute about $104.4 billion in fiscal year 1998,

followed by the Federal Aid Highway Program at $20 billion, and

$7.5 billion under Title I grants to local education agencies.6

 Census

information is important to the distribution of these federal funds, though

generally it is not the sole factor in allocation formulas.

Helping Local

Governments

The decennial census produces data that states use not only to determine

boundaries for congressional districts, but also to establish boundaries for

smaller jurisdictional divisions. The census is also a rich source of data to

help county and city governments plan for and provide services. The data

help them answer questions such as the following:

• Will the population of preschoolers in the various school districts warrant

building additional elementary schools?

• Are local transit systems reaching the people likely to use public transport,

and

• Where and when should the next senior citizen facility be built?

Without federal census data, state and local governments would have to

undertake their own censuses, a costly alternative given the federal

government’s experience and economies of scale.

Helping Businesses Businesses use the aggregated census data7

 available to them to plan for

and provide their services and goods. Census data about population trends

help businesses succeed—and provide jobs in the process—by alerting

them to opportunities to provide new services and products and to tailor

existing ones to demographic changes. Census data also help businesses

efficiently target their advertising dollars. A free sample, for example, of a

magazine focused on the interests of Hispanic readers can be distributed

based on information at the census block level. Companies also use

population data to locate new stores where they expect likely consumers

to be, as well as to locate production facilities where they can expect to

find a suitable labor force.

6

1997 Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance, Executive Office of the President, Office of

Management and Budget, Washington D.C., 1997.

7

Some Bureau data are free, while special data requests are filled for a fee.

Page 14 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Chapter 2 

Taking the Census

Deciding How to

Count

“The actual Enumeration shall be made,” according to the Constitution,

under Article 1, section 2, “... in such Manner as they [Congress] shall by

law direct.” In effect, this has enabled Congress to adjust decennial

census procedures allowing for changes in American society unforeseen in

1787. Congress responded by delegating the census-taking to executive

branch agencies while maintaining overall responsibility and periodically

enacting legislation affecting census-taking methodology. While changes

to census-taking methodologies have occurred, one constant—the focus

on identifying households and enumerating people within them—has

stayed the same.

Changing Conditions in

American Society

Since the 1790 Census, American society has constantly changed, thereby

necessitating changes in the methodology of enumeration in the decennial

census. Among the most significant societal changes have been:

1. Increased population mobility: Although westward-bound frontier

pioneers were difficult to count in the late-eighteenth and nineteenth

centuries, the number of mobile Americans today is much greater,

increasing problems for census-taking. Short-term renters, “snowbird”

retirees, students splitting their residence between home and college, and

young urbanites rotating temporary residences are a few of the modern

phenomena that have created a population mobility unimagined in 1787.

During the period 1990 to 1994, 17 percent of the American population on

average changed residences each year.8

2. Varied domestic arrangements: Households have always been the major

focus of census enumeration. In eighteenth century America, nearly all

citizens identified themselves with a household whose members were

almost always related by blood, marriage, or through regular employment,

and therefore included servants, slaves, apprentices, and resident

farmworkers. Most people lived in a family-occupied dwelling that was

headed by a male readily able to provide a count and characterize the

members of his household. Today, divorce, cohabitation without marriage,

and group housing, among other domestic arrangements rarely heard of in

1787, make the determination of whom to count and where to count them

increasingly complex. From 1970 to 1990 alone, the number of American

households grew 47 percent, while average household size shrank from 3.1

to 2.6 people and nonfamily households grew by 128 percent.9

8

Statistical Abstract of the United States—The National Data Book, Bureau of Census, Department of

Commerce, October 1996.

9

Statistical Abstract of the United States—The National Data Book, October 1996.

Page 15 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Chapter 2 

Taking the Census

3. People of varied linguistic backgrounds: The heads of households to

whom the census questions were posed in the late eighteenth century

came overwhelmingly from Western European cultural traditions and

spoke a limited number of Western European languages. Today, the U.S.

population includes people from a great variety of countries, and language

barriers pose significant challenges in taking the census. To deal with this

diversity, in 1990 the Bureau had questionnaire guides available in over 32

languages and had enumerators able to speak about 50 languages.

4. Increased concerns about privacy: As a result of changing attitudes

toward government in general, concerns that census information will be

passed to other government agencies, and fears of further loss of privacy

in the computer age, the rate at which the population voluntarily responds

to requests for census information has declined. For example, mail

response (considered to be the most reliable and cost-efficient means of

obtaining census information) declined from 78 percent in 1970 to

65 percent in 1990. (Chapter 3 of this report discusses the Bureau’s efforts

to mitigate these privacy concerns.)

Decennial Decisionmaking For the first census, Congress delegated the 17 U.S. marshals and their 650

assistants to undertake the census, and gave them 9 months to do so and

report the results by district to the President. For each of the succeeding

five censuses, Congress passed a new piece of legislation. These censuses

were similar to the first, except that the questions to be asked grew in

number with each decade. During this 50-year period, Congress directed

that some refinements to census-taking be made: the tallies were passed to

the Secretary of State starting in 1800, and enumerators used printed

schedules for the first time in 1830. Congress also continued to authorize a

small clerical staff in Washington whose function was simply to check for

clerical errors in the work and compile the tabulations.

In 1850, Congress created a new management structure for administering

the decennial census, which was becoming an increasingly complex

undertaking as more sophisticated questions were being asked of a

growing population spread over a wide geographical area. Congress

created a Census Office and authorized a superintendent of the census at a

salary of $2,500. Congress also determined that the 1850 law would govern

future censuses should Congress fail to pass authorizing legislation. This

was done to avoid the potential for a disruption in the census-taking

schedule and possible congressional deadlocks over particular issues.

Page 16 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Chapter 2 

Taking the Census

In the last decades of the nineteenth century, Congress began to delegate

more responsibility to the Census Office, which moved beyond clerical

functions and gained authority to control the field administration of the

census and appoint or approve the appointment of supervisors and

enumerators. Until this time, the appointment of those staff had been a

matter of political patronage. Furthermore, despite the fact that census

activities took almost 7 years to complete in the late nineteenth century,

the census offices that Congress authorized every 10 years closed when

the work of each successive census was done. In 1902, Congress

established the Bureau of the Census, under the Department of the

Interior, as a permanent agency that, for the first time, would not disband

between censuses. The Bureau was transferred to the newly created

Department of Commerce and Labor in 1903.

By 1913, the Census Bureau was under the authority of the Department of

Commerce and had gained its role as the preeminent census, survey, and

statistical agency of the United States, which it remains to this day. The

Bureau not only conducts the decennial census as it did in its early history,

but also about 200 other censuses and surveys.

Title 13 Governs the Basic

Rules of Census-Taking

Today

While legislation passed in 1850 made a new authorization for each

decennial census unnecessary, Congress continued to pass legislation

every decade for implementation of upcoming censuses. In 1954, title 13 of

the U.S. Code was enacted to establish the basic rules for the taking of

future decennial censuses, including the following:

• The census, as required for apportionment, must be completed and

reported to the president within 9 months after the census date of April 1;

• the Secretary of Commerce must submit to the committees having

legislative jurisdiction over the census, not later than 3 years before the

next census, the subjects proposed to be included in the coming census

and the types of information to be compiled; and

• the Secretary must submit to the committees having legislative

jurisdiction, not later than 2 years before the next census, the planned

questions to be included.

Although Congress delegated responsibility in title 13 to the Secretary of

Commerce to undertake a decennial census “in such form and content as

he may determine,” Congress has maintained authority and responsibility

under the Constitution for directing the decennial census. Congress

exercises a continuing role in overseeing the conduct of the census

Page 17 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Chapter 2 

Taking the Census

through a number of congressional committees, including for

authorization, the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee and the

Subcommittee on the Census of the House Government Reform and

Oversight Committee,10 and for appropriations, the Commerce, Justice,

State, and the Judiciary and Related Agencies subcommittees in the House

and Senate.

While these committees and subcommittees provide general oversight,

Congress enacts legislation from time to time that contains specific

additional direction to the Secretary. For example, in 1994, in order to

facilitate development of accurate address lists, Congress enacted the

Census Address List Improvement Act of 1994 that allowed the Bureau and

the U.S. Postal Service to exchange address list information under certain

conditions.

Additional Influences on

Census-Taking

The Bureau and its predecessor entities have always been responsive to

congressional direction, but they have also been influenced by the many

users of its statistics. In the nineteenth century, state governments,

scholars, business associations, and reformers were among those who

influenced the questions contained in the schedules, and the censuses

provided them data that helped them in their various endeavors.

Professional statisticians have been and continue to be influential in the

Secretary’s determination of the form and content of the questions, as well

as in decisions concerning the presentation of data.

In the late twentieth century, the influence of various interest groups has

had an effect on the census. Advocates for the homeless spurred the

Bureau’s efforts in the last several censuses to count people who live in

shelters and on the streets. In the 1970s, the Bureau created several

advisory committees of experts involved with minority issues. Recently,

racial and ethnic groups urged the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) to reconsider the federal standards on race and ethnicity

classifications; their efforts resulted in the 1997 changes to those

standards, which will allow individuals to choose more than one racial

category when completing their census questionnaires. The plans for the

tabulating and reporting of these new racial categories by the Bureau

continue to be a much debated issue.

10The House Government Reform and Oversight Committee established a Subcommittee on the

Census, effective February 1998, whose primary function is oversight of the 2000 Decennial Census.

Page 18 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Chapter 2 

Taking the Census

Deciding Who to

Count

The Constitution identified who should be counted in the decennial census

in Article 1, sction 2,with the following language: The count “shall be

determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including

those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not

taxed, three fifths of all other Persons [slaves].”

Although the framers were specific about how to count (or not count)

Native Americans and slaves, they were not specific about whom to count.

Only one important criterion for eligibility was established: “persons”

rather than “citizens” were to be counted, meaning citizenship was not to

determine who should be counted. There was little reason to be more

specific since the population in the 1780s was relatively homogenous,

stationary, monolingual, and organized in stable household units.

In the years since the framing of the Constitution, however, many of those

conditions have changed, posing new philosophic and pragmatic issues.

Among the changed conditions are the following:

1. Illegal aliens: No one in 1787 was an illegal resident because the first

laws controlling immigration were not passed until 1875.11 The

Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) estimated there were

approximately 5 million illegal aliens residing in the United States as of

October 1996, with approximately 275,000 to 300,000 illegal aliens arriving

yearly.

2. Temporary and seasonal workers: Nearly everyone who made the

journey to America to work in the eighteenth century stayed for years.

Many were bound to do so by bonds of indenture or slavery, while the

broken ties with the distant homeland and the high cost of returning

encouraged others to stay. In l990, the INS reported about 140,000 foreign

citizens working temporarily in the United States in a variety of

occupations.

3. Homeless people: Paupers without family to assist them and depending

therefore on the public benefice were few in number in the 1780s, and they

were generally lodged at public expense in a household where they would

be counted. In contrast, the Bureau counted over 230,000 homeless

persons during the 1990 Census. The number of homeless with no fixed

11Jeffrey S. Passel and Karen A. Woodrow, “The Judicial Basis for Enumeration of Undocumented

Aliens in the 1980 Census and Implications for 1990,” U.S.Bureau of the Census, 1984.

Page 19 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Chapter 2 

Taking the Census

address, however, is a matter of conjecture, with other estimates ranging

from 800,000 upward.12

4. Foreign visitors and U.S. citizens living abroad: While short-term travel

was not unheard of in the late eighteenth century, the number of

Americans living abroad and the number of foreign citizens visiting in the

United States were insignificant. In contrast, throughout 1990,

approximately 16 million foreign citizens visited the United States for

business and/or pleasure. Furthermore, on Census Day in 1990, about

1 million federal civilian and military employees were living and working

abroad. (The Bureau’s residency rules generally do not include in the

population count either Americans living abroad who are not federal or

military employees, or foreign visitors to this country.)

The lack of specificity in the Constitution about who should be counted

has raised questions over time about the eligibility of certain categories of

people. When Congress passed the 14th amendment in 1868, which

modified Article 1, section 2, to eliminate the language concerning slaves

and indentured servants, Congress debated whether to change the

definition of those to be counted from “persons” to “citizens” or

“voters,” but decided to keep the original language. The effect of

legislation and court decisions over the past centuries is that the language

of Article 1, section 2, is read at its most inclusive. All persons who are

resident in the United States on Census Day, whether here legally or

illegally, are to be counted.

Deciding What to Ask

in the Census

The decennial census never simply counted heads. Since the earliest days

of the republic, Congress directed the Bureau or its predecessors to gather

additional information as it enumerated the population. In the nineteenth

century, the trend to greater numbers of questions, which peaked with an

encyclopedic number13 in 1890 on a large variety of issues, was inspired by

the curiosity of a self-conscious young nation and by the need to form

public policy. In the twentieth century, the census questions have been

increasingly shaped by the need to fulfill the data requirements of

programs legislated by Congress and to properly allocate the federal funds

authorized by those programs.

12“Homelessness: Toward Another Decade of Homelessness? An Issue Paper,” GAO/RCED,

September 15, 1995.

13The 1890 Census contained inquiries on subjects that later became separate censuses; these inquiries

included the subjects of agriculture, crime, insurance, mines and mining, manufacturing,

transportation, etc. This census contained a total of 13,161 questions; the majority of households

probably answered little more than the 45 questions on population.

Page 20 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Chapter 2 

Taking the Census

From Simple to Complex

Questionnaire Content

Even before the first census was taken in 1790, Congress considered

asking a range of additional questions, including one which would

determine individuals’ military eligibility. After debate, however, Congress

authorized enumerators to pose six questions: the name of the head of

each family, the number of free white males over 16 and under 16, the

number of free white females, the number of other free persons, and the

number of slaves. The 1800 and 1810 Censuses made further distinctions

among the ages of the free white respondents, and the 1820 Census added

distinctions for age and sex of the slave and free black populations and

also broke new ground in collecting basic information about people’s

occupations. The 1830 Census added a count of the numbers of deaf,

dumb, and blind household members, and the 1840 Census added

questions on literacy, schooling, and revolutionary war pensioners. This

first period of census-taking reflected the concerns of a new nation

absorbed in its political experiment and identity.

In 1850, the question of what to ask in the census became highly political

as the nation debated how to handle the coming crisis between the

northern and southern states. The focal point of the debate was what level

of detailed information to gather about slaves, but the debate became a

debate on the census itself and what was the proper reach of the federal

government. At the same time, new questions were asked that gathered

information about schools, crime, churches, and pauperism. A growing

national awareness about the changing ethnic composition of the

American population was reflected in the census questions. A question

about unnaturalized foreigners had been posed in the 1820 Census. For the

1850 Census, a question was asked on the householder’s place of birth by

the identification of the state, territory, or country where born and the

birthplace of parents.

Immigration, and particularly immigration from southern and eastern

Europe, became a critical issue in American politics in the last decades of

the nineteenth century and the first decades of the twentieth century, and

the answers to census questions became a part of the debate. For the 1910

Census, respondents were asked to identify their mother tongue in a

further effort to determine individuals’ ethnic backgrounds. In 1921, such

information, gathered over the decades, was used when Congress enacted

legislation that ended America’s historic policy of open immigration. The

law limited immigration to 500,000 people per year and was to limit the

percentage of immigrants from any country to their proportional

representation in the 1910 Census. That law’s 1924 successor, the National

Page 21 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Chapter 2 

Taking the Census

Origins Act, further cut immigration levels and returned to the 1890

Census as the basis for immigration quotas.

Until the 1930 Census, the details of the questions on the form were

specified minutely by Congress. In the 1929 law authorizing the 1930

Census, Congress specified areas to be investigated but, for the first time,

left the exact questions to the Bureau.

Unemployment was one of the areas that Congress directed the Bureau to

investigate in the 1930 Census. As the economic crisis of the 1930s wore

on, the need for more information with regard to the population’s

socioeconomic condition increased as legislators and government officials

at the federal and state levels evaluated existing programs and planned

new efforts to deal with the Depression. The 1940 Census of Population

and Housing included questions on income, internal migration, and Social

Security status, as well as more refined questions on unemployment. In

addition, Congress authorized a new set of questions about the types of

plumbing, heating, and appliances in people’s dwellings.

It became apparent prior to the 1940 Census that the amount of

information the Bureau was required to collect had come to exceed the

Bureau’s ability to gather and tabulate it in an accurate and timely manner.

As a result, the Bureau developed a new methodology for the 1940 Census

and included supplementary questions that were asked of only a portion of

the population. The Bureau’s statisticians used the data to extrapolate to

the general population.

For the 1950 Census, the Bureau moved toward limiting the decennial

census’ primary focus to population, demographic, and housing questions.

Many questions, such as those concerning unemployment, moved to

separate surveys and censuses, often done at more frequent intervals.

Today, the Bureau administers about 200 surveys related to various

economic and demographic issues.

In 1960, the Bureau began to move toward the mail-out/mail-back census

questionnaires that we know today in order to eliminate enumerator bias.

The nature of the population and housing questions remained relatively

constant from 1960 to 1990, with many supplementary questions being

asked of only a portion of the households. In 1960, for example, the

Bureau asked 7 population and 14 housing questions on a short form

questionnaire and posed an additional 28 population and 30 housing

questions on the long form questionnaire sent to 25 percent of the

Page 22 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Chapter 2 

Taking the Census

households. For the 2000 Census, an effort has been made to reduce the

number of questions and hence the burden on respondents. The short

form questionnaire is currently designed to have 5 population and housing

questions and the long form questionnaire, which the Bureau plans to send

to 17 percent of the population, is currently designed with 45 additional

questions.

Race and Ethnicity

Questions Today

The census has collected data on race and ethnicity in a variety of forms

for 200 years. Since the l960s, data on race and ethnicity have been used

extensively in civil rights monitoring and enforcement, covering such

areas as employment, voting rights, housing and mortgage lending, health

care services, and educational opportunities. Over the last several years,

however, the form of those questions has been a topic of considerable

debate within American society.

In the mid-1970s, OMB collaborated with other federal agencies to

standardize racial and ethnic data collected and published by the federal

government. The result was OMB’s 1977 Statistical Policy Directive No. 15,

which provided for classifications based on four races—American Indian

or Alaskan Native, Asian or Pacific Islander, Black, and White; and one

ethnicity—Hispanic Origin or Not of Hispanic Origin. These classifications

applied to all federal government data collection efforts and were often

used by state agencies. The Bureau used these standard classifications too,

although in the 1980 and 1990 censuses the questionnaire also provided an

“other response” category selection and a place where a respondent could

write in another category. In addition, the Bureau’s long form or sample

form gathers more information on ancestry.

During the 1990s, these standards came under increasing criticism from

people who believed that the minimal categories set forth in Directive 15

did not reflect the increasing diversity of the American population

resulting from growth in both immigration and interracial marriages and

who, therefore, urged changes in the standards. Other people, however,

feared that changing the categories would decrease the number of

officially designated members of some racial and ethnic groups, which

might decrease the distribution of federal dollars devoted to the programs

designed to benefit those groups.

An interagency group was convened in March 1994 to consider proposed

changes to the names of the groups, as well as several suggested additions

to the categories for race and ethnicity. Another suggested change the

Page 23 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Chapter 2 

Taking the Census

group considered was the addition of a “multiracial” category. On

October 30, 1997, OMB issued revisions to the standards of Directive 15.

The revised standards, which are to be used by the Bureau for the 2000

Census, have a minimum of five categories: American Indian or Alaska

Native, Asian, Black or African American, Native Hawaiian or Other

Pacific Islander, and White. Two categories remain for ethnicity: Hispanic

or Latino and Not Hispanic or Latino. OMB also directed that forms,

including the 2000 Census questionnaire, must tell respondents to “select

one or more” categories to identify themselves. By choosing multiple

categories, respondents can indicate a multiracial identity. (For

information on the percentage of population by race and ethnicity, see

table II.2.)

Counting Methods The United States has always based its censuses on an enumeration of

persons residing in households as reported by one of its members. This

self-enumeration method reflects an American commitment to a minimally

intrusive government and respect for individual privacy. In contrast to this

method, China requires its people to report to local government offices to

register their existence, and Norway and Denmark consolidate the records

of various government agencies to determine a population count. In

December 1997, the government of Turkey conducted its latest

quinquennial census whereby the entire population is counted manually in

one day over a 14-hour period. Citizens were required to stay home and be

counted under threat of punishment if found in public without special

permission. Starting in 2000, the Turkish government plans to change to

more modern statistical procedures.

For censuses prior to 1960, enumerators went door-to-door posing census

questions and recording the information. While there was no standardized

recording process before 1830, thereafter enumerators used a variety of

standardized census forms to record the respondents’ answers. With

advances in technology, the compilation of information for each new

census became more sophisticated.

After some testing in the 1960 Census, the Bureau began in earnest during

the 1970 Census to move away from the door-to-door census. Instead, it

began mailing census questionnaires to households to be filled out and

returned. Should households fail to mail back the census questionnaires,

enumerators follow up with telephone calls and door-to-door visits. As a

last resort, enumerators solicited census data from knowledgeable people,

such as an addressee’s building superintendent, letter carrier, or

Page 24 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Chapter 2 

Taking the Census

neighbors. These last resort data ranged in detail from just the number of

people in the household to all the information requested on the census

questionnaire. It should be noted that nonresponse follow-up activities

have become more and more challenging as the public becomes less

responsive to census questionnaires. It should also be noted that even

though this census-taking methodology has existed for just the last three

censuses, it is generally referred to as a traditional census.

In addition to the nonresponse follow-up, three other particularly

challenging activities in conducting the last three censuses were

(1) identifying or obtaining correct addresses for households,

(2) enumerating people in nontraditional housing, and (3) encouraging

public participation.

Associating Addresses

With Households

Finding all households and being able to geographically pinpoint their

locations are important parts of the decennial census. It is the persons

residing in those households who make up the population counts of the

United States, and it is the locations of households that provide the

population counts for smaller geographic areas, such as states,

congressional districts, counties, cities, and towns.

In 1970, the Bureau changed its primary census-taking methodology from

door-to-door enumeration to mail-out/mail-back. With this change, the

association of mailing addresses with households’ locations became more

important. The Bureau’s strategy of pinpointing the physical locations of

households, or geocoding, continues to be important for 2000 for such

procedures as nonresponse follow-up.

For prior censuses, the Bureau constructed a new address list from

scratch. For urban areas, the Bureau started with address lists purchased

from commercial vendors; for suburban and rural areas, Bureau

employees made a physical reconnaissance. Many aspects of American life

make accurate identification of housing units difficult, including rapid

suburban and rural housing construction, urban demolition and

conversion, and the mobility of some housing units, such as mobile homes

and recreational vehicles. Locating the housing units of such diverse types

in a country with an anticipated 118 million households in 2000 will be a

labor-intensive and expensive task.

For the purpose of the census, every housing unit address is geocoded to a

census block whose size varies but which generally contains 30 to 85

Page 25 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Chapter 2 

Taking the Census

people. Through 1980, the Bureau relied on maps that had hand-plotted

census block boundaries and had new streets and features drawn in by

temporary employees or enumerators. The resulting maps could be rough

and hard to read. By the 1990 Census, a new computer-generated mapping

system—called the Topographically Integrated Geographic Encoding and

Referencing System (TIGER) was in place. TIGER is designed to locate every

housing unit on 1 of the 7 million TIGER maps representing each census

block. The TIGER maps can be easy to update and can be printed off the

database by many users other than the Bureau.

In the past, the Bureau has not used U.S. Postal Service address lists to

develop its own list for several reasons. There was concern about

protecting individuals’ privacy, and the Postal Service was prohibited

under title 39 of the U.S. Code from sharing its lists. In addition, the Postal

Service lists may not conform to the Bureau’s specialized needs. For

example, the Postal Service’s addresses are for mail delivery points and

may not differentiate between more than one household at an address,

whereas the Bureau needs this household differentiation at all addresses.

Furthermore, Postal Service post office boxes or RFD addresses (which

may not indicate the actual location of a residence) cannot be used by the

Bureau because questionnaires must be delivered to actual household

addresses in the event follow-up becomes necessary.

Nonetheless, Congress and the Bureau have recognized that cooperation

with the Postal Service can alleviate some of the cost and labor burden in

preparing for a census. In 1994, Congress passed the Census Address List

Improvement Act, which allows the Postal Service to share information

with the Bureau. The Postal Service now notifies the Census Bureau of

new and newly-obsolete addresses. The Census Bureau also provides the

local governments with a list of addresses in particular locales so that they

can point out discrepancies with their own information. To protect

privacy, however, the act specifies that only officials designated as census

liaisons can handle the Bureau’s copy of their jurisdiction’s address list,

which does not contain names of residents at the addresses, and that the

liaisons are prohibited from disclosing address list information or using it

for local purposes, such as identification of illegal housing.

For the 2000 Census, the Bureau is planning to rely on a Master Address

File (MAF), which is to be developed, in part, from the Bureau’s 1990

Census address list and the most recent Postal Service address list

(referred to as the delivery sequence files). Under a reengineering plan

approved in September 1997, the Bureau also plans to conduct a

Page 26 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Chapter 2 

Taking the Census

100-percent canvass of all census blocks in early 1999 and will request the

Postal Service to validate the city-style addresses prior to the delivery of

2000 Census questionnaires. For the 2000 Census, the Bureau is not going

to rely on the Postal Service to deliver questionnaires to non-city style

addresses as it did in 1990. Instead, the Bureau is planning for enumerators

to deliver the questionnaires and ask that they be mailed back.

Furthermore, the Bureau has no plans to purchase addresses from

commercial vendors as it did in the prior three censuses. Vendors’ lists

were found to be less accurate in low-income areas, which are not a high

priority for companies selling goods and services.

Locating Nontraditional

Housing

Because the Bureau’s basic data collection method revolves around

households, counting people who do not live in traditional households can

be especially difficult. Such people live in group quarters, such as shelters

for battered women and the homeless, nursing homes, college dormitories,

migrant worker camps, and military installations, as well as in remote

areas. It takes special efforts to count these individuals.

In the 1990 Census, the Bureau tried a Street and Shelter Night program to

count the homeless wherever they could be found on a particular night. In

2000, the Bureau will focus its efforts to count the homeless on the places

where many of them come for services, such as shelters and soup

kitchens, as well as targeted outdoor locations. The emphasis will shift

from finding the homeless on street corners to identifying them through

the organizations that assist them. Other nontraditional procedures

include cooperation between the Bureau and the Department of Defense

and the U.S. Coast Guard to count individuals on military installations.

Another special operation will count highly transient individuals living at

recreational vehicle parks, commercial or public campgrounds, and

marinas. Remote areas of Alaska will be enumerated in mid-February, a

time when the difficult travel to these areas by dogsled and snowmobile is

somewhat easier, rather than on April 1.

Another way that the Bureau plans to count individuals in nontraditional

households is by making census questionnaires available at public places,

such as post offices and community centers. In this way, people who did

not receive a mailed questionnaire will have a greater chance to be

counted. This new approach does introduce a higher risk, which the

Bureau continues to assess, of multiple responses for a given household or

person. “Unduplication” formerly required a massive clerical operation,

but now the Bureau expects that advances in computer storage, retrieval,

Page 27 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Chapter 2 

Taking the Census

and matching, along with image capture and recognition, will give the

Bureau a much greater ability to eliminate duplicative responses.

Several lawsuits alleging undercounts of the homeless were filed against

the Bureau following the 1990 Census. Despite the efforts planned for the

2000 Census, the count of the homeless and other people living in

nontraditional households is likely to be less accurate than for those living

in housing units that can be plotted on a TIGER map. Issues of possible

undercounts of people living in nontraditional households will likely

surface again in the 2000 Census.

Encouraging Public

Participation

In 1970, 78 percent of the households who received a mailed questionnaire

fill it out and returned it; in 1990, that percentage dropped to 65 percent.

Based on the response rate for other surveys in the meantime, the mail

return rate for the 2000 Census could be even lower. This decline in the

mail response rate poses not only an enumeration challenge to the Bureau,

but also a major financial problem. The cost of eliciting responses from

the 34 million households that failed to return their questionnaires in 1990

was $730 million. Nonresponse follow-up was one of the most costly

operations of the 1990 Census. Encouraging voluntary public participation,

therefore, is a major objective of the Bureau.

Lack of awareness of the census was not a major problem in the 1990

census. Apathy, concerns over loss of privacy, and fears that census

information might be shared with other government agencies, however,

were major impediments to achieving high rates of returned

questionnaires. To encourage the public to mail back the questionnaires,

the Bureau spent approximately $75 million on promotion and outreach in

1990, and received pro bono promotional services valued at $65 million

from the Advertising Council—a nonprofit organization that administers

public service advertising campaigns. The Bureau reached the public

through the media and through coordinated efforts with local and state

governments, national and community organizations, and business and

religious entities. However, because the Bureau had little control over

when or where the Advertising Council disseminated the Bureau’s

message, it has decided to use a paid advertising campaign in 2000 to

complement its continuing efforts with its organizational partners. The

Bureau estimates the cost of all outreach and promotion activities will be

about $230 million for the 2000 Census.

Page 28 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Chapter 2 

Taking the Census

In order to improve the mail response rate in 2000, the Bureau is planning

to use a new, multiple mail contact strategy. The Bureau plans to increase

the number of its mail contacts with households by sending out a letter

notifying households of the coming questionnaire, an initial questionnaire,

a thank you or reminder card, and possibly a replacement questionnaire.

Both the initial and any possible replacement questionnaires will be

barcoded to minimize counting duplicate submissions. In areas lacking

city-style addresses, either the Bureau or the Postal Service will implement

segments of this strategy. The multiple mail contact strategy was used in

the 1995 Test Census and showed a potential for increasing the mail

response rate. Multiple mail contact will also be tested during the 1998

dress rehearsal.

Language barriers can be an obstacle to gathering a full count of the

population. During the 1970 Census, despite the fact that 9.2 million U.S.

residents spoke Spanish in their homes, the census questionnaire was not

printed in Spanish. Since then, the Bureau has tried to remove that

obstacle by printing the questionnaires in both English and Spanish, hiring

enumerators with foreign language skills, and providing toll-free telephone

assistance in languages other than English. In 1990, census questionnaire

guides were available in 32 languages. For 2000, the Bureau is researching

the use of questionnaires in additional languages.

Certain racial and ethnic minorities have long been undercounted in the

census. Language barriers, fears of deportation, and a greater tendency to

live in nontraditional households are factors that have led to this

undercount. In the 1970s and 1980s, the Bureau established advisory

committees on the Hispanic, African-American, Native American, and

Asian and Pacific Islander populations to help the Bureau find ways to

improve its count of these groups. Those advisory committees will

continue to function for the 2000 Census, but the obstacles to increasing

minority participation in the census have not been eliminated.

There are categories of people who have incentives to avoid participating

in the census. Individuals who are in the U.S. without the proper

documentation or who otherwise have reason to fear various law

enforcement or regulatory government agencies are unlikely to be

convinced to be counted.

Page 29 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Chapter 2 

Taking the Census

Sampling and

Statistical Estimation

in the 2000 Census

The Bureau plans to use two new sampling procedures in the 2000 Census.

One is designed to reduce the time required for and expense of following

up on the projected 40 million housing units that may not respond in 2000

to the questionnaires. The other, referred to as Integrated Coverage

Measurement (ICM), is designed to adjust the population counts obtained

from census questionnaires and nonresponse follow-up procedures to

eliminate the endemic differential undercount.

Nonresponse Follow-Up

Sampling

As in the previous three censuses, the Bureau plans to encourage

households to mail back the questionnaires that have been mailed to them

or left at their homes. Four weeks after Census Day, the Bureau plans to

implement a procedure known as nonresponse follow-up (NRFU) to collect

information from households that have not returned their forms. The 2000

procedure departs from previous censuses in that it incorporates sampling

to select the housing units that the Bureau will contact for NRFU. A sample

of housing units is to be selected in each census tract, sorted by geography

and form type (long versus short form) to make sure that the sample is

distributed evenly across nonresponding housing units in each tract. Each

sample is to be selected immediately after the cutoff date for mail returns,

and households are to be selected in sufficient numbers to ensure that the

number of housing units in the sample, when added to the households that

have voluntarily returned their forms, will total at least 90 percent of

households in the tract. Data for households not in the sample is be

imputed by a systematic procedure that relies on data collected from

geographically contiguous households.

To illustrate, in a tract where 70 percent of the households responded to

the census questionnaire, the Bureau would draw a two-thirds sample (to

reach 90 percent) of the remaining households. They would then use

results of this follow-up enumeration to impute characteristics of the

households not selected for the sample.

There are to be several exceptions to this procedure. First, all housing

units in blocks that have been selected for the Integrated Coverage

Measurement survey are to be contacted (100-percent nonresponse

follow-up). Second, nonresponse follow-up is not to be conducted in rural

households that are listed by enumerators. Data from these households

are to be collected by enumerators listing the housing units. Third, late

data submitted voluntarily by a household are not to be thrown away and

are to be used in preference to data either collected by an enumerator or

Page 30 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Chapter 2 

Taking the Census

imputed by NRFU, if the questionnaire is received before the completion of

NRFU data collection activities.

Using ICM to Adjust

Population Counts

The purpose of ICM is to adjust for errors that occur in census-taking.

(Errors in past censuses ares discussed further on under Accuracy of Past

Censuses.) In general, ICM is a statistical procedure that would be used in

an effort to improve the accuracy of the original data collected by the

census by reconciling that data with data obtained from an independent

sample of 750,000 households. The reconciliation process, referred to as

Dual System Estimation, applies probability theory to the ICM and the

census figures to generate a third, better estimate of the true population.

ICM would be conducted after basic data collection, including nonresponse

follow-up, had ended and would estimate the extent to which people were

correctly counted, missed, or included by error in the census.

Since ICM would be the last step in the census process and its results

would be an integral part of the final census numbers, the Bureau plans to

release only one set of official census numbers. In order to accomplish this

“one-number census,” the Bureau is planning for both nonresponse

follow-up and ICM to be completed quickly so that it can announce results

by December 31, in time to meet the deadline for reporting census data for

apportionment purposes. The use of laptop computers during the

post-enumeration interviews is planned to speed the process of

reconciling differences between the census and ICM data. The cost of ICM,

including the laptop computers, is projected to be $325 million.

Constitutional and Legal

Issues on Sampling

Article I, section 2, of the Constitution refers to an “actual Enumeration”

of the population for the census. It also vests Congress with the authority

to conduct censuses “in such a Manner as they shall by Law Direct.”

Congress, in turn, has delegated this authority to the Department of

Commerce through title 13 of the U.S. Code.14 The question now being

debated is whether the latitude allowed the Secretary of Commerce

includes the use of the statistical methods proposed for 2000, provided the

Secretary determines that using them would improve the census accuracy,

or whether the requirement for an “actual Enumeration” limits that

discretion. The issue also has a similar statutory incarnation: Title 13 of

the U.S. Code states that the Secretary of Commerce is to undertake a

decennial census in such form and context as he may determine, including

the use of sampling procedures, yet it excludes authority to use sampling

1413 U.S.C. 141(a).

Page 31 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Chapter 2 

Taking the Census

in the determination of population for purposes of apportionment of

representatives in Congress.15

The question of whether sampling is statutorily and constitutionally

permissible in determining the decennial census count can only be

definitively resolved by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has not

yet considered the specific issue of whether the use of sampling violates

the Constitution and, in the course of considering past challenges to the

conduct of the census, has specifically stated that its rulings were not to

be construed as either prohibiting or allowing the methods.

Sampling through the use of the long form questionnaire to obtain

demographic information has become an unremarkable part of late

twentieth century census-taking in America. However, the possible use of

sampling and statistical estimation to adjust the 1990 census population

count raised fundamental constitutional and statutory issues that continue

to be debated today. The resolution of these issues is now essential to the

completion of planning for the 2000 Census.

Accuracy of Past

Censuses

Ever since George Washington questioned the results of the first census in

1791, the accuracy of any given census has been in question. The questions

have always been legitimate: The census has never counted 100 percent of

those it should, in part because American sensibilities would probably not

tolerate more foolproof census-taking methods, such as requiring

residents to register with a central governmental authority. In addition,

some percentage of the populace has always chosen to evade

census-takers out of fear. Others have gone, and will continue to go,

uncounted because there is an incongruence between the Bureau’s

primary means of locating individuals and particular individuals’

circumstances. For example, in the nineteenth century, isolated

homesteaders were difficult for enumerators to locate and count. Today,

young urban males are especially likely to be missed in an enumeration

process based on associating people at fixed household addresses.

Until the 1940s, there were no means to answer the question of how

inaccurate a particular census had been, or at least no means less prone to

inaccuracy than the census itself. The Bureau began to evaluate census

coverage in the 1940s, at first based on comparisons of birth and death

certificates and other administrative data—a procedure known as

demographic analysis. The Bureau also began to use statistical methods

1513 U.S.C. 195.

Page 32 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Chapter 2 

Taking the Census

based on sampling, a method that involves using a representative part of a

population to convey information about a whole population. Since 1940,

the Bureau has quantified the amount by which any census undercounts

the population. (See table II.3 for net undercount estimates.16)

Measures of the total undercount have been possible since 1940 with

demographic analysis, but detailed measures of the differences among

undercounts of particular ethnic, racial, or other groups have only become

available since 1980. The statistics reveal that some subgroups of the

population are counted less completely than others. The availability of the

data, and the fact that not only representation but also allocation of

federal resources is at stake, have made the composition of the

undercount a sensitive and widespread concern.

In the 1940 census, the Bureau instituted its first effort to gain accurate

information through sampling. The Bureau, responding to pressure to add

a multitude of questions on unemployment, housing, and income, among

others, developed a set of supplementary questions that were asked of

only 5 percent of the population. The Bureau statisticians, using

newly-developed statistical methods, used those answers to extrapolate to

the general population.17 This statistical method continues in use today,

although the percentage of households receiving what is now known as

the long form questionnaire is to be 17 percent.

The Bureau has evaluated the magnitude and characteristics of census

errors and undercounts for decades, but it has never used the findings of

these evaluations to actually correct coverage errors. In 1990, a survey

called the Post Enumeration Survey (PES) was used to determine the error

in the 1990 census. After the census was taken, PES enumerators

interviewed a sample of 5,000 census block clusters containing 150,000

households, and matched by name the people counted in the PES with

those counted in the census. The extent to which housing units and people

were correctly enumerated, missed, or counted in error was used to

estimate error for the entire census. Rates of error were then determined

for 1,392 various types of people or post strata in the population and

applied to every person counted in the census. The post strata were based

16The “net undercount” reported does not reveal the even larger errors in the census. The net

undercount is the difference between those missed and those counted twice. In 1990, for example, the

net undercount was 4 million. The number, however, of persons missed was 10 million, and the

number of persons counted twice was 6 million, making the gross error 16 million.

17Statistical analysis was critical to the 1950 Census in a different way when statistical analysis by the

Bureau revealed that enumerators were introducing errors into the census results. This realization was

one of the factors that led the Census Bureau to introduce a 1960 test of the method of

self-enumeration via mailed questionnaires that has become the standard today.

Page 33 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Chapter 2 

Taking the Census

on such characteristics as age, sex, race, ethnicity, location, and status as

renter versus owner of housing. Thus, for example, if Asian and Pacific

Islander females between the ages of 18 and 29 were found to be

undercounted by 1 percent, an adjusted census would have counted each

person in that post stratum as 1.01 persons.

Matching had been tried in the post-enumeration effort of 1980, but the

computer technology was not sufficiently sophisticated to base an

adjustment on the effort. The quality of the data improved in 1990, but the

Secretary of Commerce determined that the evidence to support an

adjustment was inconclusive and decided not to adjust the 1990 census

results. The decision whether to adjust the census with the results of PES

was complicated by the fact that the 1990 census figures had already been

released when the PES figures became available in the spring of 1991. The

Secretary of Commerce expressed concern that having two sets of

numbers could create confusion and might allow political considerations

to play a part in choosing between sets of numbers when the outcome of

the choices, such as differences in apportionment of seats in Congress,

can be known in advance of a decision.

Page 34 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Chapter 3 

Protecting Privacy and Controlling Costs

Are Persistent Census Concerns

Protecting Privacy Title 13 of the U.S. Code prohibits the Bureau and its employees from

releasing or allowing anyone other than Department of Commerce

employees to examine individual census records. Penalties of up to $5,000

and 5 years in prison for violating the provisions of the title apply. Despite

the Bureau’s strict policies, stringent penalties, and its modern record of

conscientious defense of the confidentiality of its records against a

number of agencies and groups that have sought to obtain certain records,

some portion of the population fails to respond to the census, or responds

reluctantly, out of fear that their personal information will find its way into

the public domain.

The Evolution From Public

Posting to Strict Privacy

From 1790 through 1840, the censuses were entirely public.18 In fact,

during this period, the census results by household were posted “in two of

the most important places” in the enumeration districts by Congress’

express direction. The purpose of the posting was to allow omissions and

errors to be caught by districts’ residents.

After the 1840 Census, census results were no longer publicly posted, but

there was no law formally safeguarding the confidentiality of the

information. Bureau policy, however, as enunciated by the Secretary of the

Interior in 1850, was that the returns were to be “exclusively for the use of

the government, and not to be used in any way to the gratification of

curiosity, the exposure of any man’s business or pursuits, or for the private

emolument of the marshals or assistants.” However, because the originals

of the census were given to local officials, the security of the returns could

not always be ensured.

The 1880 Census Act included major changes with regard to privacy.

Enumerators were required to swear an oath not to disclose any

information to anyone except their supervisors, and census returns were

no longer given to local officials but were filed instead with the

Department of the Interior. Business information was protected, but

information related to individuals was not. That information was available

at the discretion of the Director of the Census for a fee.

In the early 1900s, the Bureau focused on a different threat to

confidentiality, which was the potential that businesses might, by

analyzing aggregate pieces of information provided at the local level,

deduce the identity of their competitors and information about them. The

18Frederick G. Bohme and David M. Pemberton, “Privacy and Confidentiality in the U.S. Census—A

History,” Bureau of Census, Department of Commerce, 1991.

Page 35 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Chapter 3 

Protecting Privacy and Controlling Costs

Are Persistent Census Concerns

1910 Census Act prohibited the Bureau from publishing data from which a

business might be identified.

The discretion given the Director of the Census to release information

related to individuals allowed Civil War veterans to obtain information

that helped them prove their age and status for pension purposes at a time

when census records might have been the best or only source of official

information. World War I era men received information from the Bureau to

prove that they were too young to be eligible for the draft. Exercising the

same discretion, the Director agreed in 1917 to supply federal officials

with the names and ages of individuals potentially eligible for the draft,

and in 1921, the Director approved the provision of information to private

institutions promoting literacy that wanted to use Bureau records to

identify illiterate people in the nation.

Later in the 1920s, the Bureau, following the guidance of the Justice

Department, began to narrow the circumstances under which information

could be released. In 1930, it denied access to a federal agency called the

Women’s Bureau, which wanted the names, addresses, and occupations of

some women. In 1942, the Bureau turned down the War Department’s

request for the names and addresses of people of Japanese descent living

in the West—although the Bureau did identify geographic concentrations

of Japanese.

The new practice of thoroughly restricting access by private or public

entities to census records was codified in title 13 of the U.S. Code in 1954.

The Supreme Court, citing title 13, ruled in 1982 that the Bureau could not

even release its address list without names to the City of New York so that

city officials could compare their lists with the Bureau’s. Subsequently, in

1994, Congress passed the Census Address List Improvement Act, which

allows the Bureau to share address list information with local

governments as part of its decennial address list development procedures.

Title 13 assures complete confidentiality for all records in the Bureau’s

custody. Once the records are passed to the custody of the National

Archives, the Archives can then release them for public use when the

records are 72 years old. For records not yet in the Archives, individuals

can, for a fee, get a copy of their own record or their minor child’s record,

but for anyone else they must have a signed authorization. For a deceased

person, a death certificate or similar evidence must be submitted, as well

as proof that the applicant is either a direct blood-line descendant or an

heir of the person requesting the information.

Page 36 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Chapter 3 

Protecting Privacy and Controlling Costs

Are Persistent Census Concerns

Privacy Issues Today Title 13 provides for strict confidentiality and substantial penalties for

deliberate release of individuals’ information. The Privacy Act of 1974 does

not apply to census records. The Bureau has long been concerned about

inadvertent release of information about individuals via published data

that could be analyzed in a way to reveal a particular respondent’s data.

The Bureau has procedures to prevent the possible identification of a

particular household’s data, especially when it is cross-tabulated with

other information.

In order to prevent such an accidental release of economic information, in

earlier days, the Bureau would visually inspect the data before release and,

when necessary, would collapse it into broad categories or delete

information from certain cells in tables. Today, the Bureau uses computer

programs to ensure that information cannot be analyzed to reveal

individuals’ information. Additional techniques, such as random rounding

or exchanging household statistics among census blocks, are being

studied to avoid potential problems.

Nonetheless, in an age when many people feel anxious about the reach of

marketers, poll-takers, and others who come armed with computer-based

data about individuals, the concern over privacy and confidentiality will be

hard to vanquish, and its effect on census-taking will not easily be

mitigated. Some part of the declining response rate is a function of

people’s anxiety about what will become of the data they provide to the

Bureau.

Rising Census Costs The cost of the census has steadily increased over the course of 200 years.

The rate of increase has been dramatic in the twentieth century: the 1960

Census cost $523 million,19 and the 1990 Census cost $2.6 billion—an

increase of 400 percent after adjusting for inflation. The rate of increase

will continue to escalate with the 2000 Census, which is projected to cost

$4 billion. Three major factors are involved in the soaring costs over the

last 40 years: an increase in the number of housing units to be enumerated,

an increasing use of expensive technology, and an increase in the number

of staff needed to take a decennial census.

19The actual cost of the 1960 Census was $120 million, but using 1990 constant dollars the cost is

$523 million. In addition, the 1960 Census was not conducted using primarily mail-out/mail-back

questionnaires as was the 1990 Census.

Page 37 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Chapter 3 

Protecting Privacy and Controlling Costs

Are Persistent Census Concerns

Increasing Number of

Housing Units

Rapid population growth has been one of the hallmarks of the American

national experience. The country’s population has grown over 10 percent

on average per decade since the 1960 Census, and that fact has

contributed to the ever increasing price tag of the decennial census. In

recent decades, however, an additional factor has been important: the

rapid rise in the number of housing units.

While the number of people in the country has been increasing, there have

been fewer people living in the average household. The rate of increase in

the number of households, therefore, has been rising at an even quicker

pace than the population. In 1960, the Bureau counted people at nearly

60 million housing units; in 1990, it counted people at 102.3 million housing

units, a 75-percent increase in the number of units to be either contacted

by mail or visited, or both. For 2000, the Bureau estimates there should be

118.6 million housing units that need to be contacted.

Increasing Use of

Technology

The Bureau has been a leader in the use of automation technology and

electronic data processing methods for nearly a century. The Bureau

needed to be inventive because, as the population grew and the census

questions and the possible answers to them became more numerous, the

decennial census required increasing numbers of clerks to tally and

cross-tabulate the responses. To conduct the 1860 Census, the Bureau had

184 office staff and 4,417 field enumerators and produced 3,189 pages of

census reports. In 1890, the census effort required just over 3,143 office

workers, 46,804 field enumerators, and the pages published numbered

26,408. The census was also taking ever longer to complete as the amount

of data collected increased.

All the tallying of the 1880 Census was still done by hand, and the Bureau

recognized then that the solution to what was becoming a data crisis was

mechanization. Herman Hollerith, a former Bureau employee, developed

an electrical enumerating machine with its punch cards for the 1890

Census.20 With 105 of Hollerith’s machines, the 1890 census was completed

in 3 years, as opposed to the 7 years it took to complete the 1880 Census.

In 1946, the Bureau contracted with a private firm, the Eckert-Mauchly

Computer Corporation, to design a machine for its statistical purposes that

would use electrical impulses rather than mechanical holes to tabulate

census responses. The machine, known as UNIVAC, had a processing unit

20Hollerith went on to establish the Hollerith Tabulating Company to manufacture machines and sell

punch cards and later merged his company with others making time clocks, scales, and grinders. In

1924, the merged companies were renamed International Business Machines.

Page 38 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Chapter 3 

Protecting Privacy and Controlling Costs

Are Persistent Census Concerns

containing 18,000 vacuum tubes and was delivered in 1951. Although it

was too late for processing much of the 1950 Census data, it proved the

concept and was a precursor to much greater use of computer processing

in subsequent censuses. Since 1950, the Census Bureau has taken

advantage of improvements and additional capabilities in electronic data

processing developed during the previous decade.

While the punch card automation systems of the late nineteenth and early

twentieth centuries saved enormous clerical labor costs, they were also a

practical necessity: the time needed for completing a census tabulation

was approaching 7 years. The benefits of technology in the second half of

the twentieth century have produced some savings in labor costs, but the

major benefits have been in faster census data processing and improved

data analysis and accuracy. For example, the TIGER maps developed for the

1990 Census integrated maps, addresses, and other geographical

information, thus solving most problems of inconsistency.

The 2000 Census will rely on computer technology to a greater extent than

ever before, but most improvements are not primarily aimed at cost

reduction. For example:

• The census address list and the geographic file will be integrated to assist

enumerators in finding housing units.

• By providing census data electronically directly on the Internet and

through libraries, universities, and the Bureau’s Data Centers, the Bureau

intends to make more data available faster to the public than ever before.

• The improved data recognition software to be introduced in 2000 will

facilitate the processing of enumeration data.

• The use of laptop computers pre-loaded with census data for the

enumerators to use during the post-enumeration interviews for ICM is

planned to speed the process of reconciling differences between the

census and ICM data.

While there is a cost for implementing these technologies, the benefit is

wider, faster distribution, and therefore use, of public census data; greater

accuracy and fuller coverage of the census; internal Bureau efficiencies;

and, to a lesser degree, reduction of labor costs.

Increase in Census Staffing Taking a decennial census is a very labor intensive and costly endeavor.

Over the decades, as the population has grown, so have the different types

and numbers of workers needed to complete and report a census on time.

Page 39 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Chapter 3 

Protecting Privacy and Controlling Costs

Are Persistent Census Concerns

(Table II.3 provides information on the growth of the 21 completed

decennial censuses by listing the population, enumerator staff, office and

headquarters staff, and the actual cost of each census.)

Decennial census staffing can be generally divided into three different

categories—field enumeration, local census and census field offices, and

headquarters staff. The majority of the field staff are enumerators and

supervisors whose primary job is verifying addresses prior to a census,

doing nonresponse follow-up during the initial census-taking; and doing

post-enumeration surveys. The majority of enumerators work from 6 to 10

weeks and are paid a few dollars over minimum wage. Enumerators do not

receive regular federal employees benefits but have been eligible for

unemployment compensation during past censuses. Partly because of the

high turnover rate of enumerators during prior censuses, the Bureau plans

to employ part-time workers who may have another job. The Bureau

estimates it will need over 300,000 field staff working out of 520 local

census offices and 402 census field offices for the 2000 Census.

Local census and census field office staff generally reflect a variety of

occupations, such as clerks, lower to mid-level managers, data processors,

and data scanning operators. Some of these local census office staff may

be employed for up to 11 months. Temporary office staff are generally paid

at rates similar to those of full-time federal employees. The Bureau has 4

processing offices and 12 regional offices whose primary mission every 10

years becomes taking the decennial census. The Bureau estimates it

should need several thousand employees for its local census, census field,

and processing offices in 2000.

Headquarters staff consists primarily of managers and analytical staff,

such as the Director of the Bureau, high-level managers, lawyers,

computer programmers, statisticians, demographers, advertising experts,

and writers. The types and amounts of pay received by headquarters staff

are as divergent as the many different occupations needed to take and

report a census. Several thousand full-time employees from Bureau

headquarters are expected to work on the 2000 Decennial Census.

Having sufficient staff may allow the Bureau to meet its stated goals of

producing an accurate and timely one-number census in 2000. But, doing

so also could be costly since it requires the Bureau to undertake many

labor-intensive procedures and special activities to ensure that all

residents of the United States are counted and included in the 2000

Census.

Page 40 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Page 41 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Appendix I 

Most Frequently Asked Questions and

Answers About the Decennial Census

Question Answer

Why is a census count taken? For constitutionally mandated reapportionment and other

statutory requirements.

What is reapportionment? Allocation of the 435 members in the House of

Representatives among the states according to the

population from the decennial census.

What is the latest count? 248.7 million people per the 1990 Census.

Who is counted? All persons residing in the United States, regardless of

their citizenship status.

How long does it take to

count and report results?

Nine months, with extensive research, pretesting, and

planning.

How much does it cost? $2.6 billion for the 1990 Census; about $4 billion is the

projected cost for the 2000 Census.

How many workers are

needed?

Over 500,000 temporary workers and about 6,800

permanent employees were used during the 1990 Census.

How is the census taken? Mostly self-enumeration, by mail, using standardized

short and long form questionnaires and door-to-door

follow-up for nonresponding households.

What questions are asked? Population, economic, demographic, and housing issues.

Are statistical procedures

used?

The long form or sample questionnaire is filled out by

one-sixth of the population and used to project national

results. The Census Bureau plans to use statistical

sampling and estimation procedures in 2000.

At what levels are the results

available for public uses?

Computerized data are available by state, county, city,

municipalities, etc., in various enumerations.

What publications are

available?

Standardized and special publications are available on

paper, computer tapes, CD-ROM, and the Internet.

Note: The plans for the 2000 Census are not final. Depending upon decisions made by the

Bureau and Congress, operational procedures may change, and costs must then be adjusted.

Page 42 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Appendix II 

Changes and Undercounts in and Growth of

the Decennial Census

Table II.1: Changes in the

Apportionment of Membership of the

House of Representatives Between the

1920 and 1990 Decennial Censuses, by

Region of Country

Decennial census

Regions/divisions 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990

Northeast 123 122 120 115 108 104 95 88

New England 32 29 28 28 25 25 24 23

Middle Atlantic 91 93 92 87 83 79 71 65

Midwest 143 137 131 129 125 121 113 105

East North Central 86 90 87 87 88 86 80 74

West North Central 57 47 44 42 37 35 33 31

South 136 133 135 134 133 134 142 149

South Atlantic 56 54 56 60 63 65 69 75

East South Central 39 34 35 32 29 27 28 27

West South Central 41 45 44 42 41 42 45 47

West 33 43 49 59 69 76 85 93

Mountain 14 14 16 16 17 19 24 24

Pacific 19 29 33 43 52 57 61 69

Total for United

States 435 435 435 437 435 435 435 435

Source: United States Summary, “Population and Housing Unit Counts,” Bureau of Census,

Department of Commerce, Aug. 27, 1993.

Table II.2: Changes in the U. S.

Population and Its Undercount by

Race and Ethnicity Between the 1950

and 1990 Decennial Censuses

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990

Population distribution

(percentage)

White (non-Black) 89.3 88.6 87.6 79.9 75.7

Black 9.9 10.5 11.1 11.5 11.8

American Indian, Alaska Native NA NA NA 0.6 00.7

Asian Pacific Islander NA NA NA 1.6 02.8

Hispanic NA NA NA 6.4 09.0

Other 0.7 0.9 01.3 • •

Net undercount estimates (percentage)

White (non-Black) 3.8 2.7 2.2 0.8 1.3

Black 7.5 6.6 6.5 4.5 5.7

American Indian, Alaska Native NA NA NA NA 4.5

Asian Pacific Islander NA NA NA NA 2.3

Hispanic NA NA NA NA 5.0

Note: NA = Not available.

Sources: Statistical Abstract of the United States—The National Data Book, Bureau of Census,

Department of Commerce, October 1996; Economic and Statistics Administration brochure,

Bureau of Census, Department of Commerce, November 1996.

Page 43 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Appendix II 

Changes and Undercounts in and Growth of

the Decennial Census

Table II.3: Growth of the Decennial

Census From 1790 to 1990

Census year

Total U.S.

population

(millions)

Number of

enumerator

staff

Number of

headquarters

and/or office

staff

Total cost of

census

(thousands of

dollars)

1790 3.9 650 a $44

1800 5.3 900 a 66

1810 7.2 1,100 a 178

1820 9.6 1,188 a 208

1830 12.9 1,519 43 378

1840 17.1 2,167 28 833

1850 23.2 3,231 160 1,423

1860 31.4 4,417 184 1,969

1870 38.6 6,530 438 3,421

1880 50.2 31,382 1,495 5,790

1890 63.0 46,804 3,143 11,547

1900 76.2 52,871 3,447 11,854

1910 92.2 70,286 3,738 15,968

1920 106.0 87,234 6,301 25,117

1930 123.2 87,756 6,825 40,156

1940 132.2 123,069 9,987 67,527

1950 151.3 142,962 9,233 91,462

1960 179.3 159,321 2,960 127,934

1970 203.2 166,406 4,571 247,653

1980 226.5 458,523 4,081 1,136,000

1990 248.7 510,200 6,763 2,600,000

aThere was no official headquarters staff for the first four censuses. In addition, the records for the

1790, 1800, and 1810 Censuses were accidentally destroyed; the numbers shown are estimates.

Sources: The Story of the Census—1790-1915, Bureau of the Census, Department of Commerce,

1915; The Bureau of Census, adapted by A. Ross Eckler, Bureau of the Census, 1972; Margo J.

Anderson, American Census: A Social History (New Haven: 1988); Modernizing the U.S. Census,

National Research Council, 1995; Statistical Abstract of the United States—The National Data

Book, Bureau of the Census, Department of Commerce, October 1996.

Page 44 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Appendix III 

Major Contributors to This Report

General Government

Division

J. Christopher Mihm, Associate Director, Federal Management and

 Workforce Issues

James H. Burow, Assistant Director

Jacqueline E. Matthews, Evaluator-in-Charge

Timothy A. Bober, Senior Evaluator

Ruth G. Kassinger, Writer Consultant

Victoria E. Miller, Senior Evaluator

Page 45 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Bibliography of Non-GAO Publications and

Sources

Anderson, Margo J. American Census: A Social History. New Haven, CT:

1988.

Bohme, Frederick G. “200 Years of Census Factfinding,” Bureau of Census,

U. S. Department of Commerce, 1989.

Bohme, Frederick G., and David M. Pemberton. “Privacy and

Confidentiality in the U.S. Censuses—A History,” Bureau of Census, U. S.

Department of Commerce, 1991.

Bryant, Barbara Everitt (Bureau Director,1989-1993), and William Dunn.

Moving Power and Money, The Politics of Census Taking. Ithaca, NY: 1995.

Bureau of the Census, U. S. Department of Commerce. The Story of the

Census—1790-1915, Washington, D.C.: 1915.

_____ 200 Years of U.S. Census Taking: Population and Housing Questions,

1790 - 1990, Washington, D.C.: 1989.

_____ 1990 Census of Population and Housing, Guide, Parts A, B, C, and D,

1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, and 1996. (History Series: CPH-R-1A, CPH-R-2A, 2B,

2C, and 2D).

Cassedy, James H. Demography in Early America: Beginnings of the

Statistical Mind, 1600-1800. Cambridge, MA: 1969.

Demos, John. A Little Commonwealth: Family Life in Plymouth Colony.

New York, NY: 1970.

Durbin, Thomas M., and L. Paige Whitaker. “Congressional and State

Reapportionment and Redistricting: A Legal Analysis,” Congressional

Research Service, Library of Congress, 1996.

Eckler, A. Ross (Bureau Director, 1965-1969). The Bureau of the Census.

New York, NY: 1972.

Huckabee, David C. “Apportioning Seats in the House of Representatives:

The Method of Equal Proportions,” Congressional Research Service,

Library of Congress, 1988.

_____”House Apportionment Following the 2000 Census: Preliminary

Projections,” Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, 1997.

Page 46 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Bibliography of Non-GAO Publications and

Sources

Melnick, Daniel. “The 1980 Census: Recalculating the Federal Equation,”

Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, 1981.

National Research Council. Modernizing the U.S. Census, Panel on Census

Requirements in the Year 2000 and Beyond. Washington, D.C.: 1995.

Wright, Carroll D. (Commissioner of Labor). The History and Growth of

the United States Census. Washington, D.C.: 1900.

Page 47 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Bibliography of Non-GAO Publications and

Sources

Page 48 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Bibliography of Non-GAO Publications and

Sources

Page 49 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Bibliography of Non-GAO Publications and

Sources

Page 50 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Selected GAO Products Related to the

Decennial Census

2000 Census: Preparations for Dress Rehearsal Leave Many Unanswered

Questions (GAO/GGD-98-74, Mar. 26, 1998).

2000 Census: Progress Made on Design, but Risks Remain (GAO/GGD-97-142,

July 14, 1997).

Addressing the Deficit: Budgetary Implications of Selected GAO Work for

Fiscal Year 1998 (GAO/OCG-97-2, Mar. 14, 1997).

High Risk Series (GAO/HR-97-1 and 97-2, Feb. 1997).

Decennial Census: Fundamental Design Decisions Merit Congressional

Attention (GAO/T-GGD-96-37, Oct. 25, 1995).

Decennial Census: 1995 Test Census Presents Opportunities to Evaluate

New Census-taking Methods (GAO/T-GGD-94-136, Sept. 27, 1994).

Decennial Census: Promising Proposals, Some Progress, But Challenges

Remain (GAO/T-GGD-94-80, Jan. 26, 1994).

Decennial Census: Test Design Proposals Are Promising, But Fundamental

Reform Is Still at Risk (GAO/T-GGD-94-12, Oct. 7, 1993).

Decennial Census: Focused Action Needed Soon to Achieve Fundamental

Breakthroughs (GAO/T-GGD-93-32, May 27, 1993).

Census Reform: Early Outreach and Decisions Needed on Race and Ethnic

Questions (GAO/GGD-93-36, Jan. 28, 1993).

Census Reform: Questionnaire Test Shows Simplification Holds Promise

(GAO/T-GGD-92-59, July 1, 1992).

Decennial Census: 1990 Results Show Need for Fundamental Reform

(GAO/GGD-92-94, June 9, 1992).

1990 Census: Limitations in Methods and Procedures to Include the

Homeless (GAO/GGD-92-1, Dec. 30, 1991).

1990 Census: Reported Net Undercount Obscured Magnitude of Error

(GAO/GGD-91-113, Aug. 22, 1991).

Page 51 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Selected GAO Products Related to the

Decennial Census

1990 Census Adjustment: Estimating Census Accuracy - A Complex Task

(GAO/GGD-91-42, Mar. 11, 1991).

Components of the 1990 Census Count (GAO/T-GGD-91-8, Feb. 21, 1991).

Decennial Census: Preliminary 1990 Lessons Learned Indicate Need to

Rethink Census Approach GAO/T-GGD-90-18, Aug. 8, 1990).

1990 Census: Overview of Key Issues (GAO/GGD-89-77BR, July 3, 1989).

(410187) Page 52 GAO/GGD-98-103 Overview of Historical Census Issues
Ordering Information

The first copy of each GAO report and testimony is free.

Additional copies are $2 each. Orders should be sent to the

following address, accompanied by a check or money order

made out to the Superintendent of Documents, when

necessary. VISA and MasterCard credit cards are accepted, also.

Orders for 100 or more copies to be mailed to a single address

are discounted 25 percent.

Orders by mail:

U.S. General Accounting Office

P.O. Box 37050

Washington, DC 20013

or visit:

Room 1100

700 4th St. NW (corner of 4th and G Sts. NW)

U.S. General Accounting Office

Washington, DC

Orders may also be placed by calling (202) 512-6000 

or by using fax number (202) 512-6061, or TDD (202) 512-2537.

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly available reports and

testimony. To receive facsimile copies of the daily list or any

list from the past 30 days, please call (202) 512-6000 using a

touchtone phone. A recorded menu will provide information on

how to obtain these lists.

For information on how to access GAO reports on the INTERNET,

send an e-mail message with "info" in the body to:

info@www.gao.gov

or visit GAO’s World Wide Web Home Page at:

http://www.gao.gov

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
United States

General Accounting Office

Washington, D.C. 20548-0001

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use $300

Address Correction Requested

Bulk Rate

Postage & Fees Paid

GAO

Permit No. G100