U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

32–492 PDF WASHINGTON : 2019

S. Hrg. 115–605 

NOMINATIONS OF HON. STEVEN DILLINGHAM AND 

MICHAEL M. KUBAYANDA 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON 

HOMELAND SECURITY AND 

GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

NOMINATIONS OF HONORABLE STEVEN DILLINGHAM, NOMINEE TO BE 

DIRECTOR OF THE CENSUS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND 

MICHAEL M. KUBAYANDA, NOMINEE TO BE A COMMISSIONER, POSTAL 

REGULATORY COMMISSION 

OCTOBER 3, 2018 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov/ 

Printed for the use of the 

Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

( 
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 

RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin, Chairman 

ROB PORTMAN, Ohio 

RAND PAUL, Kentucky 

JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma 

MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming 

JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota 

STEVE DAINES, Montana 

JON KYL, Arizona 

CLAIRE MCCASKILL, Missouri 

THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware 

HEIDI HEITKAMP, North Dakota 

GARY C. PETERS, Michigan 

MAGGIE HASSAN, New Hampshire 

KAMALA D. HARRIS, California 

DOUG JONES, Alabama 

CHRISTOPHER R. HIXON, Staff Director 

GABRIELLE D’ADAMO SINGER, Chief Counsel 

CATHERINE A. BAILEY, Director of Governmental Affairs 

JENNIFER L. SELDE, Professional Staff Member 

MARGARET E. DAUM, Minority Staff Director 

MICHAEL J. BROOME, Minority Counsel 

LAURA W. KILBRIDE, Chief Clerk 

THOMAS J. SPINO, Hearing Clerk 
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Opening statements: Page 

Senator Johnson ............................................................................................... 1 

Senator McCaskill ............................................................................................ 3 

Senator Lankford .............................................................................................. 10 

Senator Carper ................................................................................................. 13 

Senator Hassan ................................................................................................. 16 

Senator Harris .................................................................................................. 19 

Senator Hoeven ................................................................................................. 21 

Senator Jones .................................................................................................... 23 

Senator Daines ................................................................................................. 29 

Prepared statements: 

Senator Johnson ............................................................................................... 33 

Senator McCaskill ............................................................................................ 34 

WITNESSES 

WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 3, 2018 

Hon. Steven Dillingham, Nominee to be Director of the Census, U.S. Department of Commerce 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 7 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 38 

Biographical and financial information .......................................................... 40 

Letter from the Office of Government Ethics ................................................. 65 

Responses to pre-hearing questions ................................................................ 68 

Responses to post-hearing questions .............................................................. 102 

Michael M. Kubayanda, Nominee to be a Commissioner, Postal Regulatory 

Commission 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 9 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 118 

Biographical and financial information .......................................................... 121 

Letter from the Office of Government Ethics ................................................. 142 

Responses to pre-hearing questions ................................................................ 146 

Responses to post-hearing questions .............................................................. 180 

APPENDIX 

Income statement charts submitted by Senator Johnson .................................... 189 

Census inflation-adjusted chart submitted by Senator Johnson ......................... 190 

Census cost per household chart submitted by Senator Johnson ........................ 191 

Letter to POTUS submitted by Senator Johnson ................................................. 192 

Harris Letter and Response submitted by Senator Johnson ............................... 194 

Postal Rate Increase Data Chart submitted by Senator Johnson ....................... 199 

Postal Data Chart submitted by Senator McCaskill ............................................ 201 

Letter from Electronic Privacy Information Center .............................................. 203 

Letter from the Census Project .............................................................................. 207 

(1) 

1The prepared statement of Senator Johnson appears in the Appendix on page 33. 

2The chart referenced by Senator Johnson appears in the Appendix on page 189. 

NOMINATIONS OF THE 

HONORABLE STEVEN D. DILLINGHAM AND 

MICHAEL M. KUBAYANDA 

WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 3, 2018 

U.S. SENATE,

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY

AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS, 

Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:05 a.m., in room 

SD–342, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Ron Johnson, Chairman of the Committee, presiding. 

Present: Senators Johnson, Lankford, Hoeven, Daines, 

McCaskill, Carper, Peters, Hassan, Harris, and Jones. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN JOHNSON 

Chairman JOHNSON. Good morning. This hearing will come to 

order. 

Today we are considering the nominee to be the Director for the 

U.S. Census Bureau and a nominee to be the Commissioner for the 

Postal Regulatory Commission (PRC). 

First of all, I want to thank the nominees for your testimony for 

taking the time here today to testify. I also want to thank you for 

spending some time in my office. I enjoyed our conversations, and 

I think what I certainly determined from that is we have two nominees here that are, first, very knowledgeable and I think very well 

qualified for these positions. So I appreciate the President has 

picked I think two exceptional candidates for these two very important positions. 

I would ask that my written opening statement be entered into 

the record.1

A hearing would not be a hearing under my chairmanship without a couple of charts. So I want to just quick start out with one 

on the U.S. Postal Service (USPS).2

This is just a one-page income statement that I have developed 

over a number of years, trying to figure out exactly what is the financial condition of the U.S. Postal Service, and it is just three 

simple columns that gives you the income statement for 2007, and 

then 10 years later, 2017, and then gives you a total, 10-year. 

What I find interesting about it is I think this really does lay out 

what the issue is. In 2007, the Postal System had a $3 billion oper-
2 

1The chart referenced by Senator Johnson appears in the Appendix on page 190. 

2The chart referenced by Senator Johnson appears in the Appendix on page 191. 

ating income, $4.7 billion in 2017, but for the full 10 years lost 

about $1.4 billion on an operating basis. 

The big problem is the pension plan, and with the 2006 Postal 

Reform that required prefunding, that was a total of $62.6 billion, 

which is why you show a $63.9 billion, 10-year complete loss. 

Now, you also had appreciation. That adds some cash back, and 

of course, the Postal System is defaulting on that prefunding. So, 

in the end, it looks like the Postal System has generated $8.5 billion over 10 years, but again, this is because we have not addressed 

the problem, which is the unfunded liability in the retiree health 

benefits as well as their pension. 

So it is actually pretty simple to take a look at. I am not saying 

the solution is very simple, but again, I have a copy of this at the 

dais for all of our Senators. 

The next chart really speaks to the issues of the Census Department,1 and from my standpoint, I think this is the problem right 

here. 

And I am going to focus really on 1990 Census because by 1990, 

most of the transfer programs were in place. Most of what government was doing that requires information, the kind of data that 

Census collects, were in place. So these are inflation-adjusted dollars. 

In 1990, we spent a little under $5 billion taking the Census. 

That is the Census cost. Best-case scenario right now, using 2020 

methods, the technology, we are estimating it is going to be three 

times that total cost, $15.6 billion. 

Again, we have seen the Internet. We have seen information 

technology (IT). That cost, if anything, should be reduced, and of 

course, we have had population growth as well. 

The next chart2 I think shows that that is not the problem. In 

1990, the cost per household was $45. 1970 was only $17. But, 

again, I am moving forward to 1990 when all these programs were 

in place. Best-case scenario is looking like it would be $107, more 

than double, on a per-household basis. 

So, to me, that is the primary problem with the Census, and that 

is the question I am asking. Why? Why is the total dollar cost three 

times? Why is the per-household cost double what it was in 1990? 

What has changed so significantly that is driving that really ridiculous cost figure when in fact with all the advances of information 

technology, certainly the cost per household I think should have declined? We have gotten more productive in just about every area 

of our economy. I do not understand this in the Census. 

The other thing, I do want to cover something up front. I am sure 

this will come up during the hearing, and it is the whole issue of 

the citizenship question. 

I want to read something into the record here. On April 10, 2018, 

this Committee held a roundtable for Committee Members with 

representatives of both Department of Commerce and the Census 

Bureau reading the 2020 Census content, including the addition of 

a citizenship question in the 2020 questionnaire. At the Roundtable, Acting Census Director Ron Jarmin told the Committee that 
3 

1The letter referenced by Senator Johnson appears in the Appendix on page 194 

2The prepared statement of Senator McCaskill appears in the Appendix on page 34. 

3The chart referenced by Senator McCaskill appears in the Appendix on page 189. 

4The information referenced by Senator McCaskill appears in the Appendix on page 201. 

there was no definitive evidence that the addition of a citizen question would significantly reduce response rates and that other questions such as household impact had proven to have a greater impact on response rates for the American Community Survey (ACS). 

Now, I understand the citizenship question is a controversial 

issue, and reasonable people can come to different conclusions, but 

I would like to emphasize for the purposes of this hearing that Dr. 

Dillingham was not at the Census Bureau when this decision was 

made. Even if confirmed, Dr. Dillingham will not have the ability 

to change this decision because Congress charges Secretary of Commerce with the authority to determine the Census content. This is, 

again, one of those powers that Congress has delegated to the Administration. This is well within the Secretary of Commerce’s jurisdiction to create the question and determine what it is. 

Now, currently, there is an ongoing court case to determine is 

Secretary Wilbur Ross acted within his authority to add the citizenship question. So rather than argue about an issue that will be 

fully litigated in the courts, it is my sincere hope that this hearing 

will focus on whether or not Dr. Dillingham is qualified to lead the 

Census Bureau. 

We are less than 18 months out from the Census Day, and my 

colleagues and I, including the Ranking Member, have been asking 

for the President to nominate a qualified individual to serve as a 

Census Bureau Director since the position was vacated last June, 

considering the nomination of the Census Bureau Director is presently the most important step this Committee can take to put the 

2020 Census on the path for success. 

In addition to that, on September 20, I received a letter from 

Senator Harris, Senator Carper, Senator Hassan, and Senator Peters asking for more oversight hearings. I would like to enter that 

letter into the record1 as well as my response the following day on 

September 31. 

And so with that, I will turn it over to Senator McCaskill. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR MCCASKILL2

Senator MCCASKILL. Yes. Let me start out with the Postal Service chart.3 It would be really helpful if we could huddle before chart 

time. 

My staff does not believe that this is accurate, and we have a difficult time finding, tracing back the numbers that are on it. 

So I would offer into the record4 something that is much more 

complicated but gives sources for the numbers, and I think the important thing to realize is last year, the Postal Service was profitable, had it not been for prefunding issues. 

So I am anxious for us to fix postal, and that is the most important thing we should be doing right now and with comprehensive 

postal legislation. 

The House has gotten further with their work than we have, and 

maybe we can get together, our staffs, after the hearing, and we 

can come up with a chart that we can go into the—— 
4 

1The document referenced by Senator McCaskill appears in the Appendix on page 202. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Sure. 

Senator MCCASKILL. I am sure we can find agreement because 

we usually do when we sit down together. Let us see if we cannot 

get together and see if we cannot come up with a Profit and Loss 

(P&L) one that we can agree on. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Sure. 

Just real quick, this was all sourced by the United States Postal 

Service annual 10–Ks, and we have been working with a number 

of offices, just trying to hone this so it is correct. I want to make 

sure it is completely correct information. 

Senator MCCASKILL. Yes. Well, we can probably get that figured 

out. 

Chairman JOHNSON. OK. 

Senator MCCASKILL. In the meantime, I would like to put this 

much more complex document into the record.1

Chairman JOHNSON. Without objection. 

Senator MCCASKILL. Thank you so much. 

And I agree with you on the Census. IT acquisition is the black 

hole of government spending, no matter where it is, and I have 

spent a lot of time on this at the Pentagon. That would drive the 

Chairman crazy if he began trying to do all of his charts and his 

financials over at the Pentagon. 

IT acquisition has been a huge problem in government, typically 

because we cannot compete for the same talent. There has been 

such a demand for talent in the IT sector that government does not 

pay what the private sector does. So, as a result, we farm it all out, 

and if you do not know enough to know what you are buying, you 

defer to the people you are buying it from. And guess what the people you are buying it from want to make it? Really profitable for 

them and very expensive, and they want to capture agencies with 

a build-from-scratch system that they are then wedded to forever 

as opposed to ever turning to off-the-shelf software that would be 

available. 

I do not know because I have not taken a deep dive into those 

numbers, but I have a feeling that is probably where our cost increases have come from is wasting money over efforts to acquire a 

specialized built-from-scratch IT system that turned out not to be 

efficient and/or effective. 

I do think both of these nominations are very important. I agree 

that the decision today on Mr. Dillingham is on his qualifications 

and not what has occurred over the last year. 

I do think it is very important that we get to the bottom of 

whether or not this Committee was misled by Secretary Ross. We 

were clearly told that the reason the question was included was because the Justice Department asked for it. Facts are now coming 

to light that would indicate that that perhaps was not entirely 

truthful. 

And I think if we have a moment that is as important as that 

moment is in terms of oversight, if we are not getting the full truth 

on questions that are pretty important, I think that is something 

this Committee needs to take a closer look at, and I am not advocating we interfere in the litigation. But it was made very clear to 
5 

this Committee, that the reason the question was included was it 

was requested by Justice. Well, now it is not so clear. It appears 

to me that a political decision was made to include the question, 

and then they sought justice to ask for it so they could hang their 

hat on that peg. That is not being honest with us or the American 

people, and it certainly demands oversight. 

And so we can let the lawsuit continue, but that is why we are 

in this mess is because I believe that we were not given all the 

facts at the point in time that we asked for them. And I do not put 

that on the roundtable participants. I put that squarely with Secretary Ross. 

I know the Census Bureau is approaching the most critical period of a 10-year Census cycle. I frankly have a great deal of sympathy for someone who is being asked to pick up the reins at this 

point because I think we have a significant problem. I think we 

need to reassure the American people that their information is protected and private, especially in this era of privacy concerns. 

I would certainly comment to you, Mr. Dillingham, if you are 

confirmed, that that be one of the things that you focus on, not just 

the Public Service Announcements (PSAs) asking people to participate, but stressing the privacy of their information because I understand why telling people how much money you make is a scary 

thing for people to do in a Census, giving the government that 

number, although I think they give it to the Internal Revenue 

Service (IRS). But the question is, Are the two numbers the same? 

And that is probably why they are reluctant. But I think that reassurance that the information is private under law, that it is a 

criminal offense for their information to be shared, I think is very 

important. 

I am anxious to hear your plans for outreach in terms of counting 

difficult populations to count. 

Mr. Kubayanda, it is good to see you also. I feel very strongly 

that the Postal Regulatory Commission has an important role in 

our Postal Service. You come with a long record of public service, 

particularly impressive expertise in the postal issues. 

I know you left the Inspectors General (IGs) office 3 years ago, 

and I am pleased that you are willing to return to public service. 

It is a little bit like fingernails on a blackboard sometimes when 

I look at someone like you that people like you are considered the 

swamp. You have labored hard and honorably in the public sector. 

You left the public sector, and now you are willing to come back 

and provide an important public service. And I think that should 

be admired, not denigrated, and so thank you for that. 

I am really worried about the quality of rural mail service. I hear 

from people all the time in Missouri about the increasing service 

delays, and the key to rural Missouri in terms of them keeping people in their communities, keeping the next generation in their communities, is in fact reliable mail service because many of them are 

starting small businesses. The one-two partnership that is essential for rural Missouri is high-speed broadband combined with reliable mail service. That is where you can start businesses and allow 

businesses to thrive, no matter where you live, if you have those 

two ingredients. 
6 

The universal service obligation (USO) is one of the most important duties of the Postal Service. I would like to hear from you 

about what you think should be done to safeguard and improve the 

quality of mail service in rural America. 

Obviously, the financial condition of the Postal Service is a problem. The accumulated losses are a problem, and this deficit is a 

threat to the future of the Postal Service. 

I know this. That if we were to make the mistake of trying to 

privatize Postal Service, then who would end up with the most expensive service, the least reliable service, and the most sporadic 

service would in fact be that last mile. We have seen it time and 

time again. The private business model will not want to lose money 

on that one farmhouse down a mile and a half off the blacktop 

road. They will not want to lose that money, and so we would be 

stepping in, anyway, in order to provide universal service. 

Do we want to give up the profitable part of our architecture 

when we are still going to have to own the non-profitable part of 

our architecture? And that does not make sense to me. It seems to 

me we should give the Postal Service the tools it needs to thrive 

and succeed for many years to come while still respecting the universal postal delivery obligation that is set forth in the law. 

Thank you both for being here today, and I look forward to your 

testimony. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Thanks, Senator McCaskill. 

My final comment to Mr. Dillingham is if confirmed—and we are 

going to do everything we can to speed this process up—you need 

to concentrate on getting the Census completed accurately and 

with as high a response rate as possible. The whole cost issue, that 

is kind of for after the Census because we start gearing up for 2030 

and addressing that. 

Again, the questionnaire itself, that is being handled by others. 

You have a big job ahead of you, and again, our job is to get you 

on that job as quickly as possible. 

It is the tradition of this Committee to swear in witnesses, so if 

you will both stand and raise your right hand. Do you swear the 

testimony you will give before this Committee will be the truth, the 

whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you, God? 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. I do. 

Mr. KUBAYANDA. I do. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Please be seated. 

Our first nominee is the Honorable Steven Dillingham. Mr. 

Dillingham is currently serving as the Director for the Office of 

Strategic Information, Research, and Planning at the Peace Corps. 

He has an over 40-year career in Federal Government and policy 

research, including serving as the Director of two Federal statistical agencies—the Bureau of Transportation Statistics and the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). And I hope I do not say that too 

often. [Laughter.] 

Mr. Dillingham. 
7 

1The prepared statement of Mr. Dillingham appears in the Appendix on page 38. 

TESTIMONY OF THE HONORABLE STEVEN DILLINGHAM,1

NOMINEE TO BE DIRECTOR OF THE CENSUS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Before I begin, I would like to introduce my wife, Kimberly; my 

daughter Abigail; my youngest uncle and aunt, John and Debbie 

Dillingham and very much appreciate them being here today. 

Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, and Committee Members, I 

would like to share with you an experience some years ago, when 

my wife Kimberly and daughter Abigail joined me at my confirmation hearing to be the Director of the Bureau of Justice Statistics. 

That hearing was before the Senate Judiciary Committee, 

chaired by the Honorable Joe Biden. As he lifted his gavel to close 

the hearing, my infant daughter began to cry. Senator Biden 

smiled and remarked, ‘‘Let the record show that Abigail has the 

last word.’’ While quite memorable, she is an adult now, and I am 

not expecting her to repeat that performance. [Laughter.] 

Let me begin by acknowledging the importance of public service 

to my family and me. My wife and her mother were public school 

teachers. My daughter also is a public school teacher. She saves 

her money for summer travel as a volunteer teacher in villages of 

developing countries. 

My father entered military service at age 17 during World War 

II and retired from the enlisted ranks after two more decades of 

service. He named his three sons for military leaders. 

My father-in-law retired as a Lieutenant General following his 

career as a defense strategist and analyst. The Air Force annually 

bestows a leadership award in his honor. In our household, public 

service is a noble family tradition. 

It is an honor to appear before you today and to be considered 

for this position of important public trust. I am grateful to President Trump, Secretary Ross, and Under Secretary Karen Dunn 

Kelley, and all who support my nomination and who have assisted 

me. 

I thank Members of this Committee for your consideration. 

If confirmed, I pledge to serve with the professionalism and the 

integrity that you expect and the Nation deserves. 

My public service includes directing two Federal statistical agencies and several research offices. I also have been manager for 

large and small businesses, non-profits, and universities. My work 

has ranged from enforcing whistleblower protections to analyzing 

program results. Historically, the talents of Bureau Directors have 

served them well. If confirmed, mine should also. 

Challenges facing the Bureau are numerous. The Decennial Census presents an immediate need. If confirmed, I will be dedicated 

to ensuring that the workforce is ready, willing, and able to accomplish the Bureau’s mission as the leading provider of quality information on the Nation’s people and economy. 

I am mindful for the need to work with this Committee, the Government Accountability Office (GAO), the Office of Inspector General (OIG), and others. I will support a workforce committed to 

mission, principles, and accountability. 
8 

If confirmed, my focus areas will include, one, achieving results. 

I am committed to providing leadership in fulfilling the Bureau’s 

mission and performing its constitutional and statutory responsibilities while mitigating risks. 

Two, maintaining organizational and professional integrity. I 

pledge to support a Federal statistical agency culture of principles 

and practices grounded in relevance to policy issues, credibility 

among data users, trust among data providers, and independence 

from improper influences. 

Three, fostering workforce excellence. I will lead efforts to support an engaged and diverse workforce that provides quality products and services, bolsters employee morale, and is recognized for 

performance. 

Let me provide a personal perspective on data collection. A decade ago, I volunteered for civilian service in Iraq to help restore 

peace, rebuild the Nation’s government and economy, and establish 

rule of law. My duties included strategic planning and establishing 

a system of data collection for its justice system under challenging 

and unsafe conditions. 

The work involved Iraqis compiling provincial data and delivering it to the Justice Ministry in Baghdad, which was a target of 

bombings and attacks. Iraqi officials risked life and limb traveling 

in unsafe and hazardous conditions across deserts stretching hundreds of miles to deliver the data. At the Justice Ministry, an office 

staffed with dedicated Iraqi women professionally compiled the 

data. On my final visit to that office, the Iraqi female officials 

proudly presented their miraculously published and quite professional statistical results. 

Then, in contravention of their custom, they all shook our hands. 

Accurate data is an essential underpinning for representative 

and responsive government, as well as a thriving economy. While 

the Census Bureau faces challenges, I know that it has the talent 

and commitment for meeting them. 

I hope that you find me worthy to contribute. I look forward to 

your questions. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Thank you, Mr. Dillingham, and I do want 

to welcome your family and not only thank you for your service but 

thank you for theirs as well. You will probably see your loved one 

a little bit less if he gets confirmed for this position. 

Our next nominee is Michael Kubayanda. Mr. Kubayanda is currently serving as a privacy officer and board member for access mobile International, an electronic health services technology startup, 

serving communities in the United States and Africa. He previously worked for the United States Postal Service Office of the 

Inspector General, House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and the United States Postal Service. 

Mr. Kubayanda, I would also encourage you to introduce your 

family. I want to thank them for their attendance and their willingness to kind of sacrifice time with you in your important position. 
9 

1The prepared statement of Mr. Kubayanda appears in the Appendix on page 118. 

TESTIMONY OF MICHAEL M. KUBAYANDA,1 NOMINEE TO BE 

COMMISSIONER, POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION 

Mr. KUBAYANDA. Good morning Chairman Johnson, Ranking 

Member McCaskill, and Members of the Committee. Thank you for 

inviting me to testify regarding my nomination to the Postal Regulatory Commission. 

Unfortunately, my family was unable to be here. My spouse is attending to important prior commitments overseas, and my mother 

was unable to travel at this time. But they are very excited about 

my nomination as well. 

I have been fortunate to work with this Committee in earlier positions I have held and I am honored by the opportunity to do so 

again. I have built solid relationships with members of your staff 

over the years. I have been impressed by their dedication and 

knowledge, and I understand the importance of providing accurate 

and timely information to Congress. I believe this ensures better 

oversight and better public policy. If confirmed, this will be a high 

priority for me. 

I have several years of experience working on postal reform and 

oversight, most recently at the U.S. Postal Service, Office of Inspector General. I am familiar with many of the key issues and organizations in the field. I believe my understanding of adjacent and 

complementary issues, such as technology, can also be helpful. 

We appear to be close to an inflection point on postal issues. On 

one hand, declining mail volume and legal mandates contribute to 

ongoing financial losses. On the other hand, e-commerce and new 

consumer technologies are transforming delivery services and providing options to improve customer service. It is vital that we in 

the postal community understand these changes and how they impact the Postal Service. 

We should also try to understand how consumer expectations are 

changing in this era and ensure that services and regulations are 

responsive to these expectations. I have looked at these issues from 

many perspectives, especially at the OIG. I believe that this background has prepared me well to address the issues facing the postal sector now and in the future. 

I view a Commissioner’s role as similar to that of a State utility 

regulator. The Commission must bring to bear the necessary analytical skills to scrutinize the operations and finances of the Postal 

Service and ensure compliance with the law and public policy, as 

established by Congress. 

In addition, the Commission should support transparency by 

making sure that its findings are readily accessible to stakeholders 

and the public at large. 

Key technical matters facing the Commission include negotiated 

service agreements, Post Office appeals, and complex issues of economic regulation. 

The Commission will issue a final order on the 10-year review of 

the system for regulating market dominant products under the 

PAEA. It is also looking at the proper contribution of competitive 

products, such as e-commerce packages, to the institutional costs of 

the Postal Service. With this sizable and important workload, the 
10 

Commission should continue to emphasize efficiency and responsiveness to stakeholders. 

I believe the Commission’s emphasis on strategic planning will 

help it prioritize and execute against this agenda. If confirmed, I 

look forward to working with Chairman Robert Taub and Commissioners Nanci Langley, Tony Hammond, and Mark Acton to do so. 

Thank you for considering my nomination, and I look forward to 

answering your questions. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Thank you, Mr. Kubayanda. 

There are three questions the Committee asks of every nominee 

for the record, and so I will ask the question. Then I will just go 

to both of you for your answer. 

First, is there anything you are aware of in your background that 

might present a conflict of interest with the duties of the office to 

which you have been nominated? Mr. Dillingham. 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. No, Mr. Chair. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Mr. Kubayanda. 

Mr. KUBAYANDA. No, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Do you know if anything personal or otherwise that would in any way prevent you from fully and honorably 

discharging the responsibilities of the office to which you have been 

nominated? Mr. Dillingham. 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. No, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Mr. Kubayanda. 

Mr. KUBAYANDA. No, I do not. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Do you agree without reservation to comply 

with any request or summons to appear and testify before any duly 

constituted committee of Congress if you are confirmed? Mr. 

Dillingham. 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Yes, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Mr. Kubayanda. 

Mr. KUBAYANDA. Yes, I do. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Thank you. 

I will reserve my questioning until the end out of respect for my 

colleagues’ time. Senator McCaskill. 

Senator MCCASKILL. I will defer also. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Then Senator Lankford. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR LANKFORD 

Senator LANKFORD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking 

Member, for that. 

Mr. Kubayanda, let me ask you a little bit about the Postal Regulatory Commission and the hard issues that you are facing at this 

point and the very difficult decisions. What ideas do you bring to 

bear on reforms of the system that will help with pricing efficiency? 

If I talk to anyone in my State about postal, if they work in the 

postal office, it is about its ability to be able to be sustained and 

the prefunding for health. If I talk to anyone else, it is the price 

of the stamp. 

So let me ask you the question about pricing because this will 

be a big issue for you. Do you have ideas that you are walking into 

with efficiency to help offset pricing issues? 

Mr. KUBAYANDA. The Commission addressed this issue with a 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking late last year, and I am aware of 
11 

their work on this. I applaud the Commission for taking on this 

really difficult issue. It is essential to the financial health of the 

Postal Service. 

I think it is important that I come in with an open mind in reviewing the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. The Commission is 

currently reviewing comments from stakeholders on this issue before issuing a final rule. 

So, if confirmed, that will be at the top of my priority list to assist the Commission in getting out that final rule. 

I have worked on this issue extensively in the past. So it is something that I bring some knowledge to, and I do think it is important. Under Title 39, there are objectives and factors that are required to be considered in the establishment of a rate-making system. There are just some common sense issues that I think we 

need to look at that a lot of people have identified. 

Senator LANKFORD. OK. Well, stay on the common sense side of 

that as well. 

One of the big issues facing the entire country is the amount of 

fentanyl coming through the mail at this point. There has been a 

lot of emphasis on trying to detect that. Help me understand your 

perspective on what can be done and should be done trying to pick 

up illicit fentanyl coming through the mail. 

Mr. KUBAYANDA. I understand that there has been some recent 

legislation on this issue sponsored by Senator Portman from my 

home State of Ohio. I have not worked on that issue in great detail, 

but I know my former colleagues at the OIG have been very involved with that and with the new Governor. David Williams, 

former U.S. Postal Service Inspector General and current member 

of the Postal Board of Governors, has also been personally involved 

in that issue. 

I know the Postal Service, the Inspection Service and the Office 

of Inspector General all coordinate with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and with other Federal law enforcement agencies on this issue. If confirmed, it is something that I realize is a 

great priority, and I hope to work with your office on making sure 

that we interdict fentanyl. 

Senator LANKFORD. Yes. We look forward to that. We have added 

additional funding through the Financial Services and General 

Government (FSGG) appropriations for this year toward the Inspector General’s office to be able to deal with this and the ongoing 

investigations on every layer, but this is not just a machine to be 

able to detect it coming in. It is a much broader issue, and we look 

forward to getting a chance to be able to work through this process 

and whatever we can do to be able to help and whatever resources 

you need or backup that you will need to be able to deal with this 

because it is an entirely different issue when drugs are coming 

through the mail, especially as deadly as fentanyl and the proliferation of those. 

Mr. Dillingham, thank you for the visit that we have had before. 

I promised you when we visited that every time you see me, I will 

ask you a question about the Census Bureau and the IRS 

partnering together every 10 years. 
12 

April 1, we do a Census every 10 years, but every single year, 

most of the American public interacts with their government 

through a different document on April 15th of that year. 

The cost of the Census collection has continued to go up and up 

and up, and as we look for areas of efficiency, it only seems to 

make sense to try to partner, every 10 years, IRS form filling with 

also Census form filling and to see if we cannot partner those two 

together. 

You cannot promise me this is going to happen in 2030. Certainly, I would not ask that of 2020, but is that something that you 

will look at to be able to examine is that possible to save significant 

dollars to see if we can partner together in 2030? 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Senator Lankford, I appreciate the question, 

and I appreciate your interest. And I think it is very important 

that we consider new approaches and innovative ways to constrain 

costs and to save money. 

And maybe some hypotheticals when I discussed this with you, 

but there may be some new ways of looking at particularly your 

proposal and what might be fashioned as a potential solution to an 

issue of efficiency in Federal Government with two agencies with 

two separate missions. 

Senator LANKFORD. Sure. 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. One is an enforcement mission, and the other 

is gathering statistics. 

So I understand that people would see and maybe be concerned 

about a conflict there, but there could still be perhaps an efficiency 

in an approach such as you recommend. 

So I would pledge to you that we would look at that. We would 

look at all sorts of options, and from day one, if I am confirmed, 

we will look at cost constraints and novel ways of looking at that. 

Senator LANKFORD. Again, those of us that have the privilege of 

working here in Washington, DC., understand the two agencies and 

the two functions. If I am at home, I get one form, and then 2 

weeks later, I am filling out a different form. And much of that information is the same, and I am trying to figure out why I am filling this out twice and mailing something to Washington, DC., or 

emailing it in or going on a website and filling this out. 

So to the American citizen, they are going to see this as duplication coming up in 2 years because they are doing basically the 

same thing. 

So if there are ways to be able to cooperate together on that, 

whether legislative barriers to that or whatever may be, we just 

need to be able to correct it. 

The American Community Survey, you and I have had some conversation on as well. There are a lot of issues. The cost of the 

American Community Survey has continued to skyrocket as well. 

That information is exceptionally valuable to a lot of companies 

and to a lot of agencies to be able to get that information, but a 

lot of it is also commercially available. 

What I would like to do is to be able to encourage you and to 

be able to follow up in the days ahead, if you are willing to be able 

to do this, to be able to look at other places that some of that information for the American Community Survey can be received pri-
13 

vately. That we can buy that data, basically, and know that it is 

reliable and not have to go gather it and redo this. 

This is the same issue we are facing with even commercial satellites. If you go back to 15 years ago, if there was a satellite 

image, it was U.S. Government-produced. Now private companies 

will give you an image of every square inch of the earth every single day because you can buy that data, commercially available. So 

the U.S. Government is now partnering with private entities for 

some satellite images we want to get and some others we have to 

be able to do. 

I am asking just a simple question on the American Community 

Survey, where it exists and we can buy it privately and can get 

that cheaper and not have to have such a long American Community Survey that seems rather invasive at times, like how many toilets do you have and what time do you leave for work. Are there 

ways to be able to do this so we can produce some of it and then 

buy some of it? 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Senator, it is certainly my intention, if confirmed, to look at that and the potential cost savings with the 

American Community Survey. 

It always involves a balancing of burden versus benefit, and as 

you point out, we have new technologies. We have new ways of 

doing business. We have new information needs. 

So I do think you will find a very receptive response at the Census Bureau. The Census Bureau is continuously looking at cost 

savings with the American Community Survey, and rightfully so. 

And I do think that we will work with you and this Committee and 

others in Congress, and we probably would benefit from some external views on this. So we would solicit information, ideas, and potential innovations from all corners, Senator. 

Senator LANKFORD. Gentlemen, thank you both. Thank you to 

both of your families for stepping up into this role as well. It is a 

big deal. 

I happen to have a daughter whose middle name is Abigail as 

well, and she is watching her dad in public service, and I hope she 

takes on that role as well. So thank you for doing this. 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Thank you. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Senator Carper. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR CARPER 

Senator CARPER. I am going to follow up on the families theme 

for just a moment. 

Michael, you mentioned that your wife is overseas at this time. 

How long have you all been married? 

Mr. KUBAYANDA. Four years. 

Senator CARPER. Four years, OK. 

And, Mr. Dillingham, I see your wife is here sitting next to—is 

it Abigail? 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. My wife, Kimberly, and daughter Abigail. 

Senator CARPER. How long have you all been married? 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Approximately about 30—— 

Senator CARPER. I am sorry to put you on the record. 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Yes. [Laughter.] 

Senator MCCASKILL. I sense real trouble. 
14 

Senator CARPER. Wait. 

Senator MCCASKILL. There are some flowers in your future, Kimberly. 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. My analytical mind sometimes has—— 

Senator CARPER. Best answer I have ever heard on this. You can 

stop right now. 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Approximately 30 years. 

Senator CARPER. Not long enough. How is that? 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Approximately 30. That is exactly right. 

Senator CARPER. Let me hear you say that for the record. Not 

long—— 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Senator, not long enough. 

Senator CARPER. Thank you so much. That was very good. 

I want to thank seriously Michael. Tell your mom, wherever she 

is, thanks for raising you and imparting the values in you for service to our country, and thanks very much to your wife for her willingness to share you. 

Mrs. Dillingham, I would say the same thing to you. 

I want to just start off, if I could, on the Postal Service for a little 

bit. Some of us have worked on this for quite a while. The man who 

sat here in this seat, Senator Lankford and I, Tom Coburn and I 

worked on this issue for years. He is over in Oklahoma now, but 

I know he follows these issues. And I certainly do with great interest. 

When I was in the Navy during the Vietnam War, we could not 

wait for the mail to come every day. Best part of the day, best part 

of the week was mail call, and we still get mail. Our troops still 

get mail overseas, but it is not the big deal that it used to be for 

all of us. What the Internet taketh away with respect to First-Class 

Mail volumes, the Internet giveth something in return. As you 

know, it is packages and parcels, and we have seen double-digit 

growth in that business for some time. 

We have half the number of mail processing centers in this country we had 10 years ago. We have roughly half the full-time employees we had 10 years ago. We have about a third less post offices, full-time post offices than we did 10 years ago. The Postal 

Service has dramatically downsized itself I think to right-size the 

organization. 

The question for some of us is, The products that are being handled by the Postal Service, are they actually paying their way? The 

President has raised some concerns about packages and parcels, especially with a focus on Amazon that they are not paying their 

way. 

I am told by the Postal Service that they made 6- or $7 billion 

last year on the packages and parcels business, which would suggest that is not a bad piece of business, and how do we continue 

to grow that? 

I want to just note for year, we have been coming back to a 

major problem for the Postal Service is how do they pay for, offset 

the costs, health care costs for their retirees. And that has been an 

issue faced by States. We faced it when I was Governor. It is faced 

by States and local governments today. It is faced by businesses as 

well. 
15 

Most State and local governments put almost nothing aside in 

order to meet the obligation of health care for their retirees. Most 

Fortune 100 companies do not either. Fortune 500 companies, they 

do not set much money aside, if any. Same thing with Fortune 

1000 companies. 

Having said that, this is an issue that needs to be addressed, and 

I think there is a fiscally responsible way to do that, and we will 

be looking to you and your colleagues for some guidance, should 

you be confirmed. I hope that you will. 

One of our colleagues—I think it was Senator Lankford—mentioned that consumers are concerned about the price of stamps, and 

they are. The last time I checked stamps in this country, we were 

just a little under 50 cents. It actually dropped a penny or so last 

year. Postal stamps in France, 88 cents; Australia, a $1.00; Canada, a $1.00. So I still think 48 or 49 cents is not a bad deal for the service that we get. 

Let me ask a couple of questions, if I could, for Dr. Dillingham. 

If confirmed, you will face almost immediate management challenges at the Census Bureau ranging from IT acquisition to the 

need to hire enough enumerators to conduct the 2020 test. As it 

turns out, the Secretary of Commerce used to be an enumerator, 

as you probably know. He is paid better now than what he is does, 

what he is worth, but you never know when those enumerators are 

going to go. 

But what do you believe are the most pressing challenges that 

we face at the Census Bureau? How would you prioritize that? 

What are the most pressing challenges? How would you prioritize 

them? 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Senator, I appreciate the question. I think you 

really nailed a couple of the priorities and the needs and some of 

the risks at the Census Bureau. 

The IT acquisition, as the Ranking Member pointed out, is a 

major factor for cost escalations, and we want to make sure it is 

done right. 

We understand and look back at prior Decennial Censuses and 

understand that there were in the past some technological and IT 

acquisition challenges, and hopefully, the Census Bureau has 

learned from those. 

You also point out the hiring, and that is going to be of great interest. The Census Bureau, if I am confirmed, would apply a lot of 

effort to determining how best to identify that workforce and getting them on board. It is a complicated business. There is background investigations and other things that have to be part of that 

process. 

But I probably am looking at the challenges facing the Census 

Bureau. I would probably look at certainly the GAO reports as well 

as the OIG reports. 

I think, in a way, we are sort of blessed. Agencies do not like to 

have all their challenges necessarily identified and publicized at 

times, but it is a great service. It really relieves the agency of the 

introspection for doing that. 

In considering the Decennial Census as a high risk in which the 

GAO has done, it has identified several important areas. It was 
16 

mentioned by the Ranking Member, the security of the IT system. 

Certainly, that is foremost in everyone’s thinking. 

There is also the public perception, and I know that with disagreement on one of the questions, we were interested to see how 

that might impact public perception. What we need to do, with 

whatever the final questions are in the Decennial Census, we need 

to ensure that the media campaign, the communication strategy 

are on track to address those. 

Senator CARPER. Hold it right there. My time is about to expire. 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. OK. 

Senator CARPER. Thank you for those responses. 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Yes. 

Senator CARPER. I am going to also ask you for the record, if I 

do not have a chance to do it here in person. I am going to ask you 

just to identify for us some of the milestones that we in Congress 

ought to be looking at as we approach the 2020 Census to figure 

out whether we are on track or not. Do not hesitate to come to us 

early. Do not come to us late. If you have a problem, there is something we need to be doing to be of assistance. 

Senator Harris has joined us. She and I have been very active 

in writing to Census Bureau acting directors, active in writing to 

the Administration about issues involving questions about political 

interference, some questions on citizenship in the 2020 Decennial. 

We are asking some questions in that regard on the record. My 

guess is she may ask those on the record. 

All right. My thanks to both of you. 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Thank you. 

Senator CARPER. I hope to be around for a second round of questions. Thanks. 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Thank you, Senator. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Senator Hassan. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR HASSAN 

Senator HASSAN. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking 

Member McCaskill. 

Good morning and congratulations to both our nominees, and 

thank you to our families. I will just add my thanks. It is a family 

affair doing public service, and we are very grateful. 

Mr. Kubayanda, I wanted to start with a question for you that 

is a stakeholder one from my State of New Hampshire, and I was 

very pleased to hear you say just now how important it is to collaborate and work with stakeholders. 

I recently heard from the mayor of Portsmouth, New Hampshire, 

about plans to close a downtown post office. The city has been 

working in good faith with the General Services Administration 

(GSA) to acquire the Federal parcel in which the post office currently resides, and they have been collaborating too on plans for 

how to remodel the site. 

At a recent city meeting in which residents and business owners 

stress the importance of a downtown post office, the Postal Service 

said that it does not plan to return to the site once redevelopment 

is complete, which would leave this vibrant section of the city without a post office. All this, despite the fact that the city is willing 

and eager to work with the post office to find an interim site dur-
17 

ing construction of the current parcel and structure terms that will 

enable the post office to remain at the site post-construction. 

Post offices have a long history of serving as community hubs 

and as facilitators of local business, and I have concerns about the 

United States Postal Service bowing out of communities that are 

more than willing to work with them. 

Should you be confirmed, will you look at this issue in Portsmouth, and will you work to ensure that the Postal Service is doing 

everything in its power to work with community stakeholders to 

keep post offices in central locations whenever possible? 

Mr. KUBAYANDA. Yes, Senator. I am familiar with that issue, not 

in this particular example, but the Commission has a number of 

vehicles for considering appeals of specific post office closings. And 

that is one vehicle, but then we also have vehicles for looking at 

the issue more broadly. 

So, if confirmed, that will certainly be a high priority of mine, 

and I do think there are things the Postal Service can do that may 

actually make their lives easier in the long run, as well as serve 

their stakeholders better. 

Senator HASSAN. Well, that would be terrific. Thank you. 

The other thing I will just mention is there was a very good discussion just now with Senator Lankford about the Synthetics Trafficking and Overdose Prevention (STOP) Act, and I would also ask 

you, if you are confirmed to—I am a cosponsor of that Act. 

Fentanyl coming into our country is a huge problem, and it is killing way too many people, including in my State. 

Having said that, there are going to be costs that the post office 

is going to have to expend in order to make this STOP Act work, 

and so I just would ask for your commitment to look at the issue 

of whether the post office will need additional funding or help in 

order to fully enact the STOP Act. Will you commit to that? 

Mr. KUBAYANDA. Yes. If confirmed, I will definitely look at that 

issue and work with your office on it. 

Senator HASSAN. Thank you very much. 

Greetings, Dr. Dillingham. It is nice to see you again. I enjoyed 

very much our meeting in my office, and I would like to follow up 

on the discussion we had. 

I appreciated hearing your perspective on how you will help the 

Census Bureau reach its goals if you are confirmed. One area we 

discussed was the possible inclusion of questions around citizenship, such as those the Trump Administration has suggested and 

appears to be implementing. 

I worry that the inclusion of these types of questions will create 

a chilling effect on the results and could deter people from participating. 

As you know, getting a full and accurate count is part of our constitutional obligation and duty, and it is critical that when it comes 

to appropriations, to grant funding in other areas of Federal investment, that we actually have accurate numbers. 

Do you agree that, if included, this citizenship question could 

hurt participation rates? 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Senator, thank you for that question, and that 

is a question foremost in many people’s minds. 
18 

The Census Bureau has had its best and brightest look at this, 

and they have identified the possibility that there could be changes 

in the responses. And if there are those changes and we do not get 

the immediate responses that we would like and anticipate, there 

are other follow up activities to collect that information. 

The most efficient and certainly the cost savings way is for the 

respondent to immediately reply, and actually, if they do it electronically, you can also save a lot of money. I know that is a challenge in your State. 

Senator HASSAN. Right. 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. I can assure you that the Census Bureau will 

apply all of its talents and all of its energies to getting a complete 

count, and they have plans for investing more monies in those efforts, including the outreach activities you referenced. 

Senator HASSAN. Well, I appreciate the outreach activities. I am 

concerned, though, that the way the Administration went about 

this, without coming to Congress, and having us work through this 

issue of whether the question would be a chilling question or how 

best to get at the information we are trying to get at, that we have 

really created a potential question with a real chilling effect. 

So, if confirmed, will you commit to working with Congress on 

new questions surrounding citizenship or any other related topics? 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Senator, certainly, we will gain from this experience a knowledge. If in fact the question stays in and we administer the Decennial Census, there will be a learning curve. 

There also has been a learning curve with the American Community Survey. That question is in the American Community Survey. 

So we want to make sure that there is a synergy and a thorough 

analysis of how the two fit together. Again, this is under the assumption that the question remains in there after decision by the 

courts. 

Senator HASSAN. Well, I appreciate that. A number of us think 

that we could have avoided a learning curve by actually working 

on it, the Executive Branch, the Congressional, and the Legislative 

Branch, together, so that we would not be wondering whether it is 

going to have a chilling effect and whether we are going to have 

an inaccurate count as a reason or as a result. 

I have one other question, and I only have about 30 seconds left. 

You talked a little bit about some of your priorities, Dr. 

Dillingham, if you are confirmed. Can you just tell me—I understand that some of the issues that the Bureau is confronting is a 

lack of planning and a lack of hiring the hundreds of thousands of 

temporary employees who will be needed to get this count. 

Do you have plans, strategies about getting enough employees to 

get the count done? 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Senator, that is a very good question. The Census Bureau is looking at that and has contingency plans and in fact 

has been hiring, for example, in the outreach area at a record 

speed as compared to the past Decennial Census. We will continue 

to work and to apprise this body and this Committee of the 

progress in these areas. 

Senator HASSAN. Thank you very much, and thank you, Mr. 

Chairman. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Senator Harris. 
19 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR HARRIS 

Senator HARRIS. I am glad the Members of this Committee have 

an opportunity today to consider a nominee to serve as Census Bureau Director. It is a role that has temporarily been filled since 

June 2017. 

Since I joined the Senate, many of us, we have been concerned 

about the 2020 Census and the Census Bureau’s lack of permanent 

leader. 

A couple of weeks ago, I think there has been mention that my 

colleagues and I—Senators Carper, Hassan, and Peters—requested 

for the second time this year that this Committee convene a general oversight hearing focused on the 2020 Census. 

This past March, Commerce Department officials intervened to 

add an untested question to the 2020 Census asking about citizenship status, despite warnings, that this question could compromise 

survey accuracy and cost effectiveness. 

Ongoing litigation has since revealed evidence of political influence, including White House influence, behind the addition of this 

question. 

There is a pressing need for Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross 

and the Census Bureau officials to provide sworn testimony to this 

Committee to explain the addition of this controversial question 

and address other 2020 Census concerns. 

And a roundtable briefing is not the same as an oversight hearing. Sworn testimony is very different than a casual conversation 

in the area that right now the audience is seated. 

Should you be confirmed, Mr. Dillingham, I hope that this Committee will have you back here shortly for an oversight hearing to 

discuss the wide range of 2020 Census concerns in much greater 

depth to ensure that we have an accurate and successful count. 

And so, specifically, sir, I have a few questions. As a general 

matter, if a political appointee at the Commerce Department or the 

White House asked you to take an action to redesign a Census 

questionnaire in a way that expert Census Bureau staff informed 

you would make the Census less accurate and more expensive for 

American taxpayers, how would you deal with that? 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Senator, if I understand your question correctly, a theoretical question that if I am confirmed and in the position at the Census Bureau, that we seek and consider all sorts of 

recommendations, but the way you have presented it, as I interpret 

it, it sounded as though you are talking about political interference 

coming from another level that would perhaps improperly affect the 

process, the scientific process of designing questions. 

So while I can assure you that wherever the information, ideas, 

and thoughts might come from, they will probably get some consideration at the Census Bureau. But the circumstances you describe 

do not sound to me as though it would be the appropriate circumstance, and it would be something that I think as Director of 

the Census Bureau that I would have to carefully consider who is 

asking the questions or making the request and for what purpose 

and to push back if I think it was improper influence. 

Senator HARRIS. And as a general matter, do you believe that 

when a new or modified question is added to the Census question-
20 

naire that there should be a contemporaneous, robust process to 

evaluate research and test that question? 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Senator, I do think that it is very important in 

designing a survey that you bring together the experience and information for the right people to make sure you are doing the best 

that you can. 

I am not speaking theoretically to—in some instances, there is a 

history, and the survey questions may be tested in other environments. All those things need to be considered in the analysis done. 

Senator HARRIS. But what I am asking you is what do you believe is a process that has integrity when you are talking about 

adding a new question. I am concerned and would like to know 

where you stand on the need when there is a new question being 

proposed for the Census, where you stand on the need and the importance of testing, researching that question, and the potential 

impact of that question on the result, which is hopefully that we 

have a Census that truly reflects who we are as a Nation. 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. I appreciate that, Senator, and I do think, as 

a general proposition, that if confirmed as the Director of the Census Bureau that we would bring the best and brightest and the 

most thorough analysis possible to bear on the consideration of a 

new question. 

Senator HARRIS. Are you aware that numerous experts, including 

Census Bureau Chief Scientist John Abowd and six former Census 

Bureau Directors from both political parties believe that the question on the citizenship issue will deter voluntary public participation in the 2020 Census? Are you aware that that is their position? 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Senator, I have only access to public information, but I have seen the public analysis and the presentation of 

options that were part of the decisionmaking. I am aware that 

there is a number of views with regard to the possible impacts, as 

well as to whether or not—— 

Senator HARRIS. Sir, I am sorry. I only have a minute and a half 

left. 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Yes. I am aware. 

Senator HARRIS. So the point here is that there are a number of 

views, perhaps, but the views of the Census Bureau Chief Scientist 

and six former Census Bureau Directors, bipartisan group, both political parties, have serious concerns about this question? 

So knowing that, are you also aware that the Census Bureau has 

failed to conduct a contemporaneous, targeted research and testing 

on the effect of this question? 

What I am just trying to really understand is, What is your perspective on that? Are you concerned at all about that? 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Senator, I am concerned with all questions and 

particularly in the Decennial Census and the need to get the complete and accurate information and will continue to look at potential impacts and do the analysis to see if there is unexpected impacts or detrimental impacts to a complete and accurate Census, 

that we address those in other ways. 

Senator HARRIS. Do you believe that that question in particular 

should be tested before it is included in a Census that will leave 

us with information that we will rely on for the next 10 years, and 

so the accuracy of that information obviously will have an impact 
21 

for the next decade in our country? Do you believe it should be tested before we do that? 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Senator, if confirmed, I would certainly confer 

with the experts at the Census Bureau and talk to the analysts 

that you mentioned as well as others in determining their best 

views on that topic. 

Senator HARRIS. Thank you. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Senator Hoeven. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR HOEVEN 

Senator HOEVEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Dr. Dillingham, I chair the Indian Affairs Committee, and earlier, we held a hearing on the 2020 Census. Obviously, there are 

challenges with getting the accurate count everywhere but certainly on the reservation. So how do you intend to get the most accurate count? What steps are you going to take in regard to Indian 

Country? 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Senator, I appreciate that question. It is a very 

good question, and it is a question that has a great deal of interest 

within the Census Bureau and one for which there has been considerable planning. 

In your State, I understand there are certain outreach activities 

that might be required that may not in many other States, particularly with Native Americans and other groups that are hard to 

reach. 

There has been a comprehensive partnership plan. This morning, 

I was reading over the statement by the Secretary to Latino groups 

in which he addressed many of these issues, pointing out that there 

has been record speed in the hiring for the partnership specialists 

who work with those groups and sometimes are members of those 

groups who help encourage the best way to get those groups to 

complete their Census. 

But there is a number of other technologies that might come into 

play. I understand that some of these outreach activities may occur 

in an environment in which Internet access is limited and that sort 

of thing. 

So I pledge to be briefed on it and see what activities and what 

thinking and what plans are in place and to keep this Committee 

apprised and updated. 

Senator HOEVEN. Well, you kind of went to my next question. Of 

course, that is use of Internet. 

People do not realize the incredible diversity when we talk about 

Indian Country. You have some very urban tribes; for example, 

Agua Caliente in California, in the Palm Springs area, very urban. 

But then in States like mine and others, you have some very rural 

areas. So you are going to have to address both. 

You talked about the Internet. Great point. There are places, of 

course, again, in rural America where that is going to be challenging, and I know you want to use the Internet more as part of 

your Census efforts. 

So I think you are going to have to have clear strategies to address the diversity of areas that you are going to be dealing with, 

and I hope you are looking at it in that context. 
22 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Certainly, Senator, and if confirmed, I will look 

even much further at it. 

Senator HOEVEN. All right. Mr. Kubayanda, talk about your view 

of the Postal Service’s universal service obligation. This goes to the 

same question I was just asking Dr. Dillingham. 

Universal service. We need to cover everybody, right? Let us talk 

about that for a minute. 

Mr. KUBAYANDA. Yes, Senator. The universal service obligation is 

the cornerstone of postal policy. I think it is basically the reason 

that we have a public sector postal provider, and it goes back to 

the reason that the Postal Service was recognized in the Constitution in the first place. 

So I think further defining universal service and working with 

the Commissioners and working with Congress to fine-tune the definition of universal service in the modern era will be among my 

highest priorities if confirmed. 

Senator HOEVEN. How do you evaluate keeping rural post offices 

and processing facilities open relative to your cost challenges? 

Mr. KUBAYANDA. One of the issues that the Commission considers in a number of different formats, as I mentioned, specific 

post office closings can be appealed to the Commission. 

Regarding the processing network, changes that affect service on 

a nationwide basis are issues that the Commission weighs in on in 

advisory opinion reports to the Postal Service, and the Commission 

has made some recommendations to Congress about requiring the 

Postal Service to respond to those advisory reports. And I think 

that is something worthy of consideration. 

I think that, as I mentioned, universal service is the cornerstone 

of public policy, and the reason that we have a universal service 

obligation is to make sure communities that otherwise would not 

be served purely on a commercial basis get that service. 

The importance of rural communities cannot be overstated with 

relevance to the universal service obligation. 

Senator HOEVEN. Before you get into making decisions about 

closing or moving post offices or closing or moving processing centers, are you willing to come out and visit rural areas like areas 

in my State to get a firsthand knowledge of what the situation is 

there and listen to the people? 

Mr. KUBAYANDA. Yes. If confirmed, I would love to do that. 

Senator HOEVEN. All right. Thank you very much. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Before we move on to Senator Jones, Senator Carper would like to acknowledge a couple of people from the 

audience. 

Senator CARPER. Thanks so much. 

We have people come and go that service the Census and PRC. 

We also have folks who come and go and serve on our committees 

and subcommittees. 

I think maybe the most enduring Subcommittee in the Senate is 

the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, and there are two 

folks who have come to us as details and now return to work in 

the Postal IG’s office. One of them is Felicia Hawkins. I am going 

to ask her just to stand up briefly and remain standing. She is sitting next to Alex Fisk. Alex has returned to OIG, I think, at Postal 
23 

Service a couple years ago, and I just want to say thank you very 

much for your continued service to our country. We are going to 

miss you guys. Thanks so much. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Thank you for your service. Senator Jones. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JONES 

Senator JONES. Does that 30 seconds go against me? 

Chairman JOHNSON. You got the full 7 minutes. [Laughter.] 

Senator JONES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to 

both nominees for your willingness to be here and for your service. 

I really appreciate it. 

Dr. Dillingham, I want to ask a couple questions about the Census. You answered Senator Hoeven’s questions. I had very similar 

questions about rural America because 55 out of my 67 counties 

are rural. So I would appreciate being updated and continuing to 

be updated on how we are going to reach them because there are 

so many that are also not served by the Internet, and it is going 

to be a real problem. 

The other area that—statistics I have seen show that coverage 

of adults by the Census has improved a good bit since 1980, but 

there is still a net undercount of young children. And that has been 

increasing. According to the Census Bureau’s own data, the 2010 

Census missed a million children under the age of 5. Because there 

is so much that depends on the Census count, whether it is for congressional seats or for Federal funds such as Head Start, Medicare, 

school lunch programs and all. 

Have you looked at or thought about how we can work to make 

sure that the undercounting of children starts going down and we 

can get an accurate count of all the children in America, not just 

the adults? 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Senator, thank you so much, particularly on, 

first of all, your outreach question. I understand the geography of 

your State is quite diverse, and you have both the urban and the 

rural areas, and probably on football day, you have shifts in populations. 

Senator JONES. Yes. They are concentrated in Alabama and Auburn, on those days. [Laughter.] 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Senator, but on the undercount of the youth, it 

is my understanding from the publicly available information that 

the Census Bureau has studied this to date at great length, probably more studies to be done, and in fact, some of the questions 

have been revised over time. Particularly I think with the grandchildren question, there was some revision and improvement. 

So there is training of the people assisting with the Decennial 

Census, and certainly, some people that use the telephone option, 

etc., there is extensive trainings where they can probe and help to 

complete the Census and prevent that undercount. But I know it 

has been targeted as an issue that needs to be addressed. If confirmed, I will certainly be briefed on it and report back to this Committee our progress. 

Senator JONES. Great. Well, thank you very much for that. 
24 

Also, a report from the GAO in 2017 placed the 2020 Census on 

its high-risk list, and I think you have already mentioned the systems, the IT systems, and the cybersecurity readiness. 

Are you convinced—we are now less than 2 years away from the 

2020 Census—that the Bureau has addressed those GAO concerns 

and their reservations and is ready to start executing the Internetbased 2020 Census with—I will not say glitch-free, but with minor 

glitches? 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Senator, that is another excellent question. 

From public information and from observing the briefings that 

were public briefings recently as well as public materials, significant process has been made. 

The end-to-end test in Rhode Island, for example, there was significant process. I think Secretary of Commerce mentioned that 

yesterday to one of the national groups that he was addressing. 

The integration of the information technology systems are very 

important, and in that particular test, there was a general agreement that the 44 systems that were sort of being tested as part of 

the end-to-end test in Rhode Island performed very well. 

But I share with you the concern to make sure that it continues 

to perform well and that we are well prepared in 2020 for the national application of the various systems within the Census Bureau. 

Senator JONES. Great. Well, thank you very much. 

Mr. Kubayanda, I have been somewhat vocal about opposition to 

privatizing the Postal Service. I know it has been a hot topic for 

a long time, and this Administration has raised it once again. 

I would like to get your thoughts, just general thoughts as you 

sit here as a nominee, on privatizing the United States Postal Service. 

Mr. KUBAYANDA. The Administration has not put out a detailed 

proposal yet, as you know. 

I think it is important that if I am confirmed I keep an open 

mind on potential solutions to the Postal Service’s problems. 

I would in general have some concerns about privatization. I 

think there is a very difficult balance in preserving universal service to all American communities while making the investment opportunity attractive enough for investors. It is a hard thing to do, 

I think, in the American context because of the size of our country 

and the vastness of it. 

So I would have some concerns about how to achieve that balance and whether that is possible. So far, I have not seen anything 

that details exactly how to achieve that balance. 

Senator JONES. All right. You really struck the right chord that 

I was hoping. Achieving that balance is going to be I think the real 

key, if it is even possible to do that. 

So, with that, I did not even need that extra 30 seconds, Mr. 

Chairman. 

Thank you very much to both of you. Thank you. 

Chairman JOHNSON. You used the time well. Senator McCaskill. 

Senator MCCASKILL. Dr. Dillingham, I am really concerned about 

cybersecurity. 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Yes. 
25 

Senator MCCASKILL. If we had a breach of Census data, it would 

permanently affect the capability of this country to gather essential 

data in the future, and I think many Americans do not realize how 

important that data is in terms of many decisions that directly impact their lives. 

The Chairman and I have been part of briefings on what our government is doing, both through DHS and the Department of Defense (DOD) and other agencies, but primarily those two in terms 

of our cybersecurity mission in this country for both economic security as it relates to national security and also things like election 

security and just combating the cyber wars that have been committed against us. 

I would ask you as to what you think you need to do immediately 

since GAO has identified high-risk issues at Census. 

We are told by the staff that it is going to begin this coming 

spring. I am trying to figure out why we are waiting until next 

spring. We have the capability within DHS and DOD right now, if 

they are assigned the mission by this Administration, to do allhands-on immediately to make sure that the steps have been taken 

to make the system secure. 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Ranking Member, that is an excellent question. 

It is one I think is foremost on probably all the members’ minds 

as well as others throughout the government and the American 

public, and that is how well can we protect the privacy of individuals, the confidentiality of information, and to prevent some of the 

cybersecurity risk that you identified. 

I only have access to the public information and have not received some of the briefings that I am sure this Committee has, but 

as you pointed out, the Census Bureau welcomes the involvement 

and the relationships and collaboration with the other agencies you 

mentioned and the intelligence agencies and those with expertise 

in this area. 

I am informed generally from publicly available information that 

significant process is under way. That also some of the best talents 

even from the private sector is being brought to bear on this issue. 

But it is an issue we have to remain vigilant about, and I think 

in government and the private sector, with all these important 

datasets, the security is foremost in everyone’s mind. 

What I would do, Senator, is to probably be read into some of the 

specifics that you mentioned and would like to be briefed on this. 

Generally, I will say that from the management reviews that 

have been conducted, the Census Bureau is reporting their 

progress and their confidence in many of the security protections 

being put into place—the encryption, putting the data immediately 

behind the wall in the vault. All these things, I think contribute 

to the safety of the data, yet we still need to make sure that we 

have the plans in place as well as the resources to accomplish that 

mission. 

Senator MCCASKILL. Well, I would think one of your first tasks 

would be to sit down with Cyber Command at DOD and with the 

appropriate personnel at DHS and ask them how best to move forward, for them to come in and do their own independent analysis 

of the safety. So that if there are problems, we do not have to wait 
26 

until midyear next year to get them solved, and I will look forward 

to hearing back from you on that. 

Mr. Kubayanda, do you support cuts to USPS mail delivery service or the number of delivery days? 

Mr. KUBAYANDA. Those are issues primarily for the Postal Service Board of Governors. However, to the extent that they impact 

service, that is something that we need to oversee and weigh with 

an open mind. 

Senator MCCASKILL. So, in other words, you do not know? 

Mr. KUBAYANDA. Yes. Until I am presented with a specific issue, 

if confirmed, it is hard to weigh in on the specifics. 

Senator MCCASKILL. Well, I got to tell you, I respectfully disagree. I think you have to come to this job deciding whether or not 

you think the number of delivery days, it can be cut back, whether 

the universal service obligation means the same service for someone in a rural community as it does for someone who lives in an 

urban area or if somehow universal has two different definitions. 

I do not see how a service obligation that is universal has one 

standard for people who live in the city and another standard for 

people who live in the country. So I would ask you to reconsider 

your uncertainty in that area and determine what is the definition 

of a universal service obligation. Is it different, depending on where 

you live? 

I think that is, frankly, hard to reconcile, and I am disappointed 

that at this point are not willing to express that clearly. 

Mr. KUBAYANDA. I do think rural and urban communities need 

to receive the same level of service. I think that is clearly an element of universal service. What exactly that service looks like is 

something that, if confirmed, I would work with you and with my 

fellow commissioners to look at very closely. I think we need to further define universal service going forward. 

Senator MCCASKILL. One of my constant harangues with the 

Postal Service is the co-op petition arrangements with its direct 

competitors. I have said over and over again that it is a weird business model where you give a good deal to your competitors for the 

most expensive part of your operation. 

I know the pressure on volume. It is concerning to me that the 

Postal Service is charging—whether they are charging United Parcel Service (UPS) and Federal Express (FedEx) as much as it could. 

The Postal Service has refused to comply with my request for 

copies of the contracts. ‘‘Trust us’’ is what they have told us. 

I understand the Postal Regulatory Commission has confirmed 

that most of the time, these agreements at least cover costs, but 

that is not really the issue. Whether or not they cover costs should 

not be the measure. It is whether or not they are in the best interest financially of the Postal Service. 

I have had one of the companies actually tell me outside of this 

hearing room that the Postal Service has no idea whether or not 

they are maximizing profits off these agreements, and this is coming from the one that is getting the good end of the deal. 

So you share my concern that the Postal Service may not be getting the best deal available in their rush toward their concern on 

volume and not toward profitability? 
27 

Mr. KUBAYANDA. That is a very important concern, and it is 

something that, if confirmed, I would want to take a look at. 

I am one of the many people who have not seen those contracts 

myself, and so it is hard for me to state what exactly could be in 

them. But, if confirmed, that will be a top priority. 

Senator MCCASKILL. Will they let you look at them once you are 

confirmed? 

Mr. KUBAYANDA. I believe so. 

Senator MCCASKILL. Well, that would be good. 

Mr. KUBAYANDA. Yes. 

Senator MCCASKILL. They sure will not let anybody else see 

them, which is weird to me. It would be one thing if they could say, 

‘‘Well, we are making money on it, and we do not want to show you 

because we do not want to expose to one competitor the money we 

are making off the other one.’’ But they will not make representations if they are making money off of it. So what we are doing is 

we are upping the profitability of our competitor. It is just bizarre. 

Only in government does this happen. 

So I would look forward to you getting back to me on that, and 

that is all of my questions. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Thank you, Senator McCaskill. 

By the way, I will reinforce the point you just made that it has 

been very difficult to get information out of the Postal Service, and 

if you are going to solve this problem, you need accurate information. That is why it took me quite a few years just to put together 

a relatively simplified income statement to kind of get a grasp on 

what is pulling off here. 

When it comes to urban rural, again, a piece of information that 

I would hope the task force develops, just so we know, to what extent are urban customers subsidizing the service within rural? Not 

saying that they should, not saying that it should not be completely 

identical service. A piece of information we ought to have is to 

what extent does that cost the Postal Service money. Again, just 

basic information to be able to take a look and solve a problem. 

Other information I want to talk about, other than ask you to 

work with us, if confirmed to the Postal Regulatory Commission, to 

get this information, but one of the things I have been looking at, 

when you look at the profitability, to what extent has the Postal 

Service increased its prices relative to competition? 

The information we have gleaned, not from the post office, but 

from the PRC, is on parcel. This is both ground and air. Both UPS 

and FedEx have increased prices since 2007, a pretty narrow band. 

Some are between 76 and 89 percent. On parcel for the Postal 

Service, they have increased prices somewhere between 50 and 88 

percent. So, on the top band, they are relatively competitive, but 

on the lower band, about 50 percent. 

What is actually pretty remarkable is on first class, where they 

have a monopoly market—let us face it, monopolies have the ability 

to raise prices regardless—only increased prices about 16 to 17 percent since 2008. Do you want to just make that commitment to 

help to work with us to get this information? Do you have any comments on that? I know we spoke about this in my office a couple 

of days ago. 
28 

Mr. KUBAYANDA. I think that obviously many areas of pricing are 

within the purview of the Commission in an oversight role, and 

that is something I want to take a look at closely. 

We have some vehicles. The Commission does have some vehicles 

to make recommendations to Congress as well, if any legislative 

changes are merited, and so that is something I will work with you 

to take a look at. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Do you think looking within the private sector, where there is competitive situations, is that a relevant comparison? 

Mr. KUBAYANDA. Absolutely. I think it is a very relevant comparison. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Mr. Dillingham, when we talked—again, I 

think you have seen the GAO reports, correct? 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Yes, sir. 

Chairman JOHNSON. There are many issues facing this Census. 

They are held over from many years ago that you are going to have 

to be dealing with. 

The good news is some progress has been made, but there is still 

a lot of outstanding issues. When we spoke, one of my biggest concerns, having traveled around Wisconsin for the last 7.5 years, not 

one manufacturing plant, cannot hire enough people. I would say 

there is not one main street in Wisconsin that you can go down 

where there are not Help Wanted signs in just about every business front window. 

We are at 3.9 percent unemployment nationally. Wisconsin is 

less than 3 percent. I think hiring the people you are going to need, 

the enumerators, is going to be real challenging. 

By the way, maybe one of the incentives, you can talk about how 

being enumerated can lead to being Commerce Secretary. That is 

kind of an interesting comment. 

But can you just speak to really the challenge of hiring the workforce you are going to need to be able to take the Census? 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Mr. Chairman, thank you for asking that question. It is again foremost on many minds. 

It certainly will be. The hiring of the enumerators during the Decennial Census and to conducting it has been described as the largest employment program since World War II, and when you are 

hiring, even on a temporary basis, hundreds of thousands of excavation, it is a mammoth responsibility. 

I am informed from public information that the plans are there. 

Progress is being made, and it appears to be at this time on schedule. 

However, as you point out, we are in a different economy these 

days, and it could be that some of the planning may need revision 

as we learn more, and there may be a need for sort of innovative 

thinking. 

Some of the things you pointed out—and I have sitting here next 

to me someone from the Postal Service—what is the potential role 

of the Postal Service? I know that has been discussed and studied 

many times, but there are other groups that may be available. 

I have here today the Director of the Peace Corps, and they have 

return Peace Corps volunteers that may be looking for employment. And they may well be positioned. 
29 

And I just point to those by way of example, but I do think it 

would be very important to identify groups that may be ready, willing, and able to assist with enumeration and then figure out how 

quickly they can be brought on board. 

Chairman JOHNSON. You are going to have to pull out all the 

stops and use your imagination. I think that is a good idea. 

Listen, there have been a number of issues raised. I want to associate myself with Senator Lankford looking at the use of the IRS, 

and that could be through electronic filing, making sure the forms 

are identical, and then it could be just a voluntary system. So there 

are many things you can do. 

Certainly, I have raised the issue of the overall cost, cost per 

household. We have raised the citizenship questions, as I knew we 

would. 

If confirmed, let me repeat what I said in the opening, though. 

Eighteen months before this begins, there are so many challenges 

you need to overcome. We just talked about the hiring. I really do 

want you to focus on that issue. How do we take the Census? How 

do we get the highest response rate? How do we get the greatest 

deal of accuracy? 

And then following the Census, then really start turning your attention to these other issues, but we have to do it right away. We 

do not want to wait, again, 2 or 3 years before this and then it is 

too late, and we have all these problems. I really hope you organize 

your managerial emphasis, your priorities. Let us get the Census 

taken, but as soon as that is done, we start moving into making 

the 2030 Census far more efficient, utilizing all the opportunities 

we have, whether it is the IRS, where there is greater technology, 

start bringing down these costs. This really ridiculous. 

Again, thank you for your willingness to serve. 

Senator Daines, you have some questions. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR DAINES 

Senator DAINES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

It has been discussed a lot today about citizenship in the 2020 

Census. Before we get into my questions, I want to thank both of 

the nominees for coming here today and for your willingness to 

serve our Country in these very important capacities. 

Dr. Dillingham, as you know, the Census data is critical. It is a 

valuable tool utilized by all levels of government, by academia, as 

well as the private sector. I believe your firsthand experience and 

background in all these areas would serve you well in leading the 

Census Bureau. 

You mentioned the importance of public service to your family 

and to yourself. Your wife and mother-in-law were public school 

teachers. Your daughter is currently teaching. 

I can tell you my wife, Cindy, has a degree in elementary education. She has taught. My daughter graduated with a degree in 

elementary education. So I appreciate how important our teachers 

are. I live it every day to the next generation, as do you. 

I want to talk about, though, this issue of citizenship in the 2020 

Census. This data is so important, as we have worked to develop 

policies for our Country, having an understanding of something as 
30 

fundamental as how many citizens and noncitizens are in the 

Country. I think that is essential. 

In fact, it was Thomas Jefferson, the first Director of the Census, 

back in 1790. He suggested keeping track of citizenship status because it enables a more detailed view of the makeup of our Country, and I agree with that. I do not think that is an unreasonable 

position to take. 

We must make sure the taxpayer dollars are distributed fairly 

and that U.S. citizens are properly represented in Congress. Of 

course, while the Census counts each resident of the Country, my 

job is to represent the citizens of Montana and to ensure the citizens-of-Montana’s voice is heard here in Washington, DC. I believe 

citizens in Montana should have more of a say in Washington, DC., 

than illegal immigrants harboring in sanctuary cities across the 

country. And having a breakdown of citizens and noncitizens in our 

Country is common sense, especially given the millions of illegal 

immigrants who are in our Country today. 

Dr. Dillingham, do we know how many citizens we currently 

have in the United States? 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Senator, that is an excellent question. It is one 

that many people are interested in. 

We do collect, currently, information on citizenship through the 

American Community Survey. It was inserted again, at least that 

is the plan, for the Decennial Census as well. 

Senator DAINES. So are these surveys as accurate as the Census? 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Senator, I think that they are very accurate 

surveys depending on their methodology, and I do think that is a 

consideration beyond the decision to add it to the Decennial Census 

is to get one more measure. And then, of course, the experts in the 

Census Bureau can look at it and try to determine if this results 

in a more accurate measurement. 

Senator DAINES. Would not the best data come from the Census 

if we were able to determine citizens and noncitizens through the 

Census? 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Senator, it certainly would provide another 

measure of citizenship. 

Senator DAINES. Do you support including a citizenship question 

in the Census, and if so, what benefits might come of it? 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Senator, I have no plans to voice an opinion on 

that question. I think it would not be advisable in my position, if 

I am confirmed to be the Director of the Census Bureau. 

The decision, as I understand, it will be determined by the 

courts, and it would be my responsibility, if confirmed, to administer the Decennial Census in accordance and consistent with that 

judicial decision. So it would be problematic, I think, to take a public position on that question. 

Senator DAINES. Like the Chairman of this Committee, I spent 

my career in the private sector before coming to Capitol Hill. I 

have an engineering background, taught to solve problems, look at 

numbers, view the world through a quantitative lens when possible, and I do believe having additional data on something as fundamental as citizenship could help Congress better understand the 

makeup of our States and assist us in making better policies. 
31 

Dr. Dillingham, Montana is home to 12 federally recognized 

tribes, and the State recognized Little Shell Tribe, each which are 

a fundamental part of our State and our Nation’s history. Historically, Native Americans have been undercounted in the Census. 

Under your leadership, how will the Census Bureau engage with 

Indian tribes such as those in Montana to ensure an accurate population count and proper representation? 

Mr. DILLINGHAM. Senator, I understand, particularly with the geography of Montana and the dozen tribes that you said are within 

that State, that it is quite a challenge that needs to be met. 

So the outreach activities alluded to earlier in this hearing and 

the partnership activities are very much a part of that equation. 

In some instances, that we actually hire partnership specialists 

sometimes from the tribal communities to participate and assist in 

the outreach to those communities. 

At the same time, we just deploy all of our technologies in terms 

of mapping, etc., to assist in this process. There are communication 

strategies, but some of those communication strategies—for example, the media campaigns and stuff may not reach adequately some 

of the populations that you are concerned with. 

So what I can assure you is that this is being examined. This is 

being looked at. We hope that by achieving efficiencies in one area, 

for example, the electronic responses, that maybe some of those resources can be deployed to the hard-to-reach populations and the 

hard-to-count populations. We would be glad to work with you and 

other Members of this Committee because there are many States 

that to differing degrees that have that challenge. 

Senator DAINES. Dr. Dillingham, you brought up the remote nature of parts of Montana and Indian Country and just the rural 

culture that we have. 

I want to switch gears before I run out of time here and ask a 

question of Mr. Kubayanda. The Postal Service is critical to rural 

communities in Montana. When you think about the Postal Service, 

when you live a long ways away from town, you do not go into town 

to get your prescription medications. The Postal Service comes to 

you to deliver that, and oftentimes, weather challenges and so 

forth, the rural postal delivery is critically important. 

I am concerned the challenges that the organization continues to 

face that will lead to USPS failing to meet its commitment to Montanans particularly in our rural areas. 

As you know, the Board of Governors for the Postal Service still 

has an inadequate number of members. In November of last year, 

I joined in a letter to the Administration urging them to move 

quickly in nominating qualified members. 

My question is, Could you discuss the difficulties you foresee in 

working with a board of Governors that remains significantly 

understaffed? 

Mr. KUBAYANDA. If confirmed, I look forward to sitting down 

with the two new Governors who have been confirmed, but I think 

it is important that the board is filled for a number of reasons. It 

is really difficult for the Postal Service to engage in sort of the 

long-term planning that a lot of us have called for in the postal 

community without knowing what the new potential Governors, 

what direction they might go in, and I think there are certain re-
32 

1The information submitted by Mr. Dillingham appears in the Appendix on page 40. 

2The information submitted by Mr. Kubayanda appears in the Appendix on page 121. 

sponsibilities that the board dwindled and lost their quorum, they 

enacted some procedures so they could function sort of in a skeletal 

way. But I think having a fully functional board that is fully 

staffed will be absolutely critical going forward as we lay all these 

important issues on the table for the Postal Service. 

Senator DAINES. Thank you. 

Chairman JOHNSON. Thank you, Senator Daines. 

Again, I want to thank the nominees and your families for your 

willingness to serve. These are important positions, and we certainly want to move these nominations through the process as 

quickly as possible. 

The nominees have made financial disclosures and provided responses to biographical and prehearing questions submitted by the 

Committee. Without objection, this information will be made part 

of the hearing record,1 with the exception of the financial data, 

which are on file and available for public inspection in the Committee’s offices.2

The hearing record will remain open until noon tomorrow, October 4, with the submission of statements and questions for the 

record. 

This hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:39 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 
(33) 

A P P E N D I X 
34 
35 
36 
37 
38 
39 
40 
41 
42 
43 
44 
45 
46 
47 
48 
49 
50 
51 
52 
53 
54 
55 
56 
57 
58 
59 
60 
61 
62 
63 
64 
65 
66 
67 
68 
69 
70 
71 
72 
73 
74 
75 
76 
77 
78 
79 
80 
81 
82 
83 
84 
85 
86 
87 
88 
89 
90 
91 
92 
93 
94 
95 
96 
97 
98 
99 
100 
101 
102 
103 
104 
105 
106 
107 
108 
109 
110 
111 
112 
113 
114 
115 
116 
117 
118 
119 
120 
121 
122 
123 
124 
125 
126 
127 
128 
129 
130 
131 
132 
133 
134 
135 
136 
137 
138 
139 
140 
141 
142 
143 
144 
145 
146 
147 
148 
149 
150 
151 
152 
153 
154 
155 
156 
157 
158 
159 
160 
161 
162 
163 
164 
165 
166 
167 
168 
169 
170 
171 
172 
173 
174 
175 
176 
177 
178 
179 
180 
181 
182 
183 
184 
185 
186 
187 
188 
189 
190 
191 
192 
193 
194 
195 
196 
197 
198 
199 
200 
201 
202 
203 
204 
205 
206 
207 
208 

Æ