OVERSIGHT OF THE 2000 CENSUS: REVIEWING

THE LONG AND SHORT FORM QUESTIONNAIRES

HEARIN(

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE CENSUS

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON

GOVERNMENT REFORM

AND OVERSIGHT

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED FIFTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

MAY 21, 1998

Serial No. 105-180

Printed for the use of the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 1999

For sale by the US. Govemmenl Printing Office

Superintendent of Documents. Congressional Sales Office, Washington, DC 20402

ISBN 0-16-058497-3
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM AND OVERSIGHT

DAN BURTON. Indiana, Chairman

BENJAMIN A. OILMAN, New York

J. DENNIS HASTERT, Illinois

CONSTANCE A. MORELLA, Maryland

CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, Connecticut

CHRISTOPHER COX. CaUfomia

ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida

JOHN M. McHUGH, New York

STEPHEN HORN, CaUfomia

JOHN L. MICA, Florida

THOMAS M. DAVIS. Virginia

DAVID M. McINTOSH, Indiana

MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana

JOE SCARBOROUGH, Florida

JOHN B. SHADEGG, Arizona

STEVEN C. LATOURETTE, Ohio

MARSHALL "MARK" SANFORD, South

Carolina

JOHN E. SUNUNU, New Hampshire

PETE SESSIONS, Texas

MICHAEL PAPPAS, New Jersey

VINCE SNOWBARGER, Kansas

BOB BARR, Georgia

DAN MILLER, Florida

RON LEWIS, Kentucky

HENRY A. WAXMAN, CaUfomia

TOM LANTOS, CaUfomia

ROBERT E. WISE, JR., West Virginia

MAJOR R. OWENS, New York

EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York

PAUL E. KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania

GARY A. CONDIT, CaUfomia

CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York

THOMAS M. BARRETT, Wisconsin

ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, Washington.

DC

CHAKA FATTAH. Pennsylvania

ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland

DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio

ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH, IlUnois

DANNY K. DAVIS, IlUnois

JOHN F. TIERNEY, Massachusetts

JIM TURNER, Texas

THOMAS H. ALLEN, Maine

HAROLD E. FORD, JR., Tennessee

BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont

(Independent)

KEVIN BINGER, Staff Director

DANIEL R. MOLL, Deputy Staff Director

DAVID A. KASS, Deputy Counsel and Parliamentarian

JUDITH MCCOY, Chief Clerk

PHIL SCHILIRO, Minority Staff Director

SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE CENSUS

DAN MILLER, Florida, Chairman

THOMAS M. DAVIS, Virginia CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York

JOHN B. SHADEGG, Arizona ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH, Illinois

VINCE SNOWBARGER. Kansas DANNY K. DAVIS, IlUnois

RON LEWIS, Kentucky

DAN BURTON, Indiana

Ex OFFICIO

HENRY A. WAXMAN, CaUfomia

THOMAS B. HOFELLER, Staff Director

KELLY DUQUIN, Professional Staff Member

ERIN SCANLON, Professional Staff Member

DAVID MCMILLEN, Minority Professional Staff Member

LC control Nuittoer ^ ^

v

(in

A

CD

489522
(

LU CONTENTS

Pate

Hearing held on May 21, 1998 1

Statement of:

Hubbard, James B., director of economics, American Legion; Wen-Yen

Chen, president, Formosan Association for Public Affairs; David Clawson, program director, American Association of State Highway &

Transportation Officials; and Mario Lewis, Jr., vice president for policy.

Competitive Enterprise Institute 36

Morella, Hon. Constance A., a Representative in Congress from the State

of Maryland 15

Samhan, Helen, vice president, Arab American Institute, cochair. Working Group on Ancestry; and David Crowe, National Association of

Home Builders, staff vice president for housing policy 75

Letters, statements, etc., submitted for the record by:

Canady, Hon. Charles T., a Representative in Congress from the State

of Florida, prepared statement of 22

Chen, Wen-Yen, president, Formosan Association for Public Affairs, prepared statement of 45

Crowe, David, National Association of Home Builders, staff vice president

for housing policy, prepared statement of 88

Davis, Hon. Danny K., a Representative in Congress from the State

of Illinois, prepared statement of 33

Davis, Hon. Thomas M., a Representative in Congress from the State

of Virginia, prepared statement of 30

Hubbard, James B., director of economics, American Legion, prepared

statement of 37

Lewis, Mario, Jr., vice president for policy, Competitive Enterprise Institute, prepared statement of 61

Maloney, Hon. Carolyn B , a Representative in Congress from the State

of New York, prepared statement of 7

Miller, Hon. Dan, a Representative in Congress from the State of Florida,

prepared statement of 3

Morella, Hon. Constance A., a Representative in Congress from the State

of Maryland, prepared statement of 18

Samhan, Helen, vice president, Arab American Institute, cochair, Working Group on Ancestry, prepared statement of 78

(III)

OVERSIGHT OF THE 2000 CENSUS: REVIEWING THE LONG AND SHORT FORM QUESTIONNAIRES

THURSDAY, MAY 21, 1998

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE CENSUS,

COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM AND OVERSIGHT,

Washington, DC.

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 1:30 p.m., in room

2247, Raybum House Office Building, Hon. Dan Miller (chairman

of the subcommittee) presiding.

Present: Representatives Miller, Davis of Virginia, Snowbarger,

Maloney, Davis of Illinois, and Blagojevich.

Staff present: Thomas B. Hofeller, staff director; Thomas W.

Brierton, deputy staff director; Jennifer Safavian, chief counsel;

Timothy Maney, chief investigator; Kelly Duquin and Erin Scanlon,

professional staff members; Michelle Ash, minority counsel; David

McMillen, minority professional staff member; and Ellen Rayner,

minority chief clerk.

Mr. MILLER. I call the hearing to order.

Good afternoon. This is our third meeting of the Subcommittee

on the Census. We have a new member who has joined us today,

Mr. Lewis. He is unable to be here right now, but I think he will

be joining us later. He was approved this morning at the full committee.

Before each of us npakes a brief opening statement, I need to ask

unanimous consent that all Members' and witnesses' written statements be included in the record. Without objection, so ordered.

The subject of the hearing today is concerning the questionnaire.

In the past we have been talking about issues like to use sampling

or not to use sampling. Today we are talking about the questionnaire; in particular, the use of the long form and the short form.

The Census Bureau provided us the questionnaire recently, and we

have three panels in which to provide the information.

The constitutional reason we have a census is because of the purEoses of apportionment and then drawing congressional districts

ased on that. That is the only constitutional reason; however, the

census is used for a lot of other reasons. In fact, large amounts of

Federal dollars, $100 billion annually, flow because of census information to education programs, veterans' programs, elderly programs and such. Of course, many State and local governments use

it for their planing on new construction and youth programs, and

they rely on it; and nongovernmental organizations use it for social

(1)
service programs and such. So it has a great deal of use by a wide

variety of the people, in addition to the constitutional reasons.

There are two questionnaires, a short form and a long form. The

short form has seven questions. The long form has 52 questions.

Generally speaking, 1 out of 6 people receive the long form; in rural

areas 1 of 2. This may be the last time the long form is used. There

has been a proposal to go to the American Community Survey,

which we won't be discussing today, but we will at some stage, as

a replacement for the long form.

A number of people have expressed concerns about the long form,

and the amount of information requested. Some people feel it is intrusive in nature and that it is a form of corporate welfare because

it compiles information that private surveys should seek out where

there is an additional cost.

Another concern that has been raised about the long form is the

impact on response rates. In 1980, the difference in response rates

between the long form and short form was IV2 percent. In 1990,

it increased to 4V2 percent. So by increasing it to 52 questions, it

does have an impact on the response rate, which is, of course, very

critical because we obviously want the best census possible.

[The prepared statement of Hon. Dan Miller follows:]
Census 2000 Questionnaire

Chairman Miller's opening statement

In March of this year, the Census Bureau provided Members of Congress with the

questions that will be included in the Census 2000 Questionnaire. In the spirit of

congressional oversight, the Subcommittee on the Census is holding this hearing to discuss the

issues involving the 2000 Census long and short form questionnaires. We have brought

together professionals from several different fields to air their concerns and share their ideas

on the 2000 Census questionnaires. This hearing will not be a hearing on statistical sampling.

There are many end users of Census questionnaire data. For example, the Federal

government allocates over $100 billion in Federal funds annually for education programs,

veterans' services, services for the elderly, programs for the disabled, just to name a few.

Many states and 43,000 local governments use Census data for planning and allocating funds

for, new school construction, youth programs, highway safety and public transportation

systems, and rural development programs. In addition to the Federal government and state

and local governments, many nongovernmental organizations use census data for developing

social service programs, community action projects, and child care center locations.

There are two types of Census questionnaires - the long form and the short form. The

short form questionnaire consists of 7 questions. There are 6 population questions and 1

bousing question, that 5 out of 6 households across the nation will receive. The long form

questionnaire contains 52 questions. This questionnaire includes all of the short form

questions, plus 26 population questions, and 20 housing questions that will be sent to I out of

6 households across the nation. In rural areas, 1 in 2 households will receive the long form

questionnaire.

The 2000 Census may be the last time the Bureau uses the long form questionnaire.

One of the proposals on the table to replace the long form questionnaire is the American

Community Survey. The American Community Survey (ACS) was designed to provide

annual updated estimates of the 2000 Census long form items beginning with the year 2003

data. The ACS is conducted by the Census Bureau. Household addresses are selected at

random from a national residential address listing, and individuals are required by law to
participate. The American Community Survey is a monthly household survey. This approach

has been constructed to provide accurate and up to date profiles of America's communities

every year, not just every decennial census.

The Decennial Census provides more than just data for congressional reappordonment

and allocation of federal funds. Proponents ofthe long form questionnaire data point out that

many federal agencies and private businesses rely on the additional demographic data that the

long form provides.

Some opponents of the long form questionnaire feel that the information that the

Census Bureau solicits on the long form questionnaire is intrusive in nature and could be

compiled through other private paid surveys. Some critics have commented that the long form

questionnaire is more corporate welfare for big business. Other critics ofthe long form census

questionnaire object to the increased costs involved.

The Subcommittee has heard several concerns about the Census 2000 long form

questionnaire. The first concern deals with mail-back response rates. The long form

questionnaire consists of 52 questions dealing with varied household information, that the

Bureau purports to take the average person 38 minutes to complete. There are 21 subjects in

the long form questionnaire that are mandated by federal law. There are 18 subjects in the

long form questionnaire that are the only historical source of this information, but are not

mandated by any laws.

Traditionally, the long form questionnaire has had a slightly lower mail-back response

rate than the short form questionnaire. The short form questionnaire takes an estimated 10

minutes for the average household to fill out. In 1980 the difference between the response

rates for the long form and short form was 1.5%. In 1990 this figure has jumped to a 4.5%

difference.

An effective questionnaire, along with an accurate and complete list of households to

which the questionnaires will be mailed, are the most important components of a successful

2000 Census. The Subcommittee also welcomes additional comments and concerns from

members on this issue and looks forward to revisiting this issue again soon.
Mr. MILLER. SO before we get into the first witness, which is

Congressman Canady, I will now ask if Congresswoman Maloney

has an opening statement.

Mrs. MALONEY. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and I

thank you for calling this hearing.

The data from the decennial census is vitally important to our

Nation. Conducting the census every 10 years is the largest peacetime mobilization undertaken by the Federal Government, as it

should be, because conducting an accurate census is a national security and economic interest second to none.

According to the Congressional Research Service, the distribution

of close to $200 billion a year in Federal moneys depends on the

census data. Clearly, that is reason enough to support the use of

the long form by the Census Bureau, but not the only reason. Data

collected in the census impacts every citizen in this country in

many varied and important ways, ana I brought along yesterday's

USA Today to illustrate my point. The holes in the paper represent

the holes in information that we would not have reported in just

one issue of an important paper. Half the front page is gone of USA

Today. I just cut out articles related to the census, related to census data, that we collect on the long form, Mr. Chairman. Look at

this. I went through one paper, and literally every day, if you pick

up the paper and read through it, many of the articles rely on census data.

I see my colleague from the Women's Caucus, Connie Morella. I

don't know if she is testifying or not, but, Connie, both of us do a

lot of research on women, how far they are going, if they are progressing, if they are not, where they are working, if they are working, and practically all the data on women comes from the Census

Bureau. It is the same with minorities, any other group in our

country, and it is the same for businesses. That is why so many

businesses are so adamantly in support of the long form and in

support of the census.

This front page article is on the recent successes in the war on

cancer. Measurement of these successes requires information on

national disease rates, which relies on, guess what, census data.

There is also a little front page article on recent college graduate

jobs and pay situations. The column on what is up in Washington

shows clearly how much policymakers here in Washington and

Congress rely on accurate and fair census data.

Raising the Social Security retirement rate to 70, distribution on

transportation funding in the 200 billion plus ISTEA legislation,

and tne distribution of grant moneys, three things which come up

in Congress in just 1 day, they are all reported here in the paper.

Informed debate on all of them requires accurate census data.

Where do we get it? We get it from the long form.

Other articles refer to unemployment levels, crime rates, rates of

teen pregnancy. None of that information would be available without the census data, much of which is on the long form.

Finally, the editorial is a discussion of the bilingual education debate sparked by Proposition 227 in California. No matter where

one stands on that issue, accurate information is absolutely vital

to an informed debate, where bilingual students live, what is their

first language, what percentage of a given school district's popu-
6

lation is bilingual. These questions can only be answered with the

accurate data supplied by the census.

All of these programs and issues in just one random day's paper.

I challenge you tomorrow, I bet if you look at USA Today tomorrow

or any paper, you will cut out as many articles that are based on

census data.

When you stop and think, even if only for a few minutes, about

the impact of the census on the average American's daily life, one

can only marvel at the wisdom of America's Founding Fathers,

when they enshrined in the Constitution a requirement for a full,

fair, and accurate census.

As you know, Mr. Chairman, there are some in Congress who

would just as soon see some of this information go away. I applaud

your willingness to hold this hearing and the cooperation you have

given in getting a broad level of opinion that will be represented

today in this hearing.

Two days ago a group of organizations held a press conference

on the House Triangle in support of the Speaker's lawsuit to block

the use of modem technology in the census. At that press conference, this quote, "Coalition leader Mr. Grover Norquist advocated that all of the questions on the census be eliminated except

for those necessary for apportionment." He said that it was a waste

of money.

I hope that through this hearing we will all come to understand

the folly of that position, a position regrettably held by many in the

majority, hopefully not by the chairman, who I hope will come out

strongly in support of the long form.

And all the information that has been in USA Today, and this

information would not be there, the stories could not have been

written if we didn't have accurate data. As I have said many times

before, without accurate data we are just an uninformed opinion.

The census gives us accurate data to make better decisions in the

planning of our country. Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Hon. Carolyn B. Maloney follows:]
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE

CAROLYN B. MALONEY

May21.1908

Thank you Mr. Chairman for holding this hearing on the census

questionnaire. The data from the Decennial Census is vitally

important our nation. Conducting the Census every 10 years is the

largest peacetime mobilization undertaken by the federal government.

As it should be, because conducting an accurate census is a national

security and economic interest of America second to none.

According to the Congressional Research Service, the

distribution of close to 200 billion dollars a year in federal monies

depends on census data. Clearly, that is reason enough to support

the use of the long form by the Census Bureau, but not the only

reason. Data collected in the Census impacts every citizen in this

country in many varied and important ways.

>

I've brought a copy of yesterday's USA Today to illustrate my

point. The holes in this paper represent all of the holes in the

nation's information data bases which would be created by the failure

to conduct an accurate census. And this is just one day!
8

Here's a front page article on the recent successes in the war on

cancer. Measurement of those successes requires information on

national disease rates, which rely on census data. There's also a little

front page article on recent college graduates job and pay situations.

The column on what's up in Washington shows clearly how

much policy makers here in Congress rely on accurate and fair

census data. Raising the Social Security retirement rate to 70,

distribution on transportation funding in the $200 billion plus ISTEA

legislation, and the distribution of grant monies -three thing which

come up in Congress in just one day. Informed debate on all of them

require accurate Census information.

Other articles refer to unemployment levels, crime rates, rates of

teen pregnancy. None that information would be available without

Census data. Finally, the editorial is a discussion of the bilingual

education debate sparked by Proposition 227 in California. No matter

where one stands on that issue, accurate information is absolutely -

vital to an informed debate. Where bilingual students live; what is

their first language; what percentage of a given school districts

population is bilingual. These questions can only be answered with

the accurate data supplied by the decennial census.
9

All of these programs and issues in just one, random day's

paper. When you stop and think, even if only for a few minutes, about

the impact of the census on the average American's daily life, one

can only marvel at the wisdom of America's founding fathers when the

enshrined in the Constitution a requirement for a full, fair, and

accurate census.

As you know, Mr. Chairman, there are some in Congress who

would just as soon see all of this information go away. I applaud your

willingness to hold this hearing, and the cooperation you have given

in getting a broad spectrum of opinions represented.

i

Two days ago a group of organizations held a press conference

on the House Triangle in support of the Speaker's law suit to block

the use of modem technology in the census. At that press

conference, this quote coalition's leader, Grover Norquist advocated

that all of the questions on the census be eliminated except for those

necessary for apportionment. He said it was a waste of money. I

hope that through this hearing we all will come to understand the folly

of that position, a position regrettably held by many in the majority.
10

Montane

r «CWd to rrn who Mer

MMM- is raoM *

aickn pox vacdu. L«u«n 4
11

IWn^tipfc: Bilingual •ducation

Calif, initiative expose

flawed programs nation\ ide

i!f!ffffWf| Students languish for

UlMlttU years: classes, despite

high coat go unmonitored.

As a school board member Fcmanio V'egd

helped introduce bilinguaJ cducjtion 10 CJJIfonua's Redwood City schools Thirty yean

laier. he regrets his work.

Vega's personal epiphany came when hi*

grandson. Jason, was placed in classes taught

in Spanish, although the second-generation

American spoke only English When his family demanded a class transfer, they were refused.

Due to the school's large Hispanic cnrotlmenL

only bilingual classes were offered.

Today Vega. 73. is a vocal supporter of

Prefmioan 227. a California inttiaiive that

would dismantle the

state's massive bilingual education program for the 430.000

California students

now taught primanly

in their native languaces.

Polls suggest the referendum will pats by a

wide margin June 2.

But no matter which

way it turns out. the

proposal's popularity,

particularly among

Hispamcs. has exposed

broad and deep naDonal failures to the way

bdingual programs are

run. Amoogthem:

• Few states limit

the time students are

taught in their native

languages, even though

the ndcnl governmeni

recommends bilingual

students should move

into regular classes

withm three years Caltfonua graduates only

6% of its bilingual sturused are the data thai esunuie-lnince trom S2

billion to $10 billion anniully. Vet in CaJifornia. the programs are so bad that rie gwup they

should help most. Hispamcs. i-Kurv junking

them, polb sho«. by as much a

Because 731 ul all bilingualktudents nationally are Hispanic bilingual nrogranv. ^rc

wklety btamed br a 301 Huponicikupout noe.

more than twice the nauonol avenge, and for

the low 81 propuroon ot Hispanics in college

As a resuh. parents in several s ales are demanding a resouctunng of failed t lingual prograrm. In February, the Chicago I card of Education set a three > car time I mil on the

bilingual classes servmg 71,000 i udents

Arizona is constdenngleftslatt ithai would

eral funding tor bthngual prognm fbrstudenK

who da 't join regular class >widvnfcu

years. And New

York Mi ror Rudolph

Giuliani las suggested limiu ig bilingual

instructK n to a yem.

They're moving in

the nghJ direction.

Teaching all studcres

English u quickly aa

possible makes setae

in a country where

the greatest opporiunities • and the

highest salaries •

are reserved fcrthiae

fluent in the language. But whether

Ptopouoon 227 H tar

nght answer is less

certain !

The proposal

would rcpUce most

bilingual

taught ma

Speaking the language

Most school ckstnets had no eipenanc* w<h

bAnguM piognra i«i« 1966 wn*n Congr«»a

pUMa the Hngutf Educaaon Act In 1974,

iha SuDrwn* Court rutad tiat school astneta

must prosnda b*ngual educabon or oewr

tanging* programs StatM mandatng

bOnguM •ducabon AlaaU. Conrwcacul.

Nww Yorii. TMM. WMtilnglon and Wtcortwi.

Sttaaa mquwhO •majwaa to b*ngu*i

• andNabraaka.

ly clanes •nuaJK Resole Students graduate

from high school noprepared for colleges '•.,, - , | ,

and workplaces where

English is essential,

•• Many sates provide bonus pay for bthogual teachers and extra school funding for each

biluigual student, perverse financial incentives

ifa« eaooursge studencs lo languish in the laeguage-segregated classes

>• In distnets with high immigrant populations. English-speaking students may be forced

mm bilingual classes In Oakland, Calif. for instance, George Louie is stung the school district because no English-only kindergarten

classes are offered at his was local school. As

a resuh. his son. TVivcIL an Afirican-Amchcan.

was farced into a Cantonese bilingual program

MM

• Ala tune when " accountability" is the

new mantn of educators, bilingual programs

are murk on automatic pilot Neither states nor

the federal government knows what works or

how much bilingual educaboo COMK. Socond English m vpsraie. intensified

English classics It

backed by the re

search of B( ston

University Professor Othsone RobeO SI • has

(bund thai most students are best served nhen

they're taught in a language in which rt ey'll

evoKually conpeie

UiAxuutefy, thrugh the proposal has ame

icnous flaws It assumes that a largely

ed. one-size approach will provide a

sotuoon Ior alI thj iiK bilingual education

local school dutnets mt left with preci

de wiggle room to bad out students who

diffkuits making the transtuon in one

Course correcOoos are nearly tnevn

Cahforma copes wdh an almost loral

men of a sy«em that serves one-fourth

But an important national movemeotp

been bandied. In bme, it should impmvdthe

education not only of chikhen m Cabfomuqbut

tlto of 2 mi 1 Iwo others m bilingual p

aenxs the couovy
12

JETTING A HANDLE ON THE IJ^S

BIOLOGY OF CANCER' new violence

LATEST

DEVELOPMENTS

•nQiostittn and

found to shnnfc

cancerous tumofs

m mce by cutttng

off blood suppfy to

theiumor

New study shows

that tamoxtfan cuts

bnait cancer nsk

by 4SS m tyherrtsk women

Adting Taxof to

chamofftefapy

drugs reduces rate

of recumng braast

cancefby22%«nd

the number ol

by 26%

• Drugs that starve

tumors get moced

results, ID

•New test tor

prostate cancer, 90

JkhE&

•Top sites tor

medical advice

onNne,40

By Devld Lyncti

USA TODAY

JAKARTA. 1 clasD between SQti-|ovcri

mem protesters ind the mil

lary was apperently avene

early today as a Muslim leaoe

called ofl a maaive demw

stnQoQ.

Amien Raa. leader of [be ^

million member Muhamm.

diyib onanlaOoo. canceled i

rally at a •o«"mfiit adjacee

to the praBdentta^pelace. sg

'•tn mn rim inm npnai

Studenu who planned ti

> " li mnanmanl finii

the parttamM twlklttn wben

Bwy baw been dODHBMnttni

lor 3 d«i ««n kaMad fey a cor

f *» of polea art aoMtan.

Aothorltkeatoo curtailed B«

pubOc trao*t end erected mlfl

tary roadblocks oa majoi

streets to stymie protest!

against Presidenl Subano1'

tobtluc I mBBoa people tado

the «raat^ bid mpporten aid

tte flnled ralty was aol a sen

Tatn* ttajMnoaal no

ceeded la Wockla* today*

Day by day, scientists are

USA TODAY

away at

LOS ANGELES - Tfce

beco aU but deatadnf.

A Rarvarddoctor has cwed caacen in mice.

UCLA researcfaen have shrunk tumon and protanged wrvtval lo women with the meet ^pcs>

•we fonn of breaet fTaifTT

Thai Uwirt Oc IMS oo [unoxKm The

(•molten, d doeut

ii rwk at uterte oncer,

b It ower' Is OK Wir on Cancer wm?

If only K wwc tbm timpte

"Hn ire tmttt nai J« lib urn,- ay,

D«r* m^»m « UCLA.-T*eyi» imn. ol • .

.. Pfg?1"y^ aamnaBi anoul mm 1 Hot a baadto im the UOICB of caaxr-lla£

oecaiae oejm learned an the amen to can- ConrHv ID what HMM OMMI* iMnb ~

~^•beeM"

,,n

""

k,,

"

,te

"

ok,,* ^S»«s;3sa35uS

.9»«ne.rt«».«oprecl«. •**•«* "«»«*»">I»«o"

ty wlial ffm^keajjUjerTOegade cancer cell In

lura e«ar BOWT IO aa uaaainad aaooiBBr bfead loaHe

• •onenfcrtioBIcalal*.

- •armu

AanJl

BBL »6«re w ID 1 gunon

had baa toidM • OM

pow •«* today, only atoul .

do«n people wen allowed

Ihroufl mlUUry Unea. The

troup. Unen alk| thanselvaa "rahmn adeecatea."

I nw hactad Oe udsm' SttSSmmt

Ua l» » iwd leader, i

- U Loeioa. a lawyw,

are Bo In* ID parcr,

taMn ID c«mst- rmawSiiiiaS-iiw

| Saaanot 7t. ackaowl
13

-A • >AEDNESDAV, MAY 20. 1998 • USA TODAY

CAPITAL ROUNDUP

Senate rejects bill to cap

tobacco trial lawyers' fees

Senaun dcfeadng Uie lotacco wntonen MU 1\i»ctey

took a swipe at another group that's bashed just as frequently as Btf "Ibbacco Dial lawyers. But they mused The Senate voted 58-39 against a proposal to cap lawyers' fees during tobacco negotiations at $250 an hour

The proposed senlement is "*•

wheel of fortune for trial lawyers,'*

some of whom could get the equivalentnf tens of thousands of ddIan an

hour. Sen. Lauch Fairciotli, RNc.

•ML

we are talking about fees the

liko of whtcb the world has never

seen." Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., said

But Sen. Ernest H0UI119, D-S.C, a

trial lawyer, rose to their defense. He

«d the real legal villains were tobacco company taMM who may

have conspired to bide damning in- w*" w "wyara

torraanoo about totacco's dangers. -'

The battle over fee caps was among the more controver.

sial aspects of the bill ^^.^ _

There are fotng to be a lot of exptosum" as the debate

continues, said Sen. John McCain. R-Arlr. who crafted the

He said he still hopes tor final pnMge by the

WASHING!

Starr: Agents

Documents detail

arguments over

Secret Service

The plan would exact an estimated 1516 biltioo frotn tobacco companies over 25 years by levying fees that would

rate cigarette prices SUO a pack over ftve years. There?.

ate a propcaal to rate the tax by llJO a pack. The compawould be restricted in ho* they wU to mmora. and

would pay up to $4 billion in annual penalties if teen

rates doot fall. The price support pro^mm for tofanners also would end

SOCIAL SECURITTiw^s

tatfree and Invest part of their Social Security

tioram the suick market under a plan put forth by a

an study commission The panel of lawmaker*. '

money

would divert 2 percentage points of the 12.4% payroll lax

into ta^preferred individual saving accounts. Workers

could add $2,000 more to the accounts annually The remainder of the payroll tax. which is split equally between

the worker and employer, would go to Social Security. The

plan ate calb for raising the letlieiufnl a^ to 70 by 2029

and reducing benefits to elderiy spousal heneAdaries.

that make It harder lor new and snail aktoes ID compete

TfrMpDHaBon Secretary Rodney Slater said questJons include whether competition is stifled by kneterm gate

leases or departure tees known as "patugu fadttty

charges" The report Is due in March. Slater ate extended

by 90 days the June 9 deadline for comments on the department's proposed guidelines to dteourage arm-competitive

behavior by major carriers. "We haven't heard from the big

carriers yet." he said • David Held

COPYRIGHT LAW: The mteppropriatton of all or most

of (he information in an electronic database would be a

crime under a bill the House passed by voice vote. Vioiators

ate could be sued for damages In dvU court and Judges

could order the destrucooo of computer equipment iued In

the theft of databases "Good faith-use of databases by nonproAt, scientific or educational groups would be exempt

The law is Jg^pgj to dear up an area of copyright law

that some say has been overtaken by computer technology.

By Kevin Johnson and Gary Fields

USA TODAY

WASHINGTON

sel Kenneth Starr asserted as recently as

last week that Us offlce continues to receive "numerous and credible reports"

that Secret Service employees have loflomaDOB relevant to BH tovestlgaooti

President aaon "J . y

Start* a»erdor is coolalned WIM

pages of court documents made public

•Hiad^. Praiecmoii are Igjtrf* gS

quire agents to testify before a federal^

gand fm§ linifHairii^ allfmmni diat

CBoion bad an aflatr with fanner White

' House intera Monica Lewtnsky and tiled

to cowr It op. The Secret Service con-

-tends that locapg agents to testify would

cmipmnlse pranntfaf security.

The newly released papers generally

track the TT"-**^ arguments by Starr

and Deputy AttMant Anorney General

Gary Grlndler Thrne arpiments were

voiced last week In open court before

Chief U.S. District Judge Norms

Holloway Jotinson But the duuitueUi

also provide a more detailed accoutm of

occaslonaily emotional talks that began

nearly Ove moothsago v"* .^i

Secret Service Dtreoor LewU Mr,.

lemrepeAedly asks in the pleading! that

he be allowed to addreso the court

the potential i twenticiicef.•

s against the

Tbe effect of su

and tbe Justice

would be lo protr

la private talk

t not pai

hasbaue.

partmert. not poi

UtoVOih

'lactoaedTtte

The or

that lool

on an

i
14

THE FORUM

Good times could use a Go

By MtchMtMtdvrd

to shake things up

few days ago. uoemploym*

reached its lowefl level In

Lyein. For Bvcrage Amerlcaia. income K now nai« teuer

'"" i. crime

, leen prccmocy ItdcV air quality rtas Imfirrvf^ m

our lorges cities and the Cold Wir to

over. We're surrounded by good

news on all sides So why Is Hollywood rtxaled on dliMter?

The latest threat to civilization

thunders into theaters today- a radioactive reptile that, in oar form or

another, has been ratting around the

world's consciousness for 34 ycare.

The new American Godzilla may be

(he biggest movie menace lodalc

("Sue Does Matter.' proclaim the

utatquilous ads) But be hardly stands

(or flomps) alone

la recent months we've seen div

•aler movies about UUer volcanoes

(Oontes Prafeand Vokonoi. dev»-

ladng floods |Hard Rain), temfyu^

tornadoes (TSvutcr). evtl alien invasions (Independence Day. Mars Atladu. Mm in Blado, and cnmic collisions (Deep Impact, plus the

forthcoming Armageddon) As the

real world looks lea and to fearful,

the movie business seems determined to rill the fright gap with

MtBrre monsters and natural catastrophes. Despite the sunny national

mood, film executives feel certain

that audiences will welcome nightmansn clrematic assaults on their

current conMencc.

When (be original CodziJIn

hatched in Japan, bis appearance

made more sense Lest than a

decade after Hiroshima, the monster

attacked J society still profoundly

and unmtstakably haunted bv memories of atomic devastation Gofiro

ias the scaly cutter w« known in hts

hoine touniry' emerged

from Tokyo Bay. a timeles terror reactivated by

recent rudlatiun. giving

shape to nameless fears

cbaractenstk: of thai era.

In Japan, and throughout tbe world, humanity

lived under tbe shadow

of The Bomb, coming to

t grips with tbe very real

\pos«lbllity of tnstanta- .

neous thermonuclear Incineration.

CounUess commentators drew the obvious association between worries

over World War III and tbe unexpected global popularity of a tacky

but unstoppable dlnaaaur who orlgin^ed In the only nnOon Qm ever tiM

actually endured A-bomb attack.

None of this mattered to me as a

7-year old scl-n nut In IMg, when

US. theaters welcomed Godzillo.

King o/ (he Monsters, newly

equipped with tame inserts lor American audiences featuring Raymond

ftirr I desperately wanted to sec tbe

movie at a 23-cent Saturday matinee

but my mother steadfastly refused

Sbe fell certain the monster would

plant nightmares In my youthful

Imagination and also discerned

something offensively sacnlegloos

about tbe beast's name Could II be

maky. vcn«cftil Jap

evil thing Godnlla

laaoyeveM,!

didn't get to see

Ibat first Big G

flick until yean

later, but 1 did

manage to connect with nearly

all successor

monsters from

Tote Siudioa. including Varsn

the tMbeluvaUe

(a gigantic flying

squ'ireP), Camera the (miner

Me (a huge. )etprwpelled.

flre-breaihing

turtle), Molhra

(an enormous

•tiller moth).

Gorath (featuring a gigantic

man-eating walrus). Dogora the Spore Moniter (a

humongous jellyfish from outer

•pace). Gvoos (a titanic flying fox

with fangs), plus self-expunaiory u

lies like Ghidrah the Thre^Heoded

Monsler TV Green Sfime and The

£VtI Sroin from Older Space

Did such ferocious fare help my

leader psyche cope with the underlying terrors of the 50s and '60s

eqx'P youag Michael to handle menacing world events like tbe Cuban

mlsslMcflsls? Who knows. But at

least that theory provides some explanatlod for tbe otherwise Incom

prehenslble popularity of so many

ueUagwwrf•

acton in n

tramping around n

A similar notion might help ac

count for the oan la dtaMcr mevlM

In tbe IfTOa. ranging from The Tow-

«*« tymo kntf The Pbtrirfon A*

vnfure to The S^form Md 7W CMIB Syn*ome WKh wsrld eventt (tbe

Ml of Salgoo. the

73 Mideast war.

- •Urn

dally devastaOag computei

known as Y2K • hot. If aa

been underplajwd to the med

looming debodt may not qua

motion picture treaCmeot he»

ts both more teaulnety fngh

to spite of pmnUog good tkll

becatae of them For many r

in high school aad csiefe tai

ways tbe core aadleDce for i

films) tharVa aa eM MNMI

. Uy parents',

ooo conquered the Grea( Dep

and won World War a tboae

tbe baby boon bulge survlvt

oam. the cMI rtghb roovemhippie revoludoe and disco

current "era of good fecllx«s

ordeals can young people cl

tbelr own? Is K. ajter all. a n

heroism lo eadore some bo

Core speech on global warn

to live through Ibe Aeer tern)

Great Goveramanl Shutdown

At least vu.1 the new crop •

adng movte maaalen. you[«

can feel thol ihey^ overcom

autheotlcally formidable f

They can now tell their gra

that In It

m«

lldlng asteroids and rampai

ooeaun •la tbe shape of G

Jurnsnc nzr* wetodnptanB

baps most Chiang of aN. tbe I

•ag purple tyiannosaar of fh

GrWAdv
15

Mr. MILLER. Just a brief response, and then we will go to our

panel. As I said, the constitutional purposes of the census are to

apportion Representatives between States and to allow the States

to draw congressional districts. The long form is the use of sampling, which is appropriate. The Census Bureau itself has recommended that we move to another type of format for the year

2010 and not have the long form. We will have a hearing on that

issue. The information, a lot of it is very valuable information and

can be collected via sampling. I think we need to hear from the

Census Bureau on why they want to drop the long form. But if it

impacts the response rate, it is a very serious issue.

At this time, let me call forward our two

Mrs. MALONEY. Excuse me. Point of information. You said the

Census Bureau wants to drop the long form?

Mr. MILLER. For the year 2000. They are going to the American

Community Survey. We will be having a hearing on that at some

stage. I am sorry, this is for 2010. This will be the last time they

are recommending the use of the long form. So it is the Census Bureau's recommendation about dropping the form, and they feel that

they can get accurate sampling information spread over the 10

years, annually collecting the information, rather than just waiting

once every 10 years to do it. So we will find the Census Bureau's

recommendations on it for year 2010.

At this time, if Congressman Canady and Congresswoman

Morella would come forward. I am delighted that you all could join

us today.

We have asked for our colleagues who have a particular interest

in the questionnaire to come forward. Congressman Canady has a

specific piece of legislation, and Congresswoman Morella is in support of that legislation and has also introduced a concurrent resolution concerning the sense of Congress. I will let you all explain the

legislation. Who would like to go first?

Mrs. MORELLA. Whichever you say, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. MILLER. Congresswoman Morella.

STATEMENT OF HON. CONSTANCE A. MORELLA, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MARYLAND

Mrs. MORELLA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank you

for holding this hearing, and. Ranking Member Maloney, it would

certainly save time reading the paper, wouldn't it, if we followed

that maxim.

I really appreciate your holding this hearing on a critically important issue, the census long form. And as you mentioned. Chairman Miller, I have introduced legislation. House Concurrent Resolution 246, to express the sense of Congress that the Census Bureau should continue to collect demographic and socioeconomic data

on the long form in census 2000. In other words, it is saying the

long form provides important information, and Members of Congress feel it should be continued.

I want to commend my colleague and fellow panelist Congressman Canady for his legislation, of which I am an original cosponsor. His legislation would enumerate family caregivers in the census long form. This information, as it is broken down by census
16

tract, will be very helpful as Congress considers policy to address

the needs of caregivers.

The long form, consisting of 52 questions, is sent to 1 in 6 "city

style" addresses and 1 in 2 "rural style" addresses. Its questions

will provide the only accurate and reliable source of demographic,

social and economic data about our population.

The long form data provides both national and local information,

and thus we can assess and compare our population and needs as

a Nation and as local communities.

The public sector relies on census long form data. Federal agencies must have the information collected by the Census Bureau on

the long form in order to administer Federal programs. More than

$100 billion of Federal funds are distributed every year based on

this information. The Federal Government needs the information to

ensure that programs are inclusive, representative, and that they

serve the needs of the local populations. For example, the U.S.

Commission on Civil Rights needs this data to monitor discrimination based on national origin.

Long form data impacts every congressional district in the country. Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act allocates $8 billion every year to be used by every school district in the

country for programs for the educationally disadvantaged children.

These funds are targeted on the basis of census data. The Department of Transportation allocates some ISTEA funds based on the

journey to work question on the long form.

Beyond the Federal Government, the largest non-Federal users

of long form information are local governments. The National Association of Counties adopted a resolution calling for a census long

form, stating that it would "provide the useful demographic information necessary to guide our country into the 21st century."

In addition, State, county and municipal agencies, educators and

human service providers, researchers and political leaders all rely

on the long form data. Members of Congress depend on accurate information to formulate public policy and understand the needs of

our own constituents. The questions on the long form give us insight into our communities, our transportation and our infrastructure, our housing, our most vulnerable constituents and our ethnic

constituencies.

Last month Michel Lettre, the assistant director for the Maryland Office of Planning, highlighted the importance of census data

for planning in the State of Maryland. One of the most pressing

problems facing my own congressional district in Montgomery

County, MD, is traffic congestion. The long form provides important data to address this problem. Without the long form data,

county officials would not have a clear idea of what transportation

needs are and how to remedy congestion.

The private sector is a secondary, but, I think, veiy important,

beneficiary of long form data. Census data promotes economic stability and growth in every sector of our economy. Retail, service,

communications, and manufacturing companies rely on this data to

allocate resources and develop investment strategies; to determine

the location of new stores and plants; to assess the need for job

training; to provide educational and child care programs; and to

meet customer needs and preferences. Transportation providers use
17

census data to assess the needs for roads, highways and transit

systems. The housing industry relies on census data to gauge housing conditions, predict loan demand, improve and expand housing

in underserved markets. The private sector couldn't possibly replicate the information in the census.

One of the important long form questions is the ancestry question. We are a proud Nation of immigrants, and the ancestry question helps us to preserve knowledge about our ethnic heritage for

present policymakers and for future generations. The ancestry

question gives us insight into our ethnic constituencies and a measure of how we change demographically. Knowing this will help us

move toward a society that is inclusive and best serves the diverse

needs of our American family.

Critics' complaints about the cost and burden of the long form,

I think, are shortsighted and ill-founded. On average, it will take

people 38 minutes to fill out the long form. The Census Bureau has

simplified the long form, asking fewer additional topics than in

1990. The Census Bureau will collect only, and I will underline

"only," data that is specifically required by law or by a Federal

court for the implementation of programs or the allocation of Federal funds where the census is the only source. The Bureau has

dropped its policy in planning 1990 questions that have no explicit

statutory justification, so they have really streamlined. In fact, it

is the shortest long form since 1820. At a cost of $400 million total,

the long form is less than one-tenth of the cost of the total census.

To collect this information without the census long form would be

far more expensive, and to forgo this information could lead to very

bad decisions or a misallocation of precious resources.

This is a critical year for census planning. Since the 1990 census,

there has been much debate over the long form. It is critical that

we educate other Members and that we build support for this critical census data. I appreciate the opportunity to share my views

with this very important subcommittee, with Chairman Miller,

Ranking Member Maloney and the Davises on both sides of the

aisle. I thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. MILLER. Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Hon. Constance A. Morella follows:]
18

CONSTANCE A. MORELLA

WASHINGTON, DC 2091S

COMMimE ON SCKNCf . ^ ^ (202) 22S-U41

FAX 1202) 22V13I

CongrEgfi of tilf Slnitel) States ^ »<>«>.s^..

KFo«M«Noo«i««Kr *nii«» nf «Mir«<mffltihf« nocmL., MO 20«o

»«M5»•rnt o" Cw* Knc* 1301) 424-3601

FAX. 1301)424-5092

ifoust of Hrprnttntatitats

Congressworaan Coank MordU

Testimony before the SubcaaunMce on the Coma

May 21,1998

I want to thank Chairman Dan Miller and Ranking Member Carolyn Malooey for bolduig today's

bearing on a cribcally impcrunt issue - the census long form. As you know, I have introduced legislation.

House Concurrent Resolution 246, to express the Sense of Congress that the Census Bureau should conimue

to collect demographic and socioeconomic data on the long form in Census 2000.

I want to commend my colleague and fellow panelist. Congressman Charles Canady, for his

legislation, of which I am an original cosponaor. to enumerate family caregivers in the census long form.

This information, as it is broken down by census tract, will be very helpful as the Congress considers policy

to address the needs of caregivers.

The long form, consisting of 32 questions, is sent to one in six "city style" addresses and one in two

"mill style* addresses. Its questioos will provide the only accurate and reliable source of demographic,

social, and economic data about our population. The long form data provides both national and local data,

thus we can assess and compare our population and needs as a nation and as local communities.

The public sector relies on census long form data. Federal agencies must have the information

collected by the Census Bureau on the long form in order to administer federal programs. More than $100

billion of federal fends are distributed every year based on this data. The federal government needs this

information to ensure that programs an inclusive, representative, and serve the needs of local populations.

For example, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights needs the data to monitor discrimination based on

national origin.

Long form data impacts every congressional district in the country. Title I of the Elementary and

Secondary Education Act allocates $8 billion a year lo every school district in the country for programs for

the educationally disadvantaged children, targeted f»n rh» ha^i pf nmnifl illll The Department of

Transportation allocates some ISTEA fends baaed on the "journey lo work" question on the long form.

Beyond the federal government, the largest non-federal users of long form information are local

govemnents. The National Association of Counties adopted a resolution calling for a census long form 'to

provide the usefel demographic information nrrctsa/y to guide our couaiy into the 21st ceauty." In

addition, stale, county, and municipal agencies; educators and human service providers; researchers; and

political leaders all rely on long form data.

Members of Congress depend on accurate information lo formulate public policy and understand the

needs of our own constituenu. The questions on the long form give us insight into our communities, our

transporuuon and infrastructure, our housing, our most vulnerable consiituents. and our ethnic
19

Last month. Michel Lettre, the AssUunt Director for the Maryland Office of Planning, highlighted the

importance of census data for planning in the State of Maryland. One of the more pressing problems facing

my congressional district in Montgomery County, Maryland, is traffic congestion. The long form provides

important data used to address this problem. Without the long form data, county officials would not have a

clear idea what our transportation needs are and bow to remedy congestion.

The private sector is a secondary, but important, beneficiary of long form data. Census data promote

economic stability and growth in every sector of our economy. Retail, services, communications, and

manufacturing companies rely on this data to allocate resources and develop investment strategies: to

determine the location of new stores and plants: to assess the need for job training, educational, and child

care programs: and to meet customer needs and preferences. Transportation providers use census data to

assess the need for roads, highways, and transit systems. The housing industry relies on census data to gauge

bousing conditions, predict loan demand, and improve and expand housing in undenerved marteo. The

private sector could not possibly replicate the information in the census.

One of the important long form questions is the ancestry question. We are a proud nation of

immigrants, and the ancestry question helps us to preserve knowledge about our ethnic heritage for present

policy makers and for future generations. The ancestry question gives us insight into our ethnic

constituencies and a measure of bow we change demographically. Knowing this will help us move toward a

society that is inclusive and best serves the diverse needs of our American family.

Critics' complaints about the cost and burden of the long form an ill-founded and shortsighted. On

avenge, it will take people 38 minutes to fill out the long form. The Census Bureau has simplified the long

form, asking fewer additional topics than in 1990. The Census Bureau will collect .only data that is

specifically required by law or by a Federal court for the implementation of programs or the allocation of

Federal funds where the Census is the only source: the Bureau has dropped its policy and planning 1990

questions that have no explicit statutory Justification. In fact, it is the shortest long form since 1820 At a

cost of $400 million tool, the long form is less than one-tenth of the coat of the total cemis. To collect this

information without the census long form would be far more expensive, and to forgo this information could

lead to very bad decisions or misal location of precious resources.

This is a critical year for census planning. Since the 1990 Census, there has been much debate over

the long form. It is critical that we educate other Members and build support for this critical census dan, and

I appreciate the opportunity to do that today.
20

Mr. MILLER. Congressman Canady, would you like to make your

opening statement, please.

Mr. CANADY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I want to thank you for giving me the opportunity to testify

today before your panel, and I want to commend you on your efforts to ensure a fair and accurate census carried out in accordance

with the requirements of our Constitution.

I want to join in supporting the usefulness of the long form. I believe, as Congresswoman Morella has stated, the long form of the

census can be a useful tool for us as policymakers to utilize in

working to shape effective public policy. And I believe that Congresswoman Morella has given a number of examples of why that

is the case. And while I respect the opinion of those who believe

the form is too costly and time-consuming, I believe that the benefits of the information provided through the long form outweigh

any drawbacks that may be associated with its use.

Today I would like to specifically address the provisions of my

bill, H.R. 2081, and the importance of counting family caregivers

in census 2000. My legislation, which is known as the Family Caregivers Enumeration Act, would require the Census Bureau to identify family caregivers in the long form of census 2000. This legislation has been endorsed by the National Multiple Sclerosis Society,

the National Association for Medical Equipment Services, and the

Home Care Coalition, an organization which represents such

groups as the American Federation of Home Health Agencies and

the Spina Bifida Association of America.

Family caregivers are individuals who provide free care for

chronically ill or disabled loved ones. According to a report issued

by the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research, almost 2 percent of the population of the United States

needs help performing one or more activities of daily living. Activities of daily living are defined as basic self-care activities, such as

eating, dressing or brushing your teeth. These are activities we

take for granted, yet many individuals who cannot perform them

on their own continue to live at home without specialized medical

assistance. Without the help of a family caregiver, these individuals would be forced to depend on the U.S. health care system that

is already strained in many ways.

Unfortunately, caregivers and their contributions to the Nation's

public health have historically gone unrecognized, and the fact is

that all of us are either caregivers now or potential caregivers, and

we are also all potentially care recipients. So this is an issue that

affects all Americans. It is something that every family can be involved in, and sometimes the responsibilities of family caregiving

can come very suddenly. And I believe that as our population ages,

this issue is going to become even more important, and we are

going to see even more family caregiving taking place in our society.

I first became aware of the obstacles faced by family caregivers

when a group of constituents approached me with the idea of

counting caregivers in the census. They were concerned that Federal, State and local governments would be unable to effectively address issues of concern to family caregivers without the kind of

data that could be provided through the decennial census. I have
21

worked extensively with Congresswoman Morella and a group

headquartered in her district, the National Family Caregivers Association, to draft and promote this legislation and to draw attention to the importance of gathering statistical information that will

help policymakers address caregiver issues.

Family caregivers face emotional, physical and financial obstacles every day. Many times they are the lone caregiver for their

husband, wife, child or parent and are responsible for their care

around the clock. For many individuals, this is a 24-hour-a-day, 7-

day-a-week situation.

H.R. 2081 would serve to educate policymakers on the number,

location and demographics of family caregivers and would help

Members of Congress make informed decisions on the most effective ways to assist caregivers in our society.

Mr. Chairman, no one disputes family caregivers have an enormous impact on the health care industry and on the quality of life

of thousands of needy persons. Until we know how many family

caregivers live in the United States, legislators and policymakers

will he unable to properly and comprehensively address the unique

and varied needs of this valued part of our community.

The Family Caregiver Enumeration Act is a relatively simple but

important first step in recognizing the contributions and needs of

dedicated and hard-working family caregivers in all of our districts.

I believe that with the information that would be obtained pursuant to this, we would be in a much better position to make the

judgments we need to make about meeting the needs of all of our

constituents.

Again, Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you for your leadership

on the issues related to the census. I appreciate your commitment

to ensuring that the upcoming census is successful, and I thank

you for allowing me to be here today.

[The prepared statement of Hon. Charles T. Canady follows:]
Testimony of Rep. Charles T. Canady

before the House Government Reform and Oversight

Census Subcommittee

May 21,1998

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to testify today before this panel. 1

would like to commend you on your efforts to ensure a fair and accurate decennial census

carried out in accordance with the requirements ofthe Constitution.

I believe that the long form ofthe Census can be a useful tool for legislators as

they work to shape public policy. While 1 respect the opinion ofthose who believe that

the form is too time-consuming, I believe that the benefits ofthe information provided

through the long form outweigh any drawbacks that may be associated with its use.

Today, I would like to discuss the merits ofmy bill, H.R. 2081, and the importance

of counting family caregivcrs in Census 2000. The Family Caregivers Enumeration Act

would require the Census Bureau to identify family caregivers in the long form ofCensus

2000. The bill has bipartisan support and has been endorsed by the National Multiple

Sclerosis Society, the National Association for Medical Equipment Services, and the

Home Care Coalition, which represents such groups as the American Federation ofHome

Health Agencies and the Spina Bifida Association ofAmerica.

Family caregivers are individuals who provide "free" care for chronically ill or
23

disabled loved ones. According to a report issued by the National Institute on Disability

and Rehabilitation Research, almost 2 percent ofthe population ofthe United States

needs help performing one or more Activities ofDaily Living. Activities of Daily Living

arc defined as basic self-care activities, such as eating, dressing, or brushing your teeth.

These are activities that we take for granted, yet many individuals who cannot perform

them on their own continue to live at home without specialized medical assistance.

Without the help of a family caregiver, these individuals would be forced to depend on a

U.S. health care system that is already strained in many ways. Unfortunately, caregivers

and their contributions to the nation's public health have historically gone unrecognized.

The fact is, Mr. Chairman, that all ofus are either caregivers now or could be

caregivers in the future. This is an issue that potentially affects the entire population.

I first became aware ofthe obstacles faced by family caregivers when a group of

constituents approached me with the idea of counting caregivers in the Census. They

were concerned that federal, state, and local governments would be unable to effectively

address issues of concern to family caregivers without the kind of data that could be

provided through the decennial census. I have worked extensively with Congresswoman

Morella and a group headquartered in her district, the National Family Caregivers

Association, to draft and promote this legislation, and draw attention to the importance of

gathering statistical information that will help policy-makers address caregiver issues.
24

Family caregiveis face emotional, physical, and financial obstacles every day.

Many times they are the lone caregiver for their husband, wife, child, or parent and are

responsible for their care around the clock. H.R. 2081 would serve to educate policy

makers on the number, location, and demographics offamily caregivers and would help

Members ofCongress make informed decisions on the most effective ways to assist

caregivers.

Mr. Chairman, no one disputes that family caregivers have an enormous impact on

the health care industry and on the quality oflife ofthousands ofneedy persons. But until

we know how many family caregivers live in the United States, legislators and policy

makers will be unable to properly and comprehensively address the unique and varied

needs ofthis valued part of community. The Family Caregiver Enumeration Act is a

relatively simple but important first step in recognizing the contributions and needs of

dedicated and hard-working family caregivers in all of our districts.

Again, thank you for allowing me this time.
25

Mr. MILLER. Thank you all very much.

Let me correct what I was saying. There is no question we are

going to use the long form in the year 2000. There has been a proposal by the Census Bureau, and apparently they haven't finalized

their position on this, and that is to phaseout, after the year 2000,

the long form and go to what is called the American Community

Survey, which would be done on an annual basis and continually

updated. And at some stage we will have a hearing to find out

what the Census Bureau really plans to do. But there is no question, we are going to have the long form in the year 2000.

It is interesting, I was flying home recently, and I completed the

questionnaire. You should do that. I had trouble completing some

of the questions personally, and one is the question of transportation. When you start traveling, you go by car, so it is easy since

you live in the neighborhood. But I fly, my home is in Florida, and

that is not provided for the questionnaire. I know we all have

unique jobs here, but you wonder, maybe sales people have the

same problem. How do they go to and from work? It was even difficult for me to fill out one phase of the particular questionnaire.

Congressman Canady, recently I did meet with a group of caregivers at a senior citizens day care center and had lunch with the

caregivers, the wives and mothers or daughters of a number of

them, and so it drove home the point that there are a lot of them

that devote a great deal to their loved ones, and they are, first of

all, appreciative of having a day care center during the day. But

there is a lot more than you realize, and their lives are very much

impacted by the commitment they make to that particular relative,

so I recognize that.

When you start adding questions to a questionnaire, when you

do this in any type of questionnaire, it costs money, and it affects

response rates. So the question is, what will you use it for. Give

me a little better description on how we will use the information

on caregivers. It would be nice information to know.

Mr. CANADY. I think it is very basic in that it is hard for us to

make judgments about the proper policy to assist family caregivers,

to meet the needs of family caregivers and the family members

they are serving, unless we have comprehensive information about

what is actually taking place. And, quite frankly, I think that part

of the answer to the question is that there is great unawareness

of the extent to which family caregiving actually is going on in our

society.

I know I was surprised when I started talking with constituents,

and it is not that I had never been aware of family caregiver situations, I was, but when you start looking at the number of people

that are affected, it is quite impressive. I think that one very important aspect of this is simply getting that information so that all

of us would understand the magnitude of the issue that we confront when it comes to family caregivers. Understanding their particular demographic characteristics and all the other types of information we would gather, I think, can help us formulate the appropriate public policies to assist family caregivers.

Now, obviously, we have to have family caregivers, and the kind

of policies we are looking for are policies that will help them and

support them in carrying out their responsibilities they have as-
sumed as family caregivers. Just having the basic information

about how many there are, where they are, the size of the family

units and other things we would gather from this information I

think can be helpful.

And it is not magic. I mean, the information could be gathered

and sit on the shelf. That sometimes happens. But I believe in this

case, as family caregiving is becoming more and more important,

this kind of information would be very valuable to the policymakers, and it is not the kind of information that will sit on the

shelf.

For instance, I think an area we need to be looking at very carefully is ways we can provide additional respite care for family caregivers. That is a very big issue for family caregivers, and I think

having the information about how many we are actually talking

about, how many that are involved in around-the-clock, 7-day-aweek caregiving would be helpful in formulating the right kind of

strategies to target respite care and to have effective respite care

programs that meet the real needs that are there.

Mr. MILLER. It is possible, maybe, that the new proposal will give

more flexibility to ask those types of questions than when you tie

it into the decennial census, that is where it has the potential impact it did between 1980 and 1990 of affecting response rates, so

obviously we will find out once we do the 2000 census.

Mr. CANADY. Mr. Chairman, I am not here to endorse the status

quo. That is not my point. I have a particular issue that is an important policy issue we should focus on. There may be questions

being asked that don't need to be asked, so we need to look at it.

We need to take a fresh look. I mean, I commend that to your efforts. I just hope while you are doing that, you will take a very

close look at the merits of looking at family caregivers and getting

us a better understanding of the very important role they play.

And I think questions with respect to family caregivers are something that could end up benefiting every single family in this country.

Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Chairman, it could also tie in with what Mr.

Canady has said in terms of location of facilities that would assist

the caregivers, whether it is medical facilities, whether there are

shops or what they might need.

Mrs. MALONEY. Thank you both for your testimony.

I would just like to ask you. Representative Canady, it is my understanding that the Census Bureau has been working with you in

response to your interest in caregivers to develop questions on family caregivers on a survey of income and program participation; is

that correct? So they are putting the questions on that survey; is

that correct?

Mr. CANADY. That is correct, and I want to thank the Bureau of

the Census for recognizing the need for additional information on

this. As I understand it, as we speak, the survey of income and program participation is going forward with some questions concerning caregivers included, and that is a survey that is occurring

from April through July of this year, but it will only cover about

36,000 households. Now, that is significant, and I appreciate the

Census Bureau's including these questions, and that is
27

Mrs. MALONEY. But my question is do we need•I can't believe

I am asking this because I am an advocate of the long form, but

do we need questions on the census form as well if we already have

it on the other survey of income, and why do we need it on both

surveys?

Mr. CANADY. I think you could take the position you don't need

a long form at all, and some would advocate you could just use

these less extensive surveys and gather information in that way.

I don't think that we get the level of detail and comprehensiveness

that we get with the long form in the other type of survey.

Mrs. MALONEY. But this would be program participation, so it

would be people that are in the family caregiver programs.

Wouldn't that cover them?

Mr. CANADY. I don't think it is intended just to cover people who

are actually participating in an existing program. I think it is

broader, because part of the problem with that is if we just cover

people who are participating in the programs, we would be losing

a lot of people, because a lot of these families don't participate in

any program, they get no sort of help at all, they are out there on

their own doing the best they can.

Mrs. MALONEY. You would know better than I would that many

members of particularly vour party, do not advocate the long form.

In fact, they have really been trying to take questions off of it. And

I just wonder, have you discussed this? In tact, the former Chair

of the subcommittee, Mr. Hastert, was not supportive of adding to

the long form, or the long form for that matter.

Have you asked some of your colleagues, such as Representative

Rogers, who argue for a form even shorter than the one that has

been proposed by the Census Bureau; in other words, is there support on your side of the aisle for adding these questions to the

form? Have you discussed it with some of the people?

Mr. CANADY. I have not discussed this with Chairman Rogers. I

know his longstanding opposition to the long form. We have been

trying to get cosponsors. We have a bipartisan group of cosponsors.

It is not an enormous group. But my attitude on this is that this

should not be a partisan issue. Family caregivers are Democrats,

they are Republicans, they are Independents. This should be removed from partisanship entirely, and I believe this is a responsible measure that would help us do a better job of meeting the

needs of family caregivers, and that is why I am pursuing it. Some

of my colleagues on the Republican side may have a philosophical

difference about the purpose of the census entirely, but the point

I would make is if we are going to have a long form, and I believe

there is a strong case to be made for that, this is exactly the kind

of question that should be included because this is addressing a

very important policy issue and will provide us information that

will help us do a better job in legislating.

Mrs. MALONEY. Representative Morella, some people suggest that

one way to shorten the census form is to ask only the questions

identified as mandated. In your opinion. Representative Morella,

what would be the effect of eliminating the questions that aren't

mandated?

Mrs. MORELLA. Well, actually, Congresswoman Maloney, as I

mentioned, they pretty much streamlined this long form. Now, I
28

would like to correct something that I stated. I stated that this is

the shortest long form since 1820. Well, let the record state that

this long form for 2000 is shorter than both the 1980 and the 1990

long form, but the short form is the shortest since 1820, so we will

get that taken care of. But it is streamlined so that, frankly, the

questions that are asked are all questions that in some way link

up with responsibilities and mandates that we do have.

I wanted to also pick up on what Chairman Miller said with regard to that American Communities Survey. First of all, I am very

pleased that he mentioned that the long form will be preserved for

this coming census. And subsequent to that, I know there are tests

that are taking place, and I would applaud you for having hearings

to find out whether or not that more timely data does work out better.

Mrs. MALONEY. I just would like to really ask both of you a very

brief question. In the appropriations process, the idea has come up

that agencies that use the questions should pay for them, and this

usually comes from the appropriations subcommittee Chair who

has to deal with the cyclical swings in census funding.

OMB has argued that the administrative burden of handling the

budget with questions through nearly a dozen appropriations subcommittees is inefficient. Rather, they argue, that it should be

treated as a governmentwide investment and funded through a single agency, and I would like to ask both of you your response to

that question, whether it should be funded through a single agency

or through the appropriations process as some have recommended.

Mrs. MORELLA. I think it should be funded by the appropriations

process for all of them. If you were to look at what the cost would

be of getting the data that is on that census for the private sector,

for the public sector, for all of the localities, for every entity, it

would be astronomical, and we are talking about only $400 million.

In the Government Reform and Oversight Committee just today,

we had a measure that dealt with looking at regulations in terms

of what the costs would be and whether or not there are any benefits that would be weighed. I would submit that the cost of even

that agency, you know, would be higher if they were to look at

every regulation. And when you think about what that cost would

be to the private sector, it would just be so very high, we couldn't

afford it.

Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Canady.

Mr. CANADY. I haven't fully evaluated the arguments on both

sides of this issue, but it would be my inclination to think it is easier and makes more sense to fund this on a unified basis and not

try to divide it up. I think you just get into complications and fights

over, well, you get different groups using the same data, who is

going to pay for that, how do you divide that up. This is the responsibility of the whole government, and it ought to be dealt with on

that basis. That would be my inclination.

Mrs. MALONEY. Thank you very much. I have no further questions.

Mr. MILLER. Mr. Davis of Virginia.

Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. Just a couple questions. Some in the Census Bureau and the professional statistical lobby have argued that

we can use statistical estimation to determine the population of the
29

country; that estimates would then be used to divide up political

representation to govern America. They claim that this statistical

information, in their estimation, based on a sample of roughly 1 in

100 Americans would be more accurate than actually trying to

count everyone.

Now, my question is, if taking a sample of 1 in 100 is good

enough to decide how Americans will be governed over the next

decade, why do we need to take a sample of 1 in every 6 Americans

to find out how many bedrooms a person has in their house and

how far they drive to work? It seems to me that we have our priorities all wrong here. Doesn't it make sense that if you give the 1

in 100 being good enough to choose the government, that we take

a sample of 1 in 500 or 1 in 1,000, or any comments on that?

Mr. CANADY. I think we should have an actual enumeration, and

we should count everybody for the basic purpose of the census.

There are other things we are accomplishing through the census

through the long form which I think are valuable from the public

policy perspective, but when it comes to the fundamental constitutional requirement for a census, I think we would be making a serious mistake to do anything other than actual enumeration as is

specifically provided for in the Constitution.

Mrs. MORELLA. The American Statistical Society and all of the

other scientific organizations have felt that the sampling, as so described and so implemented, is what is appropriate.

Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. Actually that is not quite accurate. There

are some groups that do and some that don't.

Mrs. MORELLA. But, I mean, it just seems as those that have

been recognized of long standing have gotten together and felt that

way. But I am sure you will find disagreements on both sides, so

I defer to their expertise.

Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. That is all I got.

[The prepared statement of Hon. Thomas M. Davis follows:]

^2-019 OQ.I
30

STATEMENT OF REP. TOM DAVIS OF VIRGINIA

SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE CENSUS

MAY 21, 1998

I would like to personally thank Chairman Dan Miller for holding this oversight hearing

on the 2000 Census and the use of the Long and Short Form Questionnaires. We clearly have a

very interesting agenda of witnesses, including my good friend from across the Potomac

Congresswoman Connie Morella and the gentleman from Florida Congressman Canady. I look

forward to an open discussion ofthe two questionnaire formats.

In this Congress I have co-sponsored House Concurrent Resolution 38 which was

introduced by Representative Morella. This resolution expresses the sense of the Congress that

the ancestry question on the Long Form should be preserved. 1 have worked closely with many

organizations from my District that represent a cross-section of all Americans. Overwhelmingly

they have called for the preservation of the ancestry question on the Long Form during the 2000

Census.

Italian-Americans, Scottish-Americans, Korean-Americans, Irish-Americans, ArabAmericans and many others are all united as Americans, however they also understand and value

the importance of their heritage and desire to have ancestry data included in our Census process.

We all depend on accurate information and the ancestry question gives us invaluable insight into

our communities and ethnic constituencies. It is an important source ofsocial and economic data

about our population.

Those who use ancestry data include: State, county, and municipal governments;

educators and human service providers; corporations; researchers; political leaders; and many

Federal agencies. The ancestry question provides important insights into who we are as a people,

how are neighborhoods are constituted, and how we are changing demographically. It is said,

"how can you know where you are going, if you do not know where you have been." This

information helps us understand where we have been and where we may be going as a Nation.

Once again, I extend my thanks to Chairman Dan Miller for holding this important

hearing.
31

Mr. MILLER. Mr. Davis of Illinois.

Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And

let me also commend you for convening these hearings. I think the

information that we are attempting to gather is certainly helpful

and beneficial.

Both of you have indicated the desirability of making use of the

long form. Representative Canady, you talked about getting information about a specific group, say, caregivers. Do you think that

there might be any number of other groups that people would want

to include in the data gathering and whether or not we reach the

point where you have got a cutoff, you have got to say this is all

we can take? And if that be the case, then how do we make the

determination about which sets of data are in and which ones are

out?

Mr. CANADY. Representative Davis, I think you are absolutely

right. Obviously you have to establish some priorities. You can't

ask every question everybody wants to ask you. You can't focus on

every group that everyone wants you to focus on.

The only point I make with respect to family caregivers is that

it is an issue that really affects all Americans potentially, and that

I believe that that should be a priority. Others, obviously, may

reach a different judgment. You would have to bring your common

sense to that and your experience in the legislative process concerning what information will be most available and will actually

be useful to us from a public policy standpoint. And there is nothing magical about it, and I realize that people in good faith can

have disagreements about what the priorities should be.

Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Please don't think that my question is an

indication that I don't agree with you. As a matter of fact, I think

the kind of information that you are seeking to get is some of the

most important data that we could possibly have, especially since

I spent many years of my life as a health planner. That kind of information certainly would be helpful in making determinations.

Representative Morella, we always talk about cost, and there is

just no way that you can get around it. What kind of cost differential would you see in making use of the long form versus a shorter

version of a form?

Mrs. MORELLA. Well, the statistics I have, Mr. Davis, are that it

would be about $400 million. When you consider what we save by

virtue of this information all being compiled as scientifically and

accurately as we can do it, I think it saves a tremendous amount

of money.

Mention has been made of health care facilities. I point out the

ancestry question. The number of ESL classes that you might need,

the number of schools that you might need in terms of children, the

kind of housing you might need, all of this information comes to

the fore from the long form, and you would not get it on the short

form. I know, as I said, only 1 out of every 6 people will be looking

at the long form.

Transportation, as you mentioned, is a problem in our area and

other parts of the country with mass transportation. And because

of Chairman Miller, I am working very hard on good radar at National Airport to make sure that your trips are going to be safe.
32

Will Rogers, incidentally, on an entirely different point, had the

answer to the problem of traffic congestion. The area I live in has

a very high level of traffic congestion, and he said the way to handle that is to pass a law which would say you could not have any

car on the road unless it was fully paid for by the person driving

it. Think about that. That might work out.

So I would simply submit that when you consider all of the kinds

of information that we use that comes from the census and that

$400 million is less than one-tenth of the cost of the total census;

it is worth an awful lot more them what we pay to get the information. Even in terms of shopping centers, where do you locate shopping centers, where do you locate the amenities the caregivers

need, the census is very helpful.

Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. So you are suggesting it is really a minor

investment from which we will get a tremendous amount of return,

so cost would not be prohibitive in any kind of way?

Mrs. MORELLA. You stated it very well.

Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Canady, one other question. Again, it

relates to the question of cost. There are some people who suggest

that if we want all of this additional information, and that if different users are requesting it, then perhaps some of the extraneous

information beyond baseline data should be paid for by the users,

by the requesters, and by the people who are suggesting that we

ought to have it. Could you respond to that, and also respond to

the question of who would make the decision about the cutoff of

data? I mean, who would decide what goes in and what goes out?

Mr. CANADY. Well, the subcommittee will know better how the

process currently works than I do. But ultimately, as a matter of

law, we can decide certain things are going to be included, and that

is why I filed the bill that I filed, because I believe this is one thing

that is right to be included. But I also believe that you on the subcommittee are right to look at the whole range of issues associated

with this, and if there are things that are being asked that don't

need to be asked or should not be a priority, then those could go.

But we are here in the Congress, and we have ultimate responsibility for ensuring that the census is carried out, so I think that

really the buck stops with us, as the Congress, to make those judgments, or to set up a process which we authorize for those judgments to be made.

Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. I have no further questions, Mr. Chairman.

I thank you very much and would suggest to both the witnesses

that I share many of the comments that you have made.

[The prepared statement of Hon. Danny K. Davis follows:]
33

STATEMENT OF DANNY K. DAVIS (11^7)

"Reviewing The Long and Short Form Questionnaires'1

May 21,1998

Subcommittee on the Census

Mr. Chairman, I want to commend you for

convening this hearing regarding a review of

the new long and short form census

questionnaires. In addition, I would like to

thank our distinguished witnesses for taking

the time to share their expertise with us as it

relates to this component ofthe 2000

Census.

The questionnaire forms we discuss today

are critical to determining resource

allocation for communities throughout the

country. In addition, these forms raise a

number of questions with respect to the

questions asked, the number of questions,

and the issue ofhow we will identify race.

Perhaps the most contentious issue is that of

race identity since the new form for the first
time allows an individual to mark offmore

than one race.

However, I am certain that the witnesses will

be able to address the areas of contention

with respect to the race questions.

I am pleased that there have been several

improvements in the short and long forms.

For example, the short form contains 6

questions, down from 9 in 1990. The long

form contains 5^ questions, down from 57 in

1990.

I would like the witnesses to speak to the

likelihood ofpeople not returning forms

because they may be too invasive. In

addition, is there a projected number of

forms that likely will not be returned?

Again, thank you for convening this hearing

and I look forward to hearing from our

distinguished guests.
35

Thank you.
36

Mr. MILLER. Mr. Blagojevich.

Mr. BLAGOJEVICH. NO questions.

Mr. MILLER. Thank you all very much for being here with us

today.

Why don't we wait a minute while the table gets set up for our

next panel.

If you all will remain standing. Raise your right hands.

[Witnesses sworn.]

Mr. MILLER. Please be seated. Thank you.

Let the record show that all the witnesses answered in the affirmative.

Welcome. Thank you all very much for coming. Your official

statements will be put in the record, and we ask you hold your

comments to 5 minutes because we have a panel of four. We will

proceed along, and then we will go through with questions by members of the panel.

Mr. Hubbard.

STATEMENTS OF JAMES B. HUBBARD, DIRECTOR OF ECONOMICS, AMERICAN LEGION; WEN-YEN CHEN, PRESIDENT, FORMOSAN ASSOCIATION FOR PUBLIC AFFAIRS; DAVID CLAWSON, PROGRAM DIRECTOR, AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF

STATE HIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATION OFFICIALS; AND

MARLO LEWIS, JR., VICE PRESIDENT FOR POLICY, COMPETITIVE ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE

Mr. HUBBARD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will be brief.

I am here today on behalf of the 2.8 million members of the

American Legion, and I am here to speak in favor of the long form.

Question 20 on the long form, and there are three parts to it, relate to data as to where veterans are. And when you coordinate

that with the location of the person answering the form, you know

where veterans live.

The Department of Veterans Affairs budget is approximately $43

billion. The discretionary portion of that is about $17 billion. The

allocation of that $17 billion depends on data collected on the long

form. The Veterans Employment Training Service at the Department of Labor has a budget of about $160 million. Virtually all of

that money is allocated based on where veterans reside. The positions funded at the State level who handle veterans' employment

issues are allocated and funded based on the veterans population

of each State.

Having said that, I will tell you that the American Legion is committed to assisting the Bureau of the Census in completing a full,

complete and accurate count of the population of the United States.

We did that in 1990, and we did it in 1980, and we mean to make

a difference in having a complete and accurate count this time

around. Thank you very much.

Mr. MILLER. Thank you, Mr. Hubbard.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Hubbard follows:]
37

STATEMENT OF

JAMES B. HUBBARD, DIRECTOR

NATIONAL ECONOMIC COMMISSION

THE AMERICAN LEGION

Before the

SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE CENSUS

COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM AND OVERSIGHT

US HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

May 21, 1998

Mr. Chairman, on behalf of the 2.8 million members of The American Legion, I

thank you for the opportunity to appear today. At the outset, let me say that The

American Legion endorses the Year 2000 Decennial Census. We will undertake

several efforts to ensure a complete, accurate count of all residents residing in

America's communities.

Beyond an accurate count there Is a very important reason to use the long form.

The long form records veterans' census information. There are two major

agencies of the United States Government that depend on accurate data from

the long form to make resource allocation decisions that effect all veterans. The

Department of Veterans Affairs relies on the long form to determine the proper

location for hospitals, clinics, cemeteries and some other VA facilities. The

allocation of discretionary funds based on where veterans reside amounts to

some $17 billion. Attempting to guess where to allocate this much money

without accurate data would be a major problem and will adversely impact on

VA's ability to properly meet the needs of America's veterans.

The Veterans Employment and Training Service at the Department of Labor

requires accurate census data to deal with the employment problems faced by

veterans when they leave the armed forces. Chapter 41 of Title 38 USC

requires the Secretary of Labor to assign some field staff based on the veteran

census. Each state has a Director of Veterans' Employment and Training.

Section 4103 further requires the Secretary to assign one Assistant Director of

Veterans Employment and Training for every 250,000 veterans and eligible

persons in the state veteran population.

Section 4103a of Title 38 USC requires the assignment of one Disabled

Veterans' Outreach Program specialist for every 6,900 veterans residing In each

state. Specialists are Vietnam veterans, veterans who entered active duty after

May 7, 1975, or disabled veterans. This data is only available from the Bureau

of the Census based on an accurate sampling of the veterans population derived
38

from the long form. Further, Section 4104 of Title 38 requires that at least 1,600

Local Veterans Employment Representatives be assigned to the various states.

An accurate count of veterans, as determined by the Decennial Census, assists

in developing the formula used to assign Local Veterans Employment

Representatives.

The long form also helps the veterans' service organizations collect accurate

data on the homeless veteran population. This information allows us to better

serve their needs. Experts estimate that 750,000 Americans are homeless on

any given night in this country. At least one third are veterans. One third of that

number served during the Vietnam era. In our major cities the percentage of

veterans in the homeless population could be in excess of 50 percent.

According to the National Coalition For Homeless Veterans (NCHV),

approximately fourteen percent of all homeless veterans have a spouse and

dependents. The International Union of Gospel Missions (IUGM) conducts an

annual survey of America's homeless. According to the 1997 survey, 32 percent

of the 11,000 homeless surveyed are veterans. Ten percent of those veterans

served in the armed forces during the Desert Storm era.

According to the Veterans Administration, veterans do not generally show up in

their homeless programs until ten years after their discharge. Considering past

experience, the number of homeless Desert Storm veterans seeking treatment

and services from VA will increase significantly in the near future. The American

Legion recognizes the challenges faced over the years in properly and

accurately documenting this group of Americans. The use of the long form will

assist the federal, state and local governments in better serving the needs of

homeless veterans and homeless Americans

Mr. Chairman, The American Legion is committed to ensuring a complete and

accurate census. We will be notifying our Posts, in some 15,000 communities

across the nation, of the national need for an accurate census count. We will be

asking those Posts that own facilities to make them available for training centers

for census enumerators and for the gathering of census data forms collected by

those enumerators. We will be encouraging our members to become census

workers and census supervisors in the communities where they live.

Our members are "on duty" across the nation. We are perpetuating the good

works we have accomplished for seventy-nine years through an array of

community oriented programs. Our 4 million members of The American Legion

family: The American Legion, Auxiliary and Sons of The American Legion are

making a difference in the lives of our fellow citizens. The collective good we

perform does not make headlines but is does make a difference. We mean to

make a difference in this Decennial Census.
39

Attached to this statement is Resolution 2 passed unanimously by the National

Executive Committee of The American Legion on May 6, 1998. Mr. Chairman,

this concludes the statement of The American Legion.
40

NATIONAL EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

OF

THE AMERICAN LEGION

INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA

MAY 6-7,1998

RESOLUTION NO.: 2

SUBJECT: SUPPORT FOR DECENNIAL CENSUS IN THE YEAR 2000

WHEREAS, The 2000 Census ofPopulation and Housing marks the 210th anniversary of

the first national census in 1790, as mandated by the U.S. Constitution; and

WHEREAS, The census serves as the statistical foundation for the nation, providing

information for equal representation in the U.S. House ofRepresentatives, state

legislatures, and local elected governing bodies; and

WHEREAS, The census produces the information used by the federal and state

governments to return billions of dollars annually to the nation's local governments for

many worthwhile purposes; and

WHEREAS, The census supplies vital demographic and socio-economic statistics to

governments at all levels and to the private sector for the economic benefit of all

communities; and

WHEREAS, The Decennial Census will produce valuable facts about America's veterans

that will be essential for The American Legion in developing its policies and programs;

and

WHEREAS, A successful Decennial Census requires cooperation from all residents of

the United States of America; now, therefore, be it

RESOLVED, By the National Executive Committee ofThe American Legion in

regular meeting assembled in Indianapolis, Indiana, on May 6-7,1998, That The

American Legion endorses the Year 2000 Decennial Census; encourages its

members to support public cooperation with the Year 2000 Decennial Census by

undertaking various employment, promotion, and outreach projects in conjunction

with their local government leaders and the Bureau of the Census; and agrees to

publicize this endorsement to patriotic and veterans communities as well as to the

public at large.
41

JAMES B.HiiBBAKn

DiRErroR. NATIONAL EroNOMir COMMISSION

THE AMERICAN LEGION

James B. Hubbard is a native of Michigan. Bom in Manistee. Michigan in 1943. he was raised in

Ludington, Michigan where he graduated from high school in 1961. After completing his BA in History

from Western Michigan University in 1966. he attended ROTC camp and entered active duty with the

United States Army in December. 1966.

During his military career Jim served as a platoon leader in an Infantry Battalion in Vietnam,

platoon leader in a truck company, aide-de-camp, executive officer to an Army Command staff section and

commander of a transportation company. His military schooling includes Armor Officer Basic Course,

Transportation Officer Basic and Advanced Courses, and the Jungle Operations Course at the U.S. Army

School ofthe Americas in Panama. Jim's service in the army has taken him to Ft. Eustis, Virginia, Ft.

Knox, Kentucky, Ft. Hood, Texas, Ft. Meade, Maryland, and two different bases in Vietnam. He retired

from the Army by reason of a service connected disability in February, 1973.

Joining The American Legion national staff in January of 1977, Jim accepted a position as

Assistant Director for National Security. He was promoted to Deputy Director for National Security in July

of 1979 and served in that capacity until February of 1989 when he accepted a promotion to his current

position. As Director of the American Legion National Economic Commission Jim serves as the primary

staff liaison with the Department of Labor for veterans' employment issues, with the Department of

Veterans Affairs for vocational rehabilitation and home loan guaranty issues, with the Small Business

Administration for veterans' small business loans, and with the Federal Office of Personnel Management

for veterans' preference in federal hiring. Mr. Hubbard is the current chair of the Secretary of Labor's

Advisory Committee on Veterans' Employment and Training. He also serves as the primary liaison with

the International Association of Personnel in Employment Security and the Interstate Conference of State

Employment Security Agencies. He is an ex-officio member ofthe ICESA Veterans' Committee.

Mr. Hubbard's military awards include the Silver Star, Bronze Star, Army Commendation Medal

with Oak Leaf Cluster, Valorous Unit Award, Presidential Unit Citation, Meritorious Unit Commendation,

and the Vietnamese Cross of Gallantry with Palm.

In addition to his BA in History, Mr. Hubbard holds a Master's Degree in Business Administration

from Marymount University, Arlington, Virginia.

Prior to joining the national staff ofThe American Legion, Jim worked in managerial positions for

the Hechinger retail home center chain in the Washington, DC, area.
42

The Arnerican

Legion

for Coo t^a Co

WASHINGTON OFFK* * 16M "K" STIWrr. N.W * WASHrNOTON. DC. 200(M-2M7 »

(2021W1-2700 *

for Goa M* Covnlt,

N4iy21. 199S

Honorable Dm Miller. Ctuimuui

Conunittee on Govemmoit Reform ind Ovenighl

Subcommittee on the Census

HM14 O'Neill House Office Building

Washington, DC 205IS

Dear Mr Chainnui:

The Amehcan Legion received i 598,982 federal grant from the US Depamncm of

Labor in August 1996 The purpose of the grant is to identify and evaluate milniry

occupational specialties that have application to civilian careen that require a license or

certificate. The American Legion has not received federal monies relevant to the subject

oftoday's hearing on the Year 2000 Decennial Census

Sincerely.

'lames B Hubbard; Director

National Economics Commission
43

Mr. MILLER. Professor Chen.

Mr. CHEN. Mr. Chairman, on behalf of the Taiwanese American

community, I thank you for providing me with this opportunity to

brief the members of the Census Subcommittee on the concern of

the Taiwanese Americans about the upcoming census 2000.

In the 1990 census, about 80,000 respondents identified themselves as Taiwanese under the race question; 193,000 marked Taiwanese as their ancestry because the ancestry question listed Taiwanese as an example. This discrepancy is caused by the fact that

in the census 1990, Taiwanese was not listed as a separate category under the race question, while it was explicitly listed as an

example under the ancestry question.

Even today, the Census Bureau cannot provide us with the number of Taiwanese Americans that reflect reality. The Bureau simply

doesn't know how many Taiwanese Americans there are in the

United States. That is the reason why Taiwanese Americans have

campaigned for many years with a reasonable request: We want to

be counted.

Specifically, our campaign is directed at urging the census 2000

to list Taiwanese as an option under the race question, question

No. 6, with a separate check box along with Asian, Indian, Chinese,

Filipino, Japanese, Korean and Vietnamese, and publish this data

on Taiwanese Americans, and make them available to the public.

In a letter in response to the above request, the Census Bureau

cited several reasons for excluding Taiwanese Americans despite

the recommendation for the inclusion by the Census Advisory

Board. Each of the reasons is unjustified.

First, the Census Bureau stated that Department of State has

requested that we, the Census Bureau, do not place the Taiwanese

category in the race question because it may cause diplomatic problems with the People's Republic of China. The census is our Nation's internal matter. It has nothing to do with international relations.

Second, the Census Bureau asserts that Taiwanese Americans

are not included because of severe space constraints on the form.

This only is a technical problem which can be easily solved.

Third, the Census Bureau recommends that including Taiwanese

Americans may confuse respondents and lower the quality of the

data. We believe that the opposite is true.

These excuses cannot form the basis for excluding Taiwanese

Americans from being counted.

Let me explain why Taiwanese Americans believe that question

No. 6 of census 2000 should have a separate check box for Taiwanese Americans. First, the State Department's position that separate categories for Taiwanese Americans may cause diplomatic

problems with the People's Republic of China is unacceptable. The

U.S. census is a constitutionally mandated population count. It

gathers detailed information for various domestic purposes, such as

equal access in housing, education and employment. Accurate demographic data are also very important for business and community groups to provide services for specific communities. It has

nothing to do with international relations. To let a national matter,

such as census, be sabotaged by the fear of how the People's Re-
44

public of China might react is un-American and totally inappropriate.

The State Department in a letter, in response to the Census Bureau's request for policy guidance in reference to listing Taiwanese

as a separate category, asserts that they are not aware of any generally accepted basis for a race of Taiwanese distinct from Chinese.

To make such a claim, the Department of State must be unaware

of the definition of race contained in the OMB's Directive No. 15

on Race and Ethnic Standards for Federal Statistics and Administrative Reporting. According to Directive 15, race and ethnicity

should not be interpreted as being primarily biological and genetic

in reference. Race and ethnicity may be thought of in terms of social and cultural characteristics as well as ancestry. Furthermore,

self-identification is the preferred means of obtaining such information.

Three years ago, the House and Senate passed legislation establishing that Taiwanese Americans can list Taiwan as the place of

birth in their passport, instead of China. The U.S. Immigration and

Naturalization Service maintains separate quotas for Taiwanese

and the Chinese. If these two Federal agencies could maintain separate quotas for Taiwanese, why cannot the Census Bureau?

Three, we also strongly disagree with additional arguments put

forth by the Census Bureau. In the affirmation letter, the Bureau

claims that there is no space on the current form for a separate

check box for Taiwanese, and an additional category may cause the

respondent to lower the quality of the data. The problem can easily

be solved by slightly adjusting the design of the format. There is

space on the form.

Finally, I would like to point out that 62,000 Samoan Americans

have their own check box. Those of Chamorran descent of Guam,

totaled over 130,000, they have their own check box. By contrast,

400,000 or 500,000 Taiwanese Americans do not.

Mr. Chairman and ranking member of the subcommittee and

subcommittee members, I would like to thank you and staff director Dr. Hofeller for your open-mindedness in this matter and your

willingness to listen. Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Chen follows:]
45

Mr. Chairman, on behalf of the Taiwanese American community, I

thank you for providing me with this opportunity to brief the

members of the Census Subcommittee on the concerns of Taiwanese

Americans about the upcoming Census 2000.

In the 1990 Census, about 80,000 respondents identified themselves

as "Taiwanese" under the race question. 192,973 marked "Taiwanese"

as their ancestry because the ancestry question listed "Taiwanese"

as an example. This discrepancy is caused by the fact that, in the

Census 1990, "Taiwanese" was not listed as a separate category

under the race question, while it was explicitly listed as an

example under the ancestry question. Even today, the Census Bureau

can not provide us with a number of Taiwanese Americans that

reflects reality. The Bureau simply does not know how many

Taiwanese Americans there are in the United States.

That is the reason why Taiwanese Americans have campaigned for many

years with a reasonable request: Km want to bm cotmtmd!

Specifically, our campaign is directed at urging the Census 2000

to:

List "Taiwanaa*' aa an option nndax tho raoo qnaatlon (qoaatloo #6)

with a aapaxata chack-off boa along with Aalan Indian, Chinaaa,

Filipino, Japanaaa, Koraan and Viatn•aaa, and coda and pobliah
46

these data on Taiwanese Americans, and male* them readily available

to the public.

In a letter in response to the above request (See: page 8), the

Census Bureau cited several reasons for excluding Taiwanese

Americans, despite the recommendation for inclusion by the Census

Advisory Board. (See: page 9) Each of these reasons is unjustified.

First, the Census Bureau stated that "The Department of State has

requested that we (i.e. the Census Bureau) do not place a

"Taiwanese" category in the race question because it may cause

diplomatic problems with the People's Republic of China." The

census is our nation's internal affair. It has nothing to do with

foreign relations.

Second, the Census Bureau asserts that Taiwanese Americans are not

included because of "severe space constraints on the form." This is

only a technical problem, which can easily be solved.

Third, the Census Bureau claims that including Taiwanese Americans

"may confuse respondents and lower the quality of the data." We

believe that the opposite is true.

These excuses can not form the basis for excluding Taiwanese

Americans from being counted.

2
47

Despite the fact that Members of Congress such as Representatives

Berman, Deutsch, and Senator Murkowski have approached the Census

Bureau and the State Department with our plea, our plea has fallen

on deaf ears.

Let me explain why Taiwanese Americans believe that question 6 of

the Census 2000 form should have a separate check-off box for

Taiwanese Americans:

1. The State Department's position that a separate category for

Taiwanese Americans may cause diplomatic problems with the People's

Republic of China is unacceptable. The U.S. Census is a

constitutionally mandated population count. It gathers detailed

statistical data for various domeatir purposes, such as equal

access in housing, education and employment. (See: page 10)

Accurate demographic data are also vital for business - and

community groups to provide services for specific communities. It

has nothing to do with International relations. To let a national

matter such as the Census -the scientific count of American

citizens- be sabotaged by the fear of how the People's Republic of

China might react is un-American and totally inappropriate. This is

in flagrant contradiction with the basic principles on which our

nation was founded.

The Department of State, In a letter in response to the Census

3
48

Bureau's request for policy guidance in reference to listing

"Taiwanese" as a separate category, asserts that they are not aware

of any generally accepted basis for a race of "Taiwanese" distinct

from "Chinese." (See: page 11) To make such a claim, the Department

of State must be unaware of the definition of race contained in the

U.S. Office of Management and Budget Directive No. 15 on Race and

Ethnic Standards for Federal Statistics and Administrative

Reporting. According to Directive 15, race and ethnicity "should

not be interpreted as being primarily biological or genetic in

reference. Race and ethnicity may be thought of in terms of social

and cultural, characteristic* as well as ancestry." Furthermore,

"salf-idantification is the preferred means of obtaining

information about an individual's race and ethnicity." (See: page

10)

Let me remind you again that the Census Advisory Committee itself

has recommended that during the Census 2000 a separate category

should be included for Taiwanese Americans.

2. Three years ago, the House and Senate passed legislation

establishing that Taiwanese Americans can list "Taiwan" as place of

birth in their passports instead of "China." The U.S. Immigration

and Naturalization Service maintains separate quotas for Taiwanese

and Chinese. If these two federal agencies could maintain separate
49

quotas for Taiwanese, why can't the Census Bureau?

3. We also strongly disagree with the additional arguments put

forward by the Census Bureau. In the aforementioned letter (See:

page 8) the Bureau claims that there is no space on the current

form for a separate check-off box for "Taiwanese," and "an

additional category may confuse respondents and may lower the

quality of the data." The problem can easily be solved by slightly

adjusting the design or the format. There ia space on the form.

This trivial excuse should not be used for not collecting important

and accurate census information.

Furthermore, by stating that an additional category may confuse

respondents and lower the quality of the data, the Bureau

underestimates the Taiwanese American community.

In the 1990 Census, to be counted as a Taiwanese, one had to first

check "Other Asian Pacific Islanders," then write "Taiwanese" in

the blank space provided. Not knowing that "Taiwanese" was an

acceptable option, many Taiwanese became confused and responded

inconsistently. As a result, only 80,000 identified themselves as

"Taiwanese" under the race question. 192,973 people marked

"Taiwanese" as their ancestry and 253,719 wrote "Taiwan" as their

birthplace, because these two questions had clearly listed

"Taiwanese" as an option. So including a check-off box for
50

"Taiwanese" will improve the quality of the data, not lower it.

The position of the Census Bureau to not include a separate

category for Taiwanese Americans under the race question is not

consistent with the OMB guidelines which encourage the collection

of more detailed information on population groups, provided that

"any additional categories can be aggregated into the minimum

standard set of categories." (See: page 12)

Finally, I would like to point out that 62,000 Samoan-Americans

have their own check-off box. Those of Chamorran descent in Guam

total no more than about 133,000. They have their separate

check-off box. By contrast, the 400,000 or 500,000 Taiwanese

Americans do not.

We Taiwanese Americans believe in the principle that the Census

should be free from political bias and arbitrary decisions.

Taiwanese Americans want to be counted. It is that simple and

clear. No one -not even the Census Bureau- knows how large the

Taiwanese American population in the United States is.

Accurate demographic data are vital for business - and community

groups trying to provide services for a targeted community. For

instance, in 1993, the Los Angeles-based General Bank attempted to

access data on Taiwanese Americans as part of its research for
51

expansion into northern California. Eventually, the Bank had to

forgo the expansion because such information was not available. In

addition, the Taiwanese American Citizens League regularly receives

requests for demographic data on the Taiwanese American community

from church groups trying to organize their activities. Again, the

Census Bureau can not provide this information. It is simply not

available.

This committee hearing is the first step -but a major step- towards

fulfilling the wish of Taiwanese Americans to have a check-off box

for "Taiwanese" under the race question, and thus be counted.

Mr. Chairman, ranking Member Congresswoman Maloney, Subcommittee

Members, I would like to thank you and staff director Dr. Thomas

Hofeller for your open-mindedness in the matter and your

willingness to listen.

The Cmnma 2000 -at the start of the nmw millennium- provides m

unique opportunity to right a wrong.

Thank you.
52

PEB-10-98 TUE 10:55 Aft US CENSUS POP DIV FfiX NO. 3014572644 P. 02

/SN

vSy

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

BufII of the Cmnmu*

W..lw^ioo. DC 202M-OOO1

Febni«y 10.1998

Wen-yen Chen, Ph.D

Presldenl

Fonnosan Association for Public Affiirt

SS27lh Street S.E.

Washington, D.C. 20003

Dear Dr. Chen :

Think you for your letter to John Long requeiting that Taiwaneae" be listed on the Census 2000 form

Wc appreciate your interest in obtaining accuraie data on the Taiwanese population.

The Census Bureau plant to use "Taiwanese" as an example On the ancestry question for Census 2000

just as it did In 1990. but it has no plans to include a separate category for Taiwanese in the race question.

Tho current categories in the nee question w«n arrived at through a comprebrmivc consultation and

lasting proouss to elicit the best possible mformation on the race question given the severe sooce

constraints on tho form Our testing program for race and ethnic origin included two national tests ond

utemlvc cognitive research conducted by Census Bureau staff and by a Census Bureau contractor. The

results from this testing program show that the current categories ore understood by respondents and

provide good quality data on race. Additional categories may confuse nspondents and lowr-r the auolitv of

the data We will, however, code the Taiwanese write-in responses in uic utner /tsian wrile-m line

separately from the Chinese responses as we did in the 1990 census.

Additionally, the Department of State has requested that wc do not place a "Taiwanese" category in the

race question because It mav cause diolranalic otobieim with tho Peoole's Rcmiblic of China. 1 suggest

•tut you contact the Depanment of State directly concerning me objections to the Department's position

raised in your letter.

Thank you for your Interest in oar wait, and If you need fonher clariflcauon, please contact me on (301)

4S7-2379 on the Issue of Toiwanaae and the ancestry question and Dr. Jorge del Final (301) 457-4 875

regarding Taiwanese and the race question.

Sincerely,

///fimJauJi' iwnfcManuel de u Puonte, Ph D

Chief, Klhnie and Hispanic

Sloiisties Branch
58

ee-d 6*i8l 966T-eT-nON

RECOMMENDATIONS OP THE

CENSUS ADVISORY COMMITTKUN THE

ASIAN AND PACIFIC ISLANDER POTOLATIONS

MADE AS A RESULT OF THE MEETING ON DECEMBER 1-2, 19M

•Flao* '•ktiwi ••*ila»' mm m mmomxmf emtmgory to ba groiyd la tb*

••ctloc wltJb I^Mt aM JLIMU. tlMraby teI«tlB« It fro* ck* iL*i*n

Pacific lalaator catcgocv* Mitiva Mwaiiaaa «r* people At MtM&iitt blood,

JM••! <»• tbc orl«iB*l Mtl«M of IMMii.*

i «bc lasuM pruanccd by tha Cn•Itt** aad

•aafeaca oi UM •awiita rn•ialty. «a will forward your ••iWll to

the offio* of IHTIIB•ant and »ttd»at (CHB) 1A0 will a^oa cba daeiaion

*bout cba elaaaifioatlfm of -lutiv* baHailaaa* aa part of Cbair laxyax

review at fftatiatieal Directive IS. siraaciva It, idOeh aev olaeeifiea

"•MKiian* In tbe #Aaiaa aad Moiflc Zalaader* eate«ocy, prevldea racial

ead etheie «eldeliaea for all Fateml l

coetiaea witfc Liatia« cba baidb aad paalfio taA aadar takfro^a

•Maiataiw tbe conoept of llatiag tbe Aaiaa Veeific lalcaicr eobarovpe

Mperatalir. aa wet dona la tba 19M eaaaoa. the apaeific liatia«a are yet

to be dacewjned.*

to teat alternative veraioaa of cba reoe quectiee

in tba lf*« baticaei oaataat Teat aad tba IMC baea aed ttfeaidty taz«ated

Taat (bum. Maarml taac veraioM will iaeluda apecif ie baiaa aad

Pacific xalaader mibqra^m. boweiar, aeveral of tba teat vaaaicaa of cba

nurr will be baaed on reooavaadaticna free tbe am raviaa prooaaa.

xt mmmmm I» D«i*ted. mdd w&mmm •• wmtHm fa* mt. m

-it eaeeatry la •••froa tbe Hat of «ieaclcaa la cba 20H oaaaoa, add

Talvcaeaa mm oa* of tbe aauaplea of group* tbat could be liaced in tbe

writa-in for tbe 'Otbar Aalaa Paciflo Zalaadar*

«• win ooaeidair tbe oaaactaa'a rdd•ddtl• if cfaa Moaatry lev ia

aot liMrta<ad U tbe 2000 eeuua. Tba Geaaea bureau will oeaaelt tfitb cbia

CoMlccee, tba B^ert•at of ftate, aad npreaaatativar of tbe Cb1a>aa aad

«ali«Maa < aan iti^m oa tbla laaua.
[llllli'

[flhfli

lliiliu

33

h

*. ~

IliilHI

3

S. "• S 2 « 3 =

B tt• ft. H

yiji

t8 jlll

r

li4fM

|!'f

ci?

- ° Is?! a

SET

s

i •• Sis s

liiiltli fti

»M"

lit

"•^15 = •; * ' •

lllfh

lllfUt

W

1

-^ ro."

:

? i5f

Bil!!Sft»

H'Tiiilfl

1 • S|

v

2; »l^^ 

V ~r t r- ** .. -,

flaItlf118offi

aqSassB*? 5;

m!ff!lr

.umHa O D §

»

g 3 •*<

o

if

!•'&*!<« If|?B|

2 •)

5{

BllilflfsiPff'lifll lim

" Hit

Irrs F S ^ •• C

S7
55

United Sutcs Depamnem of State

ITatluAgun, AC 20520

July 29, 1997

MEMORANDUM

TO: Manuel da la Puente, Acting Asslacant Division Chief

Special Population Statistics

Bureau of the Census

United States Department of Commerce

FROM: Sylvia G. Stanfleld, Advisor

Taiwan Coordination Staff

Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs

Dapartaent of State

SUBJECT: "Taiwanese" as a Possible Category of Race in Census

Questionnaires

Thank you for your letter of July 22, 1997, requesting policy

guidance for responding to suggestions from the public that

"Taiwanese" be listed ss a sepsrate category of race in Census

questionnaire forms.

Our position renalns the same as it was in 1917 when Deputy

Taiwan Coordination Advisor Douglas Elliee provided guidance to

your office on this question.

we are not aware of any generally accepted basis for asserting

that there is a race of Taiwanese distinct from Chinese.

We also baliev* that any listing of Taiwanese" as a raq* in a

Census questionnaire would inevitably raise sensitive political

questions because it could be misinterpreted as official U.S.

recognition of Taiwanese as a racial category chat is separate

from Chinese. This would be contrary to U.S. Oovarranent policy

and U.S. national interests. Therefore, our position is that It

would be inappropriate to list "Taiwanese" as a category of race

separate from Chinese in the Census questionaire.

Ma hope this restatement of our position is helpful. We would

be pleased to provide further information and guidance if

needed.
00

-

5

s I i I e 3 as 8 2 6-1

lllfff

If•till

i.Ill

111*}!

iflgii

lib

tbo. Ilril

"••ocag

a?••E

-2c

2

g

SS

111

gfiilti

111' tigs "-a; »

.S

fl|il|| | S'S= So

Ulilll

seiilfi

-•s aa£

liilil £iitil S 3 •"! o

3 .9E-

i

«2 «aMl

t!ii|ln"ll'ii-u!itl

illlp'

iiiltjililiii

i9hllllliiBi>if>lir

•
57

Mr. MILLER. Thank you. We will take a short recess, there is a

vote going on now, so we will go over and cast our vote and come

right back. So it will be 10 to 15 minutes before we can reconvene.

[Recess.]

Mr. MILLER. We'll go ahead and proceed. Other Members will be

returning after the votes, and there's amendments on the floor. So

I apologize that everybody is not here, but the Members are upstairs, and they will be returning.

So at this stage, Mr. Clawson, please.

Mr. CLAWSON. OK. Mr. Chairman, on behalf of AASHTO, I'd like

to thank you for the opportunity to be here and give our position

on the census issues. AASHTO represents the State Highway and

Transportation Departments in the 50 States, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, and for some time they have been urging

that the long form be included in the census. And we're glad to

hear from today's discussion that will be in the 2000 census.

It's a very significant•the responses are very significant pieces

of information for our members in the whole area of transportation

planning, the issue of journey to work, how travel trends are

changing over time. So it's very critical to us and also to the States

and metropolitan planning organizations who make quite a bit of

use of this data.

We worked•for the 1990 census, we worked closely with the Bureau of the Census. We have also worked with the U.S. Department of Transportation and the Bureau of Transportation Statistics, and we were able to develop a significant amount of data out

of the result•the information from the census that was very useful

to the State highway and transportation departments.

So we found that the data we could provide and providing it to

them on CD-Rom to let them know now about the urban area and

rural area information out of the journey to work was very helpful.

This information provides a whole range of information as far as

place of work, usual means of travel to work, number of persons

per vehicle, time of departure for work, usual time of travel and vehicles available. So there's•there's a good resource of information

there.

We used this information to develop a report with other organizations. It's called Commuting in America, and we worked on that

with the National Governors' Association, the National Conference

of State Legislatures, the National Association of Counties, and the

National Association of Regional Councils to develop an interesting

and very useful book on the whole set of data that we found out

of the 1990 census. So this provides a major resource on commuting patterns and how the country is changing.

Without having the long form information, the reports like that

and other similar work obviously couldn't go on. It would be a significant loss of data as the MPO's and the States around the country work to develop their plans and to comply with various Federal

legislation, such as the Clean Air Act and the Intermodal Surface

Transportation Efficiency Act, ISTEA

This data will certainly be very useful as the Congress considers

and approves the ISTEA reauthorization legislation. There would

be a lot of followup out of that, and, again, it will be important to
58

have that journey to work data to analyze the trends and travel

and also to comply with other legislation such as the Clean Air Act.

In 1996, there was a Transportation Research Board conference

held on the whole issue of transportation data, and it included

State transportation officials, and university representatives, and

urban and local area representatives. And they developed a number of conclusions out of that meeting. One was that the Bureau

of Census should construct a year 2000 census with a strong long

form component. The second one was that this information is really

a focal point for the metropolitan areas of the country and for the

States, as we looked at transportation problems and try to improve

them.

We also looked at the possibility of continuous measurement,

which has been talked about, and thought maybe there was an opportunity for some kind of pilot program to test that and see what

kind of results would come from that.

I guess to sum up, there are several reasons that the States and

metropolitan areas need this data, not only for Federal legislation,

but also for a number of pieces of information they need for their

local and regional area.

I'll stop there. And, again, we thank you for the opportunity to

testify.

Mr. MILLER. Thank you.

Mr. Lewis.

Mr. LEWIS. My name is Mario Lewis. I'm vice president for Policy

and Coalitions with the Competitive Enterprise Institute.

Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today on behalf of CEI. CEI is a free market

public policy institute. We specialize in regulatory issues, and we

accept no grants from any government agency.

I would like to outline three reasons for abolishing the long form.

I do not recommend immediate abolition. Too many private and

governmental interests have made plans with the expectation that

long form data will be collected in the year 2000. But by the year

2010, the Census Bureau should return to its original mission,

counting citizens for the purpose of apportioning seats in the House

of Representatives.

The first reason to abolish the long form is that it departs from

the original intent of the Constitution, with the result that the Bureau's ability to fulfill its core constitutional mission has been impaired. According to a recent Washington Times article, a dress rehearsal for the year 2000 census found nearly half the population

in the combined three test areas did not want to be counted.

People's willingness to fill out and mail back census questionnaires has been dropping for decades. The rate of return was 78

percent in 1970, 75 percent in 1980, and 66 percent in 1990. Part

of the explanation for this trend, according to Census Bureau officials themselves, is that people don't trust the government. Many

believe the information will not be kept confidential or may later

be used against them, and who can blame them? The IRS also is

supposed to protect the confidentiality of the information it collects,

and it's supposed to deal fairly with taxpayers. Has it always done

so?
59

The long form undoubtedly contributes to the distrust of government in general and the decennial census in particular.

In the public imagination, the census is increasingly identified

with the long form, and common sense tells us to be wary of those

who pry into our private business. Indeed, why would anyone nose

around in my personal affairs if not to find something he can later

use to my detriment? The long form is driving down response rates

for the census as a whole. The government's attempt to collect information beyond its constitutional mandate is interfering with its

ability to fulfill that mandate.

The second reason for abolition is that the long form is intrusive.

It's a violation of personal privacy. If some stranger on the street,

indeed if a perspective employer at a job interview, asks for information about your ancestry, age, income, marital status, race, Hispanic origin, bedrooms, plumbing facilities and so on, you might be

inclined to tell him where to go.

Just because the person collecting such data is a Federal bureaucrat does not make the process any less intrusive. Indeed you can

walk away from unwanted solicitations on the street, and you can

tell the impertinent job interviewer that you will see him in court.

But citizens have no legal recourse when the government duns

them for facts about their private lives.

That's what the late William F. Rickenbacker found when he

mounted a legal challenge to the long form. Summoned before a

grand jury in New York City to explain his actions, Rickenbacker

stated in part, quote, In the name of interstate commerce, some

government employees think they have a right to pry the roof off

of my house and watch everything I do there. Let them ask all the

questions they please; and let them answer who are disposed to answer, and keep silent who wish to keep silent; that is liberty, unquote.

Indeed, it would be a useful exercise to ask where the Constitution grants the Federal Government authority to compel citizens to

provide information about their ethnic origin, cars, bathrooms and

the rest, and then ask whether any constitutional rationale for the

long form, interstate commerce, the general welfare or whatever,

could not be used to justify ever more outlandish questions about

our private lives.

If we do not draw the line where the framers of the Constitution

drew it, what's to prevent the government from requiring us to submit data on our cash transactions, our religious beliefs, our political party affiliations or our sexual practices?

Third, the long form encourages government intervention in the

economy, social engineering and what might be called group think.

The statistical aggregates generated by the long form foster what

Nobel Laureate Friederich Hayek called the pretense of knowledge,

the conceit that one knows enough to improve upon the outcomes

of the marketplace. Armed with the long form, politicians and bureaucrats invariably discover statistical disparities in the incomes,

employment levels, educational credentials and so on among men

and women, black and white, Hispanic and non-Hispanic, and then

without further ado, they conclude that these disparities reveal

market failures, glass ceilings, unmet needs.
60

They then enact fiscal and regulatory schemes to remedy these

alleged market imperfections in the name of social justice, and

whatever good these programs accomplish, they also typically rob

Peter to pay Paul, especially if Paul is a big-time campaign contributor, a mobilized voting block or a powerful Washington lobby.

No doubt somebody here will observe that the census short form

also contains questions about ethnic and racial identity. And, in my

opinion, those too should be dropped because the Constitution is

colorblind, and the laws and policies of the United States should

also be colorblind.

Thank you very much.

Mr. MILLER. Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Lewis follows:]
61

COMPETITIVE ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE

Testimony of

Mario Lewis, Jr.

Vice President for Policy and Coalitions

The Competitive Enterprise Institute

Washington, D.C.

Before the

Subcommittee on the Census

Committee on Government Reform and Oversight

May 21,1998

Hearings on the Census

Good afternoon, my name is Mario Lewis. As Vice President for Policy and

Coalitions of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, I welcome your invitation to discuss

the Census Long Form. CEI is a public interest group established in 1984 with a current

staff oHS and an annual budget of about $2.5 million. Located in Washington. D.C,

CEI works to educate and inform policy makers, journalists, and other opinion leaders on

private voluntary and free market alternatives to government programs and regulation.

CEI also engages in public interest litigation to protect property rights and economic

liberty. CEI is supported by the voluntary contributions of foundations, corporations and

individuals We accept no grants from any government agency, nor do we accept grants

from any other party that would compromise the principled positions we espouse.

Mr. Chairman, I commend you for holding this hearing. The Census Long Form

is a federal action that will directly touch one-sixth of the households of this country

The information collected by the Long Form facilitates and shapes scores of federal

programs. The debate over the Long Form is part of a broader debate about the proper

scope and limits of federal power. It is with an eye to that wider debate that I will frame

my remarks.

lODI Camcacil Avmit NVK • Sum 12» • Welnvrxi. DC 200)6

Phonr. (202) Ml.1010 • FKC (202) MIOMO • E-mail: m/cKflcnofl • Vtefe we hlip^/wn axiorf

52-019 99-3
62

I. Dress Rehearsal Bombs

According lo a recent Washinglon Times article.' a "dress rehearsal" lor the year

2000 census reveals that "nearly halfthe population doesn't want to be counted." In 12

South Carolina counties 46% ofthose who received questionnaires did not respond In

Sacramento. California. 47% did not mail back their census forms. On the Menomince

Indian reservation in northern Wisconsin. 60% failed to comply. These results were a big

disappointment to the Census Bureau, which took unusual steps to encourage a more

robust response. As the Times article reports:

It [the Bureau) undertook a major advertising campaign in each test area. It

mailed or delivered 460.444 meticulously redesigned census forms in multiple

languages and placed additional forms at community centers. It generated news

stories about the test and arranged for spreading the word in churches and schools

and on local cable TV. It did another thing. In a test conducted as part of the

1990 census, the bureau confirmed that the mail response rate was higher when

questionnaire envelopes contained a bold reminder that the law requires people to

respond. So it used such envelopes in the rehearsal.

Actually, people's willingness to fill out and mail back census questionnaires has been

dropping for three decades The rate of return was 78% in 1970. 75% in 1980. and 66%

in 1990. Ifthc dress rehearsal is any indication, almost half will not comply in the year

2000 Part ofthe explanation for this trend. Census officials say. is that people don't trust

the government. Many believe the information will not be kept confidential or may later

be used against them.

Who can blame them? The IRS also is supposed to protect the confidentiality of

the information it collects, and it's supposed to deal fairly with taxpayers. Has it always

done so? Has it scrupulously abstained from acts of intimidation and persecution? As

our government has grown, it has become more intrusive, less accountable, and less

respectful of individual liberty.1The Long Form itself undoubtedly contributes to the

growing distrust of government in general and the deccenial census in particular. In the

public imagination, the census is increasingly identified with the Long Form and its

impertinent questions. Common sense tells us to be wary ofthose who pry uninvited into

our private business. Indeed, why would anyone nose around in my personal affairs if

not to find something he can later use to my detriment?

Article I. Sec. 2 ofthe Constitution mandates a decennial census or "enumeration"

for a very specific and limited purpose - to apportion congressional representatives

among the states. The Census Bureau is failing to meet its constitutional responsibility to

produce an accurate head count. The Long Form is very likely driving down response

rates for the census as a whole. The government's attempt to collect information beyond

August Gribbon. "Compiler of2000 census face diminishing returns," The Washington Times, May 18.

1998, AI2

'Id

1

James Bovard, Losi Rightt: The Oesinclion ofAmerican Liberty (New Yorit: St. Martin's Press. 1994).
63

its constitutional mandate is interfering with its ability to fulfill thai mandate. That this is

happening should not surprise us. Government doesn"t do many things well, and the

more functions it assumes beyond its core responsibilities, the less well it does anything

Mali

Mr. Chairman. 1 will now present three reasons for abolishing the Long Form. I

do not recommend immediate abolition, loo many private and governmental interests

have made plans with the expectation that Long Form data will be collected in the year

2000. But by the year 2010. the Census Bureau should return to its original mission of

enumerating the population to apportion seats in the House of Representatives. After

arguing for abolition. I will then respond to some of the arguments made by defenders of

the Long Form.

II. Why the Long Form Should Be Abolished

First, the Long Form departs from the original intent of the Constitution.

The Constitution requires a census or "enumeration" of citizens (Art. I. Sec. 2). Calling

the Long Form a "census" is an abuse ofterminology. It is deceptive. Ask yourselves

this question. Would Congress dare to require Americans to submit information about

their age, ancestry, disability, education, gender, grandparents, ethnicity, occupation,

language spoken at home, marital status, race, telephone number, bedrooms, kitchen

facilities, plumbing facilities, condominium fees, and the like in a survey separate and

apart from the decennial census? 1 think not. Because then it would be clear to everyone

that the federal government was demanding more information from American citizens

than it had constitutional warrant to collect.

One can certainly admire the cleverness ofthose who decided to time this

intrusive exercise so that it coincides with the decennial census, just as one can admire

their shrewdness in calling it the Census Long Form. But calling the Long Form the

"Census" does not make it so. The Framers provided for a decennial head count and

nothing more. I can only speculate about their reasons. But they surely knew that

knowledge is power. Limited government must have limited knowledge about the

personal characteristics of its citizens if it is to remain limited and not try to run their

lives.

Second, the Long Form is intrusive - a violation of personal privacy. If some

stranger on the street - indeed, if a prospective employer at a job interview - asked for

information about your ancestry, age. income, marital status, race, Hispanic origin,

bedrooms, plumbing facilities, and so on, you might be inclined to tell him where to go.

Just because the person collecting or processing such data is a federal bureaucrat does not

make the process any less intrusive. Indeed, you can walk away from unwanted

solicitations on the street, and you can tell the impertinent job interviewer that you'll see

him in court. But citizens have no legal recourse when the government duns them for

facts about their private lives. .
64

Thai's what the lale William F. Rickcnbacker found when he mounted a legal

challenge to the 1-ong l-orni. Writing in National Review a few months prior to the

litigation. Rickenbacker declared:

I shall not answer it. Indeed. I have already lorn it up. Some day, when the

summer satrap ofthe Snooper State comes to ask me why ! refuse to contribute

my share of statistics to the national numbers game. I shall call for my lawyer.

For my house claims protection under the Fourth Amendment: 'The right of the

people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against

unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall

issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly

describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." "Go,"

1 shall say, "and report to your Snooperiors! Tell them that I shall resist this

unreasonable search! I plead the Fourth!"4

Summoned before a Grand Jury in New York City to explain his refusal to fill out

the Long Form, Rickenbacker stated, in part: "In the name of interstate commerce, some

Government employees think they have the right to pry the roof off my house and watch

everything 1 do there. Let them ask all the questions they please; and let them answer

who are disposed to answer, and keep silent who wish to keep silent; that is liberty."5

Indeed, it would be a useful exercise to ask where the Constitution grants the

federal government authority to compel citizens to provide information about their

Hispanic origin, cars, bathrooms, and the rest. And then ask whether any constitutional

rationale for the Long Form - interstate commerce, the general welfare, or whatever -

could not be used to justify asking ever more outlandish questions about our private lives.

If we do not draw the line where the Framers drew it, what's to prevent the government

from trying to collect data concerning our cash transactions, our religious beliefs, our

political party affiliation, or our sexual practices?4

Third, the Long Form encourages government intervention in the economy,

social engineering, and "group think." I'he statistical aggregates generated by the

Long Form foster what Nobel Laureate Friederich Hayek called the "pretense of

knowledge" - the conceit that one knows enough to improve upon the outcomes ofthe

marketplace. Armed with the kind of information the Long Form provides, politicians

and bureaucrats invariably discover statistical disparities in the incomes, employment

levels, educational credentials, and so on among men and women, Hispanic and nonHispanic. White and Black Without further ado. they conclude that these disparities

reveal "market failures," "glass ceilings." racial discrimination, or, at the very least,

"unmet needs." They then enact fiscal and regulatory schemes to remedy the alleged

market imperfections and achieve "social justice."' Whatever good these programs

' William F. Rickenbacker. "The Fourth House," Nalional Review, May 21, I960, p. 325.

!

"How Many Bathrooms Have You?" Nalional Rexiew. December 31, 1960, p. 399.

* Rickenbacker. "Fourth House." p. 326.

7

John T. Wendere. "Statistics: A Vehicle for Collectivisl Mischief," The Freeman: Ideas on Lthcrty. June

I99«, p. 326.
66

accomplish, they also typically rob Peter to pay Paul - especially if Paul is a big-time

campaign contributor, a mobilized voting bloc, or a powerful Washington lobby.

Statistical disparities among dilTcrcnl descriptions of citizens are inevitable in

every society. In a free society, they are the result of human action, though not of human

design." Furthermore, statistical disparities may conceal more than they reveal. For

example, comparing the difference in earnings between the bottom and top quintiles from

one decade to the next may create the appearance of a growing income "gap." In reality,

this may merely mean that more young people have entered the workforce in the later

decade More importantly, most of the people in the bottom quintile in one decade are in

higher quintiles in the next decade. They have not fallen further behind; their economic

situation has improved. In addition, many people in today's bottom quintile enjoy a

material standard of living comparable to that of the middle class of 40 or 50 years ago.

The statistical snapshot conceals the reality of an upwardly mobile society. The alleged

problem of a growing income gap turns out to be a statistical artifact, an illusion.

The mentality that views such disparities as inherently suspect and requiring

remedial government action is the root of many entitlement programs, all affirmative

action mandates, and numerous regulatory programs. It is the Zeitgeist, the ruling spirit,

of the Era ofBig Government - an era that is far from over. The Census Long Form will

help perpetuate that mentality into the 21" Century.

Much recent social commentary laments the decline of a common American

identity - a growing fragmentation along ethnic, Yacial, and gender lines. Such sweeping

generalizations about America are perhaps best taken with several grains ofsalt. The

popularity of both Seinfeld and country music would be hard to explain if America were

a nation of discrete and insular minorities. Nonetheless, there is probably something to

the widely shared perception that the political balance is shifting in favor of Pluribus and

against Unum. What is not always recognized, however, is that social fragmentation

flourishes in a politicized economy. When government manipulates the outcomes of the

marketplace along "class," gender, and ethnic lines, it fosters social discord. When

government allocates billions of dollars based on the kinds of demographic categories

enshrined in the Long Form, it promotes "group think" and nurtures a grievance industry

with a vested interest in fueling social conflict. The Long Form is part and parcel of an

approach to politics that tends to obscure from Americans their common patrimony of

liberty.

No doubt someone will observe that the Census Short Form also contains

questions about ethnic and racial identity. These, too. should be dropped, in my opinion.

America has a colorblind Constitution. We should also have colorblind laws and

policies.

' Wcnden. Id
66

III. Assessment of Arguments for Retaining the Long Form

A common argument made by defenders of the Long Form is thai many federal

programs explicitly mandate the use of census data, others are required to use census data

by the courts, and stilt others depend on census data for program planning,

implementation, and evaluation To make this point painfully obvious, the Census

Bureau has compiled detailed lists of the federal laws that explicitly require agencies to

use census data. In other words, we are to infer that abolishing the Long Form would

cripple the federal government, that it would paralyze major programs and agencies

This argument makes three dubious assumptions One is that lawmakers would

abolish the Long Form without changing the statutes mandating the use of Long Form

data. Another is that in the interval between abolition and the next census in the year

2010, federal agencies would not develop alternative, non-coercive information sources.

A third is that all the programs that currently rely on Long Form data advance the public

interest and should be maintained in perpetuity, Mr. Chairman, this is not the place to

debate the merits of particular programs However, I would simply note that the

Competitive Enterprise Institute, the Heritage Foundation, the Cato Institute, and other

free market think tanks believe that civil society, the American family, and the U.S.

economy would benefit tremendously from dramatic cuts in the size, power, and scope of

the federal government.' Furthermore, if it really is the case federal programs cannot

run without Long Form data - that is, without coercively violating the privacy of

American citizens - then policy makers ought to review the constitutional propriety of

those programs.

Another argument is that abolishing the Long Form would incapacitate state and

local governments. In an article in which several authors pretend to evaluate after the

fact the consequences ofCongress" abolition ofthe Long Form. Dowell Meyers laments

that while some information on income, jobs, education, transportation, and the like was

still available from national surveys, "data at the local level simply vanished." Meyers

reports that "Private vendors rushed to fill the void, but they competed on price, rather

than quality. After all, without census data, how could anyone judge good data from

bad?"'1

Meyers ignores the fact that data collection, analysis and provision are huge and

growing sectors of our economy. Given the importance of accurate data to marketing and

investment decisions, it is unreasonable to suppose that firms would compete by selling

shoddy products at cutthroat prices. Conceivably this might happen for a year or two if

the Long Form suddenly dropped offthe face of the earth without warning. But if local

' See Bureau ofthe Census, Planningfor the Cnrna 2000 Questions Plannedfor Census 2000. Federal

Legislative and Program Uses, March 1998.

' See, for example, CE1, The Dirty Dozen: Soft Targetsfor Elimination at Energy, Interior. A EPA,

December 1994, and The Baker's Doien: More Soft Targetsfor Elimination, April 1995; Scott Hodge, ed ,

Rolling Back Government: A Budget Plan to RebuildAmerica (The Heritage Foundation, 1995). Caio

Handbook for Congress: 105* Congress, 1997, especially "Federal Agencies: The Abolition Agenda," pp.

145-179.

11 "Life Without the Census by census data users," American Demographics, October 1995.
67

govcmmenls and pnvale dala providers had a decade lo prepare and adjust, marketplace

competition would improve quality while lowering price, as it has throughout the

information services sector

Meyers also overlooks the potential for private regulation of dala quality by

independent third parties I see no a priori reason, for example, why former Census

Bureau officials could not start the data marketing equivalent of Underwriters

Laboratories.1 Free market competition allows industry standards to evolve -

government did not have to mandate the use digital technology in the recording industry,

nor the Windows operating platform in the personal computer industry. Finally, I would

note thai some state and local governments have budgets that exceed that of the Census

Bureau; collectively their budgets vastly exceed that of the Commerce Department. If

slate and local governments are really so keen lo keep tabs on people's bathrooms and

ethnicity, the private sector will figure out how to furnish such data via non-coercive

methods.

Another argument is that businesses will lack the demographic and income data

required for predicting consumer demand in local markets In the same fanciful article

looking back from the year 2003. Marcia Mogelonsky complains that without blockgroup-level data on income, supermarkets can no longer calculate consumer demand for

many grocery items. "Most food shoppers live within a two-mile radius of their primary

food store,'1she observes.I3 But this fact undermines her thesis, just eyeballing the

neighborhoods within a two-mile radius should give the local proprietor a pretty good

idea of income ranges and distribution Proxy data such as housing values available

from real estate brokers or property tax assessors - might be used. Supermarkets could

pool their resources lo buy marketing data on a discounted basis. If business really needs

the kinds of data supplied by the Long Form, then business should pay for it, not the

taxpayer. Nor should taxpayers be coerced into providing it, as they are today.

Writing in the same article, Keith Wardell argues that private purveyors of

marketing data will do just fine in a world without the Long Form. "Customer lists are

fairly easy to enhance without the census. For a mailer's house file, enhancement with

third-parly databases, such as INFOBASE, or direct surveys of customers can begin to

replace information provided by the Census Bureau," he says. Warden's fanciful

retrospective is worth quoting at length:

Prospecting for new customers may also be increasingly effective without a

census. Marketing information built huge and detailed consumer databases for

prospecting in the 1990s. Questionnaire programs grew significantly. These

come in many variations, including warranty cards, solo mail, and ride-alongs

from companies like Polk/NDL, Shareforce, and Buyer's Choice. In addition, a

number of marketing information companies began combining customer files

from many different mail-order companies in order to better understand

On this general subject, see Ycsim Milmaz, "Private RcguUnun A Real Altenulive for RcgulaltKy

Reform (Caio Instimie Policy AnaUsis No. 303), April 20. I99S

"Id.
consumers. These include Abacus, DMI's SmartBase, and Direct Tech's

Z24 As these databases grew, they provided more accurate targeting

information than was provided by the census long form The use ofthe data

provided by the census was already on the decline by the time the 2000 census

became available.14

Mr. Chairman, I do not pretend to be an expert in the evolutionary dynamics of

the data marketing industry. But common sense suggests that if Long Form data are so

valuable to business, then abolishing the Long Form will confer a boon on data marketing

companies. Demand for their products and services will soar. Cutting government will

create private sector jobs.

IV. Conclusion

That consideration, however, is ofsecondary importance. To recapitulate,

abolishing the Long Form will allow the Census Bureau to concentrate on its

constitutional mission to produce an accurate enumeration of citizens for purposes of

apportioning representatives in Congress. It will reduce government's coercive intrusion

into the private lives of American citizens. And it will de-politicize or privatize the

collection ofdata, perhaps deflating somewhat the pretensions ofthe grievance mongers

and would-be central planners. A national debate over abolition ofthe Long Form would

also have immense educational value, reminding Americans how far our government

system has strayed from its original constitutional design.
69

Mr. MILLER. Let me start off with a question for Professor Chen.

You stated that the Census Bureau says there's going to be diplomatic problems with the People's Republic of China if they included

the Taiwanese question; is that right?

Mr. CHEN. That's correct.

Mr. MILLER. Why?

Mr. CHEN. Well, that's a statement issued by the Department of

State, because the Census Bureau requested some sort of policy

guideline from the State Department, and the State Department in

their reply indicated that listing Taiwanese on the question No. 6

may cause diplomatic problems with the People's Republic of

China. And at this point we strongly disagree, because we believe

that the census is purely an internal affair, it has nothing to do

with international relations, and that should not interfere with the

domestic problem.

Mr. MILLER. Taiwanese is very separate from Chinese?

Mr. CHEN. I think the race is defined as self-identification, and

we believe that Taiwanese is different from Chinese from a cultural

point of view.

Mr. MILLER. That's interesting. I'm a little baffled by what the

State Department is involved in deciding questions in our questionnaire.

I mean, I have concerns how many classifications we can provide

on the form, but right now there's 400,000, 500,000 of Taiwanese

descent living in this country. What do you base that on?

Mr. CHEN. Because based on the United States, it allows 20,000

people to immigrate from Taiwan every year since 1982. So by cumulating the amount•the number of the people coming into the

United States, and we estimate the number plus the second generation, we estimate somewhere between 400,000 and 500,000, because we don't have precise number. That's what we're asking for.

We need a precise number to know how many we are, where we

live, and so on and so forth.

Mr. MILLER. What's your opinion abou+ the ability to check off

more than one block?

Mr. CHEN. That is a difficult issue, but I think that should let

people decide whether they should identify themselves as Chinese

or as Taiwanese.

Mr. MILLER. Mr. Hubbard, is there any information you feel

we're not getting from the census for veterans? I mean, are we getting the information that you think is adequate right now, as far

as the number of veterans and such?

Mr. HUBBARD. The decisions that are made by the Department

of Veterans Affairs and the Labor Department for allocation of

funds are based on the veterans population, which is extrapolated

by the VA, by county, about a year late, and that seems to be a

good way to do it now.

I believe it would be helpful in some fashion to know the number

of disabled veterans in the population, because services by the

Labor Department are primarily targeted at disabled veterans.

Right now, those people have to self-identify when they walk into

a job service office to seek employment services from the veterans

staff.
70

A question about the disability ratings and the number•or

whether or not an individual filling out a census form is a disabled

veteran might be helpful.

Mr. MILLER. Explain to me what the other sources of information

on veteran data is from the veterans census.

Mr. HUBBARD. The Bureau of Labor Statistics collects in their

household data survey information about veterans. The problem is

that title 38 right now only requires data about Vietnam-era veterans, and if you look around, some of us are getting a little long

in the tooth. We need data on all veterans, not just Vietnam veterans, to properly serve the veterans population.

Mr. MILLER. Mr. Lewis, on the short form, what did you feel was

not needed on the short form?

Mr. LEWIS. The questions about ethnic and racial identity. It

seems to me that the purpose of the census is to count American

citizens for purposes of enumeration, and•I mean, for purposes of

apportionment, and that, it seems to me, requires one man, one

vote or one woman, one vote. Ethnicity seems to me an irrelevant

consideration from the point of view of apportioning Representatives.

Mr. MILLER. YOU say American citizens. Do you think noncitizens

residing in the United States should not be counted?

Mr. LEWIS. Well, they shouldn't be counted for purposes of apportioning seats probably, right?

Mr. MILLER. Well, I think the court ruled if you're a resident of

the United States, we•yes.

Mr. LEWIS. OK.

Mr. MILLER. OK. As I said before, the long form will be part of

the census in year 2000. Some of the information we can collect

that is requested I think can maybe even be more effectively collected in the proposed new program that the Census Bureau is

evaluating, and that decision will be a few years off. So the information you're requesting, for example, in transportation will be included in this one, though, as I said, I had a problem. I couldn't

answer that question personally in the Census Bureau long form

for the upcoming 2000 census.

Mr. LEWIS. Mr. Chairman, may I clarify my answer to your question?

Yes, obviously it's good to count citizens and noncitizens. We

should have a count of that. So I think the appropriate question

to ask in the census is: Are you an American citizen or are you not?

Take down that information, and then basing representation, however, on those who are eligible to vote by virtue of their citizenship.

Mr. MILLER. I think the courts have ruled differently from the

citizenship question.

Mr. LEWIS. OK.

Mr. MILLER. Mr. Davis.

Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Dr. Chen, you indicated that the State Department•was it the

State Department that gave the answer or the Census Bureau?

Mr. CHEN. Yes, I did. I think it's in my testimony. There's an attachment, the letter written by the State Department counsel in regard to the listing of Taiwanese as one of the categories in question
71

No. 6, and they responded by saying that it may cause diplomatic

problems with People's Republic of China.

Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. They didn't indicate that that may have

been the reason it wasn't listed 10 years ago or 20 years ago or 30

years ago?

Mr. CHEN. The partisan was formulated in 1987.

Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. OK.

Mr. CHEN. Yeah.

Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. And it was a problem then, I guess, also.

Mr. CHEN. Yes, indeed. That's why we've been trying for so many

years to convince the Census Bureau to correct that wrong.

Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. So they were saying they just as soon not

create

Mr. CHEN. I suppose.

Mr. DAVIS of Illinois [continuing]. Unnecessary difficulty if they

could prevent it?

Mr. CHEN. But our position is very clear. This is pure domestic

affairs and should not let any foreign power interfere with our domestic activity.

Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. I was just looking at the form, and I guess

there could be room.

Mr. CHEN. Yes, indeed. That's why we're arguing for it. They give

us the excuse there is no room. And may I add, we are not asking

a new question, we are asking for a check in a box in that little

space. That's all we are asking for.

Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. OK. Mr. Lewis, you indicated a lot of things

in your testimony. One of those was that the long form in some

way had helped contribute to distrust of the government. Do you

have any evidence to support that or any information or studies or

anything that would help one arrive at that assumption?

Mr. LEWIS. I'm afraid, I don't, not in terms of hard data; a survey, for example, conducted by the Census Bureau as to whether

people are not filling it out because it's too long, or it's too intrusive. But over the years I've talked to many people about the census form, and a lot of people that I've talked to say, why do they

want to know that about me?

And the article in the Washington Times which spoke about the

declining response rates did say that one reason why people are not

filling out their forms and mailing it back is because they don't

trust the government. Now, you have to ask why is that? And it

stands to reason•again, I haven't•I don't have an actual survey

to prove it, but it stands to reason that asking a lot of impertinent

questions of people is one thing that is making people distrustful

of the questionnaire itself.

Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. What is the purpose of the Competitive Enterprise Institute?

Mr. LEWIS. Our purpose is to develop, promote alternatives, private voluntary alternatives, market-based alternatives, to government regulation, coercive regulation.

Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. So you would be in favor of a more laissezfaire kind of government, I would suspect?

Mr. LEWIS. Yes. And, in fact, I would have far less objections to

the long form if it were voluntary, if people had the option of just

saying, no, I don't want to fill it out. To me the main consideration
72

is not the expense of it, not the $400 million, but the fact that you

are required to answer these questions.

Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. And do you not find any usefulness for this

data that is generated?

Mr. LEWIS. I think the data is useful for a lot of purposes. I certainly am aware that there would be no way of abolishing the long

form without also changing the legislation which requires agencies

of the Federal Government to make use of it. I'm not proposing

here that the tail wag the dog and we change the whole way the

Federal Government operates by abolishing an information source

which has now become a premise of Federal policy.

But I also believe that we are in an incredibly rich society, that

$400 million is a lot smaller than the budgets of many cities, certainly of all the States; it's smaller than the budget that some

major companies spend on marketing; and that if we gave the private sector 10 years to adjust, to prepare, and the same with the

cities, the counties, the Federal Gfovemment, we would find that

we would do pretty well without the long form.

Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, could you indulge me one additional question for

the other panelists? And that is would you respond to Mr. Lewis'

position that we really don't need all of this information that we're

talking about gathering?

Mr. HUBBARD. Mr. Davis, I believe that at some point in his presentation, Mr. Lewis talked about government bureaucrats sticking

their noses into peoples faces, or words to that effect. A lot of our

members will be out there as enumerators working for anything,

any time, from 6 weeks to 90 days helping a nonresponse fofiowup,

and I don't think they're bureaucrats. They're dedicated Americans.

They're veterans. They served their country once. They're still on

duty. They vote. They're good citizens, and all we want is an accurate count. And if we're going to spend $17 billion of Department

of Veterans Affairs dollars, our tax dollars, we better know where

to spend it. Right now the only source of that information is the

long form.

Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Thank you.

Mr. CLAWSON. From our organization, we feel that the long form

provides the key data that we need in looking at issues like congestion and the deterioration of our infrastructure and things like

that. With congestion, which we read quite a bit about in the papers, the long form information helps us to look at the trends, see

where the problems are headed and try to make some adjustments

in those areas. So it's useful data for that.

It's also very useful for the larger point of the economy. It helps

us to know things about people's journeys to work, and also how

the commuter patterns are impacting such things as the cars on

the highway with the trucks and what impact that's going to have

into delay of goods by having that mix and by having that congestion.

Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Thank you.

Dr. Chen.

Mr. CHEN. Yeah, our community is very anxious and eager to

participate in a census count. And again, we have no specific position in terms of long form or short form. But as long as the census
73

is done fairly, accurately, free from political bias, our community

is ready to participate.

Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Thank you gentlemen very much. And

thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your indulgence.

Mr. MILLER. Mr. Snowbarger.

Mr. SNOWBARGER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I apologize to

the witnesses for being late.

One comment or observation I would make, Mr. Hubbard, to your

remarks, I didn't take Mr. Lewis' comments against government

bureaucrats as reflecting on census takers. There are government

bureaucrats around every day, and if you don't understand that

people are suspicious of government bureaucrats, I think you're

missing something that's pretty obvious to all the rest of us.

I think that distrust, very frankly, will affect those of your members who decide to become a part of the census count, not because

of their own behavior, not because there's anything personal toward them, it's just a general suspicion.

And while I'm talking with you, I might ask how•it looks to us,

from other testimony that we've had, that in the year 2000, if we've

got a strong economy like we do now, there may be a real difficult

time in getting folks to help with the census. Your organization obviously is stepping forward to be a part of that.

What kind of efforts have you gone to in terms of recruitment?

Are you at that phase yet, or is this something that the organization plans to do in the future?

Mr. HUBBARD. We are not at that phase yet, Mr. Snowbarger.

One of the other things I do in connection with my employment at

the American Legion is serve as the alternate representative for

the American Legion on the Census Advisory Council. In that capacity, I chair the work group on recruiting and staffing.

There will be a report about March of next year with regard to

all of the issues being examined by the Advisory Council, one of

which will be recruiting and staffing. We will be taking up some

of those questions at the 11th and 12th of June meeting of the Advisory Council, and at that point we can probably•speaking now

as the American Legion•can probably target its efforts. We will

use every means at our disposal to let our membership know that

this is the right thing to do; that, No. 1, fill out your form; No. 2,

come help with the census.

Mr. SNOWBARGER. Were you involved in the 1990 census?

Mr. HUBBARD. Yes, sir, we were.

Mr. SNOWBARGER. And you had good cooperation from your membership at that point?

Mr. HUBBARD. I was not involved in the 1990 census in the capacity I am now, so I'm not very much aware of what we did as

an organization. However, I am sort of the lead person this time

around and will be coordinating our communications efforts

through our magazine, through our bimonthly tabloid publications,

through communications with the State organizations and so forth.

We are in the process of coaching regional census offices on how

to interface with State organizations, how to recruit, where to recruit, how many of our posts have post homes and facilities that

could serve as training sites in gathering the data, and so forth and

so on. We plan to be there in a big way.
74

Mr. SNOWBARGER. AS you know, we can use plenty of help, and

we appreciate the efforts from your organization.

Mr. Clawson, let me ask several questions here about how this

affects highway and transportation. I guess, obviously, we're concerned about the quality of the census count, particularly for apportionment and redistricting, and this is an additional burden on that

system at this point. I mean, I don't think anybody could deny that.

The question is that if for some reason we weren't able to rely

on that long form, whether it's because it's been more difficult getting information in than we would like, or it's dropped altogether,

how do you envision us collecting the information that might be

necessary for particularly transportation departments and metropolitan planning organizations to do their jobs?

Mr. CLAWSON. I think in that case it would turn out that the

States and regions would somehow try to collect the data on their

own; the urban areas would do some kind of thing to make up for

it. Although, I don't think they could do it as thoroughly as the

data they get out of the census. It would take the State and local

resources.

The problem with that is that by having one long form, we have

data that's uniform as far as how the questions were asked and

that sort of thing. If we have to go to 50 different surveys or surveys from the metropolitan planning organizations, we lose that

kind of information. It's much more difficult to pull it together to

look at the travel trends and to consider solutions for transportation.

Mr. SNOWBARGER. But if my city planning commission, or my

State highway department for that matter, are trying to answer

and address questions about infrastructure, why are they concerned about traffic patterns in Washington, DC, or traffic patterns

in New York City or someplace else? What's that going to tell

them?

Mr. CLAWSON. Well, to take a congestion issue again, it gives you

a common base for determining how congestion is changing over

time on the national level, for example. So it provides a much better comparability of the information by having one uniform set of

data collected.

Mr. SNOWBARGER. Well, again, I'm not sure my local officials

want to say, our streets are more congested than yours, or our

streets are less congested than yours. They want to get rid of the

congestion. And most of that has been done, at least in my experience, at the State and local level, most of that has been done with

local information and not the Federal information.

The Federal information probably figures in there more than I'm

aware of at the staff level. But, I mean, in terms of trying to figure

out whether your roads are congested, you drive home from work

at night, and you can tell one way or another.

And, for instance, I know our school districts do an awful lot of

this demographic kind of information, so they know how many

schools to build and where and all of those kinds of things, but

most of those are based on studies that they have done privately

and not on the Federal census, which is accurate only for a very

short period of time. As you get further into the decade, you've had
75

to adjust them statistically to keep up, and that may or may not

be accurate.

Mr. Chairman, my time has expired, thank you.

Mr. MILLER. Let me thank you all for being here today, and we

appreciate your comments and information you provided us for the

census. Thank you very much.

We will take a very short recess while the table gets rearranged

for our next two witnesses, our third panel here.

If you all would rise, and I'll swear you in.

[Witnesses sworn.]

Mr. MILLER. Thank you. Please be seated, and let the record reflect that the witnesses have stated that they answered in the affirmative.

Ms. Samhan.

STATEMENTS OF HELEN SAMHAN, VICE PRESIDENT, ARAB

AMERICAN INSTITUTE, COCHAIR, WORKING GROUP ON ANCESTRY; AND DAVID CROWE, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF

HOME BUILDERS, STAFF VICE PRESIDENT FOR HOUSING

POLICY

Ms. SAMHAN. Yes. Thank you very much.

Mr. MILLER. We're going to hold ourselves to 5 minutes, and then

we will have some questions.

Ms. SAMHAN. Thank you very much for including us. I'm very

pleased to represent the working group on ancestry in the U.S. census. We're a coalition of ethnic organizations and researchers and

scholars from around the country who are very concerned about the

continuous measurement of ethnicity in the census.

We came together about 2 years ago to make sure that there was

Emblic awareness of the importance of the ancestry question on the

ong form. And since then, we have developed an ever-increasing

interest in educating our own populations of tens of millions of ethnic Americans around the country about the importance of the census in general and how important it is to fill it out.

I guess my most important point to you this afternoon is to say

that we fully support the continued measurement of all the questions on the long form, and our particular concern, of course, is

keeping the question on ethnic ancestry. We believe that measuring the demographic and socioeconomic data on our American

population is absolutely essential to understanding who we are as

a Nation.

Since its inclusion in the 1980 census, the ancestry question has

proven an invaluable resource to our government at all levels, to

policymakers and researchers, to the media, to businesses and to

ethnic communities ourselves. We believe that it captures an essential component of the American identity, and that is our ethnic origin and heritage. In fact, people take so much pride in their ethnic

heritage and believe it is so much a part of their American identity

and are comfortable with that, that even at the suggestion that the

Census Bureau might have to drop the question on ancestry, there

was immediate outpouring from all over the country of ordinary

citizens of all ethnic backgrounds, and predominantly European

ethnic backgrounds, who wrote to us at the working group to say.
76

please, tell the Census Bureau that we must continue to measure

ethnic identity.

The ancestry question is different from the race question in that

it allows for self-identification regardless of race or nativity. There

are questions on the census that measure race and measure how

long the person has been here from, let's say, the foreign-bom generation. But the ancestry question is unique because it allows all

Americans to identify with one or more ethnic origin, and this is

not duplicated or available in any private endeavor.

We believe that because a central benefit of the census is to track

the growth and movement and mobility of all of our population

groups, that it is necessary to maintain the range of data and the

size of the sample that the Census Bureau has already recommended.

Some of the uses of ancestry data I have indicated in my testimony, and I won't go through all of them, but I would underscore

that there are private sector uses, but many, many public sector

uses. We know that school systems and social service agencies and

local governments rely on ancestry data because there is not sufficient data from the race question to answer all of the needs of their

demographic situation. We know that Federal courts have required

ancestry data, because there have been instances of discrimination

based on national origin, and they need data from the ancestry

question to back that up. There are also many economic and research uses.

And I would like to close with the use by just citizens and citizen

groups like our organization and the many, many organizations in

our coalition, and that is that it's a two-way street. The identification of ethnic Americans around the country is useful for elected

officials and civic leaders to be able to identify and communicate

with those ethnic communities on a range of issues, both domestic

issues as well as foreign affairs, but it's also imperative for ethnic

communities like ours, which are mostly run by volunteers, to be

able to know who or where our communities are, how to mobilize

them, and, quite frankly, how to help them in the process of becoming American, of becoming citizens, and in many cases just increasing the civic involvement of ethnic Americans.

I just want to end with two examples, specific examples, of the

kinds of things we learn from ancestry data. In Fairfax County,

where I live, and where Congressman Davis represents me, we

know that a full 93 percent of the county's population identified

with one or more ancestry. But we also learned that three-fourths

of that population would not have been identified had it not been

for the ancestry question, because they were not identifiable in the

race question. And that represents at least 47 specific ethnic communities, and as those of you who know Fairfax County and know

the demographic diversity of that community, you understand how

important it is for school systems and county agencies to understand the changing population there.

Another example of how important ancestry data is for communities like mine, I represent the Arab American Institute, and we

know that there are often negative stereotypes that are associated,

however much we might try to erase them, with certain ethnic

groups. And we know the reality that often ethnic achievement and
77

promoting information about ethnic achievement can defy negative

stereotypes. So I have given you some information about the fact

that of many of the Middle Eastern communities that I work with,

for example, the percentage of educational achievement in our communities is much higher than the national average. And I think

that's the kind of information that we would like to continue to promote.

I just want to end by saying that the communities that are in

our ethnic coalition of our working group really cut across all partisan lines, geographic lines and from all national origins, and we

support the continued measurement of ethnicity on the long form.

And we appreciate the initiatives that you have taken with the

subcommittee, and we continue to want to work both with the subcommittee, as well as with the Bureau, in assuring the best possible count for the year 2000. Thank you.

Mr. MILLER. Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Samhan follows:]

52-019 99-4
78

2 Working Group on

£ ANCESTRY

in the U.S. Census S

Statement of the

Working Group on Ancestry in the U.S. Census

before the

House Subcommittee on the Census

May 21, 1998

by

Helen Hatab Samhan

Vice President, Arab American Institute

Co-chair, Working Group on Ancestry

The Working Group on Ancestry in the U.S. Census is a national coalition

of ethnic organizations and researchers who came together in May of 1996 to

support the continuation of the ancestry question and the long form in the 2000

census.

Our diverse group is committed to raising public awareness about the

importance of the decennial census and the data collected on the long form. We

believe that collecting demographic and socio-economic data on the American

population is essential to understanding who we are as a nation and where we ate

headed. As organizations representing tens of millions of Americans who relate

to their ethnic origin, we are concerned in particular with keeping the question on

ancestry on the census long form.

Since its inclusion on the long form in the 1980 census, the ancestry

question has proven an invaluable resource to our government at all levels, to

policy makers and researchers, the media, businesses, ethnic communities, and to

the American public. It captures an essential component of the American

identity-our ethnic origin and heritage. In fact, people take so much pride in

Arab American Institute Foundation 1 National Italian American Foundation

918 Sinrcmh Strrct. NW. SuiK 601. Wajhington, DC 20006 I860 19" Slrrel. NW, Wuhingloo. DC 20009

(202) 429-9210 (202) 429-9214 fax. hMm)un®arib-aai.org (202) 387-0600: (202) 387-0833 fix: eliubcl®ni«f.org
79

their ethnic origin that even the suggestion that the Census Bureau might not

collect data on ethnicity prompted an outpouring of communications to our

working group from over 600 ordinary citizens from 26 states demanding to keep

measuring ethnicity in the census.

Ancestry data from the census offer the only reliable picture of how the

population identifies. Unlike questions that collect information on race and

Hispanic origin, or are limited to the immediate immigrant generation and their

children, the ancestry item allows for self-identification regardless of race and

nativity, resulting in a national self-view that cannot be and is not duplicated in

any private endeavor. And because tracking the growth, movement and socioeconomic mobility of population groups is a central benefit of the census, it is

necessary to maintain the range of data and the size of the sample proposed by

the Census Bureau to ensure accurate evaluation of ethnic communities.

Some of the specific uses of ancestry data are:

Public sector uses. Social service, educational, health and other local/state

agencies depend on ancestry data for outreach and needs assessments of

population groups in their community. Federal courts have also required ancestry

data to guard against discrimination based on national origin. However, since

ancestry data are collected separately from data on race in the census, they are

not utilized in connection with programs or policies related to affirmative action.

Economic uses. Businesses and corporations from manufacturers and retailers to

the telecommunications and telemarketing industry depend on accurate and

reliable ethnic data for market research and economic expansion. Private

collection of such data would lack the objectivity, comparability and level of

geographic detail provided by census methodologies.

Research uses. Social scientists, journalists and other researchers rely on census

long form data to study individual population groups, demographic trends,

specifically patterns of acculturation, economic and educational mobility and

citizenship.

Chic uses. Elected officials and civic leaders consult ethnic constituencies on

numerous occasions to solicit their feedback on policy issues and government
80

initiatives of concern to their communities and ancestral countries. Ethnic

organizations depend wholly on ancestry data from the census to identify, locate

and mobilize their constituencies to guarantee full participation in the civic life of

the country.

Let me give you a few examples of how this information is useful in

tracking the growth and progress of our ethnic communities:

• In Fairfax County, where I live, in the heart of Congressman Davis'

district, we see from the last census that 93% of the county's population

identify with one or more ancestry. We also see that 47 ethnic groups

representing 3/4s of this population were only identifiable through the

ancestry question. This is information that could not have been captured

by the race question alone. Local agencies and schools in Fairfax

County, like elsewhere, rely on the census as their only source to track

the rapidly changing populations they serve.

• Another thing we learn from census data is how the jeality of ethnic

achievement often defies negative stereotypes. One example:

Americans with origins in the Middle East have exceptionally high

educational achievement. Only from the census can we know that 36%

of Palestinian Americans, 41% of Turkish Americans, 56% of Iranian

Americans and 60% of Egyptian Americans hold a college degree or

higher, compared with the overall population which averages 20%.

America's ethnic communities are united around the critical importance of

entering the new millennium with complete information about our country and its

changing demographics. Knowing the basic social, economic, civic and identity

factors that shape our communities, states and nation is essential. The

technological breakthroughs now available to government agencies should allow

us the efficiency and cost savings we need to measure more for less. At the very

least, we need to maintain the long form at its present sample level with the

questions included in the Census Bureau's submission to Congress on March 30,

1998.
81

In closing, the Working Group on Ancestry would like to commend the

Census Bureau for the message of professionalism and inclusion it continues to

convey to our constituencies. In all the years I have worked on ethnic

measurement, the Bureau staff has always represented the best of responsive and

responsible public service. The tens of thousands of Americans affiliated with our

coalition applaud the Bureau for including ancestry as one of the questions on the

2000 long form. We also commend Mrs. Morella and her colleagues who have

taken the lead in speaking out for the continued collection of useful data in the

census and its importance to so many Americans.

This testimony is respectfully submitted on behalf of the organizational and

individual members of the Working Group on Ancestry and I request permission

to enter the list into the record.
82

Organizations

Working Group on Ancestry

in the U.S. Census

(Members as of May 1998)

Advocates for the Rights of Korean

Americans

Mr. Sang K. Park

American Arab Anti-Discrimination

Committee

Mr. Marvin Wingfield

American Association of Physicians of

Indian Origin

Mr. Neil Parekh

American Council of World Federation

of Hungarians

Mr. Laszlo Papp

Mr. Sander Taraszozics

American Folk Life Center

Mr. Alan Jabbour

American Hungarian Federation

Mr. Ferenc Kapitany

American Latvian Association

Mr. Martins Zvaners

American Muslim Council

Mr. Abdurahman Alamoudi

American Slovene Congress

Mr. Milan Kravanja

Americans for a New Irish Agenda

Ms. Rita Mull an

Mr. Brian O'Dwyer

Arab American Institute

Mrs. Helen Hatab Samhan

Ms. Maya Berry

Arab Community Center for Economic

and Social Services

Mr. Ismael Ahmed

Armenian American Cultural Association

Ms. Rita Balian, President

Armenian Assembly of America

Mr. Tim Jemal

Ms. Arpi Vartanian

Armenian Cultural Organization of

Minnesota

Mr. Todd Abrahamian

Armenian National Committee of

America

Mr. Aram Hamparian

Assembly of Turkish American

Associations

Ms. Guler Koknar

Assyrian Foundation of America

Martin Jacob, President

Assyrian Television of San Francisco

Mr. George Geevargis

Assyrian Universal Alliance Foundation

Mr. Simon Nouri

Council for the Development of French

in Louisiana

Ms. Elaine Clement

Daughters of Penelope

Terry Dacles

Diocese of the Armenian Church of

America

Father Vertanes Kalayjian
83

Ethnic Materials & Inrormation

Exchange Roundtable

American Library Association

Mr. Vladimir F. Wertsman

Federation of Polish Americans

Mr. Dale Denda

Ms. Marilyn Piurek

German American National Congress

Mr. Merl E. Arp

German Heritage Society of Greater

Washington DC

Ms. Jane Schleicher

German Society of Pennsylvania

Mr. Bernard J. Freitag

Hellenic American Women's Council

Ms. Christine Warnke

Hungarian American Coalition

Rev. Imre Benalan

Hungarian Reformed Federation of

America

Mr. George Dozsa, President

Immigration History Research Center

Dr. Rudolph Vecoli

Mr. Joel Wurl

International French-Creole Cultural

Society

Mr. Gilbert Martin

Ireland Institute of Pittsburgh

Irish-American Labor Coalition

Mr. Joseph Jamison, Director

Irish American Unity Foundation

Robert C. Linnon

Irish Americans for Democratic

Leadership

Ms. Nancy Donohoe

Mr. Bruce Morrison

Irish National Caucus

Father Sean McManus

Iron Range Research Center

Ms. Debra L. Fena

Italian American Democratic Leadership

Council

Mr. Robert Blancato

Japanese American Citizens League

Mr. Bob Sakaniwa

Leadership America, Inc.

Ms. Nonna Doneghy Anderson

Institute for the Puerto Rican/Hispanic

Elderly

Ms. Sulcika Cabrera Drinane

Institute for Urban Research

Dr. Robert B. Hill

Multicultural Community Partnership

Ms. Samira Hussein

National Albanian American Council

Mr. Ilir Zberka

Ms. Lindila Imamj

Institute of Language and Cultures of

the Americas

Mr. Hemando Caicedo, President

International Demographic and

Economic Associates

Dr. Samia El-Badry

National Asian and Pacific American

Legal Consortium

Ms. Karen Narasaki

Mr. Gaulam Rana

National Association for

Armenian Studies & Research, Inc.

Mr. Manoog S. Young

Dr. Simon Simonian
84

National Association for the

Advancement of Colored People

Mr. Hilary Shelton

National Association of Croatian

Americans

Mr. Steve Rukavina

National Center for Urban Ethnic

Affairs

Dr. John Kromkowski

National Coalition for an Accurate

Count of Asian Pacific Americans

Mr. Henry Der

National Council of La Raza

Mr. Eric Rodriguez

National Ethnic Coalition of

Organizations

Mr. William Fugazy

National European American Society

Professor Paul BurcheK (ret)

National Federation of American

Hungarians

Ltszio Pasztor

National Federation of Filipino American

Associations (NAFFAA)

Mr. John Meligrito

National Hispana Leadership Institute

Ms. Nancy Leon, President

National Italian American Foundation

Ms. Elizabeth O'Connell

Near East Alliance

Ms. Sarah Yeraka

NE Michigan Genealogical Society

Mrs. Jcanette Nowakowski

NY Pulaski Day Parade Committee

Mr. Tom Wojslawowicz

Office of Multicultural Services

Ms. Dorothy Gonzales

Organization of Chinese Americans

Ms. Daphne Kwok

Pennsylvania Heritage Affairs

Commission

Mr. Joseph Ellas

Persian Speaking and Middle Eastern

Community Services (PAMECS)

Dr. Moji Agha

Philippine American Heritage

Foundation

Mr. Jon Melegrito

Polish American Congress

Ms. Sophia Miskiewicz

Mr. John Mirecki

Mr. Paul T. Sosnowski

Polish Arts ft Culture Foundation

Mr. Ludomir Kitajewski

Polish Institute of Arts ft Sd. of America

Dr. Thaddeus V. Gromada

Portuguese American Leadership Council

Mr. Ron Cruz

Rusin Society of MinnesoU

Ms. Mary Lynn Donovan

Slovak League of America

JohnKarch

Slovene National Benefit Society

Mr. Joseph Evanish

Society for German American Studies

United German American Committee

Mr. Volker K. Schmeissner

Mr. Joseph Fallen

The Sheridan Circle

Mr. Tom Donahue
Ukrainian Museum Archives

Mr. Andrew Fedynsky, Director

Ukrainian National Association

Eugene M. Iwanciw

Ukrainian National Information Service

Mr. Volodymyr Chornodoisky

United Polonia

Mr. Michel Pawlowski

World Lithuanian Community

Mr. Rimas Chesonis

Dr. Alixa Naff, Curator

Falls Church, VA

Dr. Eugene P. Nassar

Utica College

Utica, NY

Ms. Alice Robbin

Florida State University

Tallahassee, FL

Dr. Michael W. Suleiman

Kansas State University

Manhattan, KS

Individuals

Dr. Ayad Al-Qazzaz

Carmichael, CA

Mr. George Bisharat

Hastings College of Law

San Francisco, CA

Mr. Hayan Charara

Queens, NY

Ms. Julia Clones

Washington, DC

Ms. Rita M. Gerona-Adkim

Arlington, VA

Dr. Paula M. Hajar

New York. NY

Mrs. Randa Fahmy Hudome

Washington, DC

Mr. Julian E. Kulas

Chicago, 1L

Dr. John Moses

Utica, NY

Ms. Linda L. Tse

Dept. of Public Libraries

Rockville. MD

Mr. Raymond W. Wangelin

Minneapolis, MN

Mr. David Wilhelm

Chicago, IL .

Dr. J.W. Wright

Washington, DC

Mr. John J. Zogby

Zogby International

Utica, NY

Ms. Corinne Mudarri

Cambridge, MA
86

Mr. MILLER. Mr. Crowe.

Mr. CROWE. Thank you. Good afternoon, Chairman Miller, and

members of the subcommittee. Thank you for the opportunity to

testify in support of the continued collection of useful demographic

and socioeconomic information in the 2000 census.

As I hope you will see from our submitted testimony and from

my comments today, we believe that the census information establishes a basic infrastructure for sound decisionmaking in virtually

every sector of our economy. Without it, the decisionmakers in this

country would be steering a very large ship without either map or

compass.

My name is David Crowe. I'm a staff vice president for the National Association of Home Builders. I also represent the Housing

Statistics Users Group on the 2000 Census Advisory Committee to

the Secretary of Commerce.

Today I'm here wearing a third hat, representing the Coalition

to Preserve Census Data of which the National Association of

Home Builders is a member. The very fact that my organization

permits this level of involvement is testimony to the importance to

the housing industry of census information.

My previously submitted written statement contains a description of the Coalition. Briefly I will just say that the Coalition is a

group of broad-based industry and professional associations and individual companies representing a wide spectrum of economic sectors who share an interest in the 2000 census long form.

Today I want to make three points about how we feel about the

long form and its importance. First, the decennial census is the

most cost effective means of collecting vital demographic and socioeconomic data about people. According to the GAG, as mentioned

earlier in other testimony, there's something like $170 billion in

Federal programs funded through data collected in the decennial

census every year. That's about $2 trillion over the 10-year span

of the information.

It's also worth pointing out, as Congresswoman Morella did, that

the long form has actually been falling in length. It was 65 questions in 1980, and 58 questions in 1990; proposed to be 52 in 2000.

That didn't seem to be a cause for the increase in nonresponse.

Second, there is currently no alternative source of reliable and

comparable data about our population and our housing for small

geographic areas, such as towns, urban and suburban neighborhoods. The census data provides a consistent foundation or benchmark for more focused data collection efforts throughout the decade

by governments at all levels.

Third, business and industry use the census data to make decisions that promote economic growth and improve the quality of life.

I would like to use the remainder of my time to give you some

examples of the business use of the data. The retail sector, for instance, relies on the information to decide the location of new

stores and the type of merchandise to stock. They need to know information about the perspective labor base so they know what their

employees will look like. They will need to know whether there was

a language issue when they open a store.

We already heard from the transportation sector.
87

In the housing industry, we use it for two reasons. We use it ourselves to understand what the current housing stock looks like, and

what the future housing stock needs to be to answer the requirements of the constituents. But it's also used by our regulators, by

the local and State governments, who have planning boards and

zoning boards and water districts who need that data to understand what's the best way, what's the best place to put new houses

and to put the infrastructure that supports them. Mortgage lenders

and the financial markets use it to predict loan demand and also

to answer underserved markets and underserved people.

Newspapers rely upon it, as was very well demonstrated by Congresswoman Maloney, to put a background to some of the current

issues.

The Coalition understands that collecting information about our

citizens takes resources and requires people to spend some time

filling out the forms. I hope I have laid out some of the most compelling reasons why the expense and effort are worth that cost. The

businesses that are represented in the Coalition take that responsibility very seriously.

Let me close with an example of our commitment in the private

sector to helping make the 2000 census work better. Target Stores,

a subsidiary of Dayton-Hudson and (a member of our Coalition),

has several department stores in the sites of this year's census

dress rehearsal. To help the Bureau promote participation in the

dry run, Target produced and is using shopping bags in their stores

bearing the census logo and the following unique message: "Census

2000, How America Knows What America Needs." I'm confident

that this in-kind contribution on the part of Target is a good example, but a small example, of the importance that the business community places on an accurate and thorough census.

Thank you for your consideration of our views. We stand ready

to cooperate with this subcommittee and with the Bureau to make

this the best census ever.

Mr. MILLER. Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Crowe follows:]
Testimony ofthe

Coalition to Preserve Census Data

before the

Subcommittee on the Census

Committee on Government Reform and Oversight

May 21,1998

Good afternoon, Chaiiman Miller, Congresswoman Maloney, and members ofthe

Subcommittee: Thank you for the opportunity to testify in support ofthe continued

collection of useful demographic and socio-economic information in the 2000 census. As

we hope you will see from the testimony presented at today's hearing, census data is the

foundation ofsound decisionmaking in virtually every sector of our economy - public,

private, and non-profit. Without it, we would be trying to steer a very big ship without a

compass, towards an unknown destination.

1 am David Crowe, Staff Vice President for Housing Policy at the National

Association of Home Builders. I also represent the Housing Statistics Users Group on

the 2000 Census Advisory Committee to the Secretary ofCommerce. Today I am

wearing a third hat, representing the Coalition to Preserve Census Data, ofwhich the

National Association of Home Builders is a member.

The Coalition to Preserve Census Data is a group of broad-based industry and

professional associations, and individual companies, representing a wide spectrum of

economic sectors, including retail, print communications, housing, transportation, and

marketing.1 We have come together based on a shared interest in ensuring that the 2000

'The members ofthe Coalition to Preserve Census Data ire: American Planning Association; The Arbitron

Company; Claritas Inc.; Dayton Hudson Corporation; Direct Marketing Association; The Dun & Bradstreet

Corp.; Housing Statistics Users Group; Institute of Transportation Engineers; International Council of

Shopping Centers; Mortgage Bankers Association; National Apartment Association; National Association

of Home Builders; National Association of Realtors; National Multi Housing Council; National Retail
89

census produces reliable demographic, economic, transportation, and bousing

information. There currently is no alternative vehicle to the census long form for

collecting reliable and comparable data for all levels of geography, including small

towns, rural communities, and urban and suburban neighborhoods.

The Coalition to Preserve Census Data respectfully urges this subcommittee and

the Congress to:

1. approve the content ofthe census questionnaires for 2000 proposed by the

Census Bureau;

2. provide adequate funding to administer the long form to approximately

seventeen percent (an average of one in six) of American households; and

3. ensure that the long form is administered as part ofthe decennial census in

April, 2000.

I want to make three points that I believe clearly demonstrate the need to field a

traditional long form in the 2000 census. In discussing these points, 1 will address some

ofthe primary concerns that have been raised about the inclusion of a long form in the

census.

• First, the decennial census is the most cost-effective means of collecting vital

demographic and socio-economic data about our nation.

• Second, there is currently no alternative source of reliable and comparable

data about our population and housing for small geographic areas such as

small towns, urban and suburban neighborhoods, and rural communities.

• Third, business and industry use census data to make decisions that promote

Federation; Newspaper Association of America.
90

economic growth and improve the quality of life in communities across the

country. However, it is important to remember that census data is not

collected for the private sector, but is required by law to guide the allocation

of Federal funds and implementation of Federal programs.

First, the census is by far the most cost-effective way to collect vital information

that is used for policy development, planning and investment decisions, and resource

allocation. The Census Bureau estimates that it will cost about $400 million to include

the traditional long form in the 2000 census. That is approximately ten percent ofthe

overall ten-year cost ofthe census. The $400 million figure includes the cost of printing

and mailing the longer questionnaires; data capture, tabulation, and publication; and

enumerator follow-up with households that don't return their census forms by mail.

Some observers have raised concerns about the added cost of door-to-door visits

to households that don't mail back a long form. Fortunately, evaluations showed that the

mail return rate in 1990 for households that received the long form was only about 4.5

percent lower than for households that received the short fonn. And because the long

form was sent only to one in six households, this differential mail return rate reduced the

overall return rate in 1990 by less than one percent.'

Census Bureau research and subsequent evaluations by an expert panel convened

by the National Academy of Sciences at the direction of Congress also concluded that the

long form did not contribute in any significant way to the overall undercount or, more

importantly, to the differential undercount of certain population subgroups." That is

because once the mail out/mail back phase ofthe census is over, the Census Bureau must

make the same effort to visit households that didn't mail back a form, regardless of
91

whether that housing unit received a short or long form. Census enumerators try to

collect the wider range ot information from households that are in the long form sample

but their minimum goal is to collect the basic information required for apportionment and

redistricting.

The Academy panel also found that the collection of useful data in the census has

not been a significant contributing factor to the rise in census costs. In fact, between

1960 and 1990, the number ofquestions on the short form has decreased steadily, while

the number of questions on the long form has fluctuated somewhat but within a relatively

small range. Furthermore, the portion of households receiving the longer questionnaire

declined over this period, even as the cost ofthe census rose considerably.'" Clearly this

evidence suggests that the growth in census costs cannot be blamed primarily on the

number ofquestions on the long form or the size ofthe long form sample.

Following the 1990 census. Congress directed the Census Bureau to find ways to

make the census more accurate and more cost-effective. As part ofthe effort to meet

those goals, and with clear direction from Congress, the Office of Management and

Budget • working with the Census Bureau and other Federal agencies - began a

thorough review of data needs and whether those needs could best be met through the

decennial census or through some other source. As a result ofthat review, most

American households will get a census form in 2000 that is nearly SO percent shorter than

in 1990 (seven questions in 2000 compared to thirteen questions in 1990). Those

households (an average of one in six) that receive the long form also will be asked fewer

questions than in 1990 (52 questions compared to 54 questions), despite the fact the

Congress mandated additional questions in the 1996 Welfare Reform Act. Coupled with
a complete redesign ofthe census forms themselves, to make them simpler to understand

and easier to fill out, the Census Bureau has made a significant effort to minimize the

burden ofdata collection on the public.

So what does America get for this S400 million investment every ten years?

According to the General Accounting Office, more than $170 billion every year in

Federal program funds alone is allocated to State and local governments based on census

data. That's nearly S2 trillion over the course of a decade. The cost of collecting this

vital information in the census is only two one-hundredths of a percent ofthat amount I

can't think of another government activity that gives taxpayers such a high rate of return

for their investment!

Some ofthe actual grant formulas may rely solely on population data or perhaps a

combination of data, such as population and income (which is collected on the long

form). But virtually all ofthe programs ate developed only after careful analysis by

Congress of demographic and socio-economic conditions that are charted by data

gathered on At long form. Billions ofdollars more in State program funds are

distributed to counties, cities and towns according to census data, although no one has yet

been able to tally this significant use ofthe data. And the use of census data by the forprofit and nonprofit private sectors to guide wise investments and community-based

services is worth more than anyone can easily calculate.

Second, the decennial census is the only source of high-quality, detailed

information about our population, housing, and the economic condition of our

communities that is consistent in time and place. Without the long form, we would not

have comparable data on labor force skills, educational attainment, income, ethnic origin.
93

housing stock, and transportation patterns for neighborhoods, small towns, and rural

areas, all the way up to medium and larger cities, counties, and States. Census data

allows us to compare the relative well being of all communities and population

subgroups, regardless ofsize, at a single point in time, using standard definitions of

measurement. It provides a consistent foundation or benchmark for more focused data

collection efforts throughout the decade by government at all levels, service-providers,

and businesses.

Some lawmakers have wondered whether the private sector could collect the

information covered on the census 'long form,' since business is a significant user ofthe

data. This is an understandable question, but the answer is rather simple. Private

businesses could not possibly replicate the data collection accomplished in the deceanM

census.

Census data is reliable, consistent, and comprehensive precisely because it is

gathered in the census, bv the Federal government The census is a national undertaking

required by the Constitution; people are far more likely to cooperate with a reputable

government agency than with an unknown company. Americans view the Census Bureau

as a neutral collector ofinformation, while they are likely to perceive some sort ofbias if

a private company tried to gather the data. And it would be exceedingly difficult, ifnot

impossible, to create a privately-run entity ofsufficient size to collect the range of

information gathered in the census. If more than one private entity were responsible for

collecting the information • either for different geographic areas or covering dififerent

subject matters -the data would not be comparable because ofdiffering methodologies,

assumptions, time of collection, and so on. Census data is collected for all households in
94

every kind ofneighborhood and community in the country - from the Kenai Peninsula in

Alaska to the tip of Key West in Florida, from remote mountain sites in the Northwest to

New York City blocks bustling with Americans of diverse ethnic backgrounds • using

the same objective standards of measurement embodied in the carefiilly-worded

questions. The government can, and does, guarantee the absolute confidentiality of

individually identifiable information provided to the Census Bureau. No private business

can earn the level ot trust that the Bureau has earned by virtue ofits unblemished

historical record of protecting the privacy ofindividual answers to the census.

We also should bear in mind that all ofthe information collected in the census is

required by Federal statute or a Federal court ruling to implement or evaluate a Federal

program or to allocate Federal dollars. Ifthe private sector were responsible for

collecting most ofthe data currently gathered through the census, might the government

find itself in the position of having to buy this data from the private sector to meet its own

mandates? I don't believe this issue has been addressed in any depth, but it's a question

worth considering.

Some people also might wonder why information collected in the census couldn't

be obtained from local governments, particularly data related to housing stock and

community infrastructure. The fact is that administrative records maintained at the local

level often cannot be compared from one jurisdiction to another because ofinconsistent

definitions or differing local requirements. In some cases, local records simply are

incomplete. Furthermore, administrative records usually capture only one piece of

socio-economic information, related to the purpose for which the records are kept. For

example, records on home values do not include data on the composition of families that
95

reside in these homes, such as whether children or elderly people are present. Yet that

kind ofinformation is necessary to develop a complete picture of each community and its

needs. The census is the one source that provides thorough, cross-tabulated information

for a//jurisdictions so that policymakers can assess relative need and target the areas of

greatest need. Census data also gives local governments and other planners the solid

informational foundation they need to measure change throughout the decade.

We understand that the primary (and sole constitutional) purpose ofthe decennial

census is to apportion seats in the U.S. House of Representatives among the States based

on population. If the collection of data beyond the minimal information needed to

support this function (along with redistricting) prevented the Census Bureau from

meeting this constitutional requirement, we would share the concern of critics who

advocate a "postcard" census. Fortunately, however, the evidence clearly shows that the

broader collection of vital demographic, social and economic data does not denigrate the

quality ofthe basic population count. With no other reliable or cost-effective way of

collecting this information, the census is a natural vehicle for meeting the nation's data

needs.

Finally, and most importantly, I want to tell you about some ofthe important uses

of census data by businesses of all sizes. As you will see, information from the census

long form isn't simply a tool that helps businesses to earn a profit. It is the foundation of

careful and sound decision-making that allows businesses to create jobs, provide useful

products and services that meet the needs of diverse communities, invest resources in

economically-disadvantaged urban neighborhoods and rural areas, assess workforce

readiness for the future, and take countless other steps that ensure the economic vitality
of our nation.

Let me give you some specific examples of how business and industry use census

data. The retail sector relies on the detailed profiles of communities made possible by

census data to decide where to locate new stores and the type of merchandise they will

sell in those stores. What kind oflabor force is available, in terms of education,

experience, availability (part-time or full-time), and proximity to a potential retail site?

Will the prevalence oftwo-income parents in the workforce require consideration of onsite daycare for employees? What level ofsales volume should they expect based on

income levels in the area? Will their customers have language barriers that need to be

addressed? Being able to answer these kinds of questions as retail companies decide

where to invest significant amounts of money helps ensure successful ventures that

benefit communities.

In the transportation sector, State and municipal agencies, working with

transportation engineers and providers, use data available only from the census long form

to assess travel patterns and monitor the use of roads, highways, and public transit The

data allows planners to select projects based on local priorities, develop traffic congestion

management systems, and identify transportation corridors needing capacity expansion.

In Willits, California (pop. 4,500), planners learned from the census that more than nine

percent of city residents walked to work - a particularly large percentage for a noncollege, non-Northeastem city - while only two percent used bicycles. Consequently,

fiscal resources were focused on improving corridors for pedestrians rather than cyclists,

to meet community needs.

The housing industry, with which I am most familiar, relies on census data to
97

10

assess the types of homes that are needed in specific locations, as well as to monitor poor

housing conditions that require intervention. Communities with growing elderly

populations may need more housing suitable for people with limited mobility, while areas

with higher-income populations or a high percentage of families with small children may

benefit from larger, single family homes with lots of bedrooms and outdoor play areas.

Builders require thorough market information before they decide where, and in what type

of housing, to invest their resources. Banks and other financial institutions use

population and housing data at the neighborhood level to locate and extend mortgage

credit to all qualified borrowers in underserved markets.

It's not only the housing industry itselfthat needs census data to help it meet the

needs of diverse communities. Home building is regulated by state and local

governments through zoning laws, land use policies, planning boards, water districts and

a host of other local agencies. These municipal government entities use census data to

make decisions about the growth oftheir communities and to forecast future needs and

conditions. Census data provides a common ground between local governments and the

private housing sector.

The communications sector also relies heavily on census data to provide objective

and thorough information about key policy issues and debates to their audiences.

Communities rely on local media, particularly newspapers, to inform them about

developments in business, transportation, education, and housing that affect their daily

lives. Newspapers not only provide in-depth coverage of current activities in a local

community, they often include feature articles that trace the growth and development in

their communities over time. Without census data, news coverage of important
11

developments in a community, analyses ofthose developments, and editorial commentary

would be superficial, at best. The marketplace ofideas conveyed through newspapers

and other media - upon which our democratic system is predicated • would suffer

tremendously.

We realize that some ofthe questions asked in the census may appear

unnecessary, or even intrusive. But census questions are designed to gather information

which, taken as a whole, provide important information about the workforce,

transportation patterns, housing conditions, living arrangements, and financial resources.

One might ask why. for example, the government needs to know how many rooms or

bedrooms are in a housing unit. We can't very well ask people whether their home or

apartment is too crowded. But the information on rooms, taken together with data on the

number ofpeople in a household, their ages, and relationship to each other, helps us

identify overcrowded housing using an objective standard of measurement, and develop

policies to alleviate unsafe and unacceptable housing conditions.

The same is true for questions about the time people depart for work and how

they get there. When carefully plotted on digital maps, transportation planners can use

this information to determine when roads and transit systems will be most crowded and

identify alternative routes and modes oftransportation to ease congestion. Day care

providers, retailers, and banks can identify locations for vital services that are most

convenient for commuters.

What are the consequences when businesses make the wrong decisions •

decisions that are not based on accurate and thorough information? In the case ofthe

retail sector, to take one obvious example, stores close, employees lose their jobs.
99

12

buildings lose their tenants, and communities lose the vitality that successful commerce

brings. In the real estate sector, poor decisions in the late 1980s crippled some financial

institutions and required government intervention. No one benefits when business fails.

It is the responsibility ofthe Census Bureau and all data users, including business

and industry, to explain to the average American why the information they provide in the

census is so important and how it directly benefits their families and their communities.

The businesses that are represented in the Coalition to Preserve Census Data take that

responsibility very seriously. We look forward to working in partnership with the Census

Bureau to ensure that the public understands why it is important to participate in the

census.

Let me close with one example of our commitment in the private sector to helping

make the 2000 census the best ever. Target, a subsidiary of Dayton-Hudson Corporation

(a member of our Coalition), has several department stores in the sites ofthis year's

census dress rehearsal. To help the Census Bureau promote participation in the dry-run.

Target has printed shopping bags bearing the census logo and the following unique

message: "Census 2000: How America Knows What America Needs." I am confident

that this in-kind contribution on the part ofTarget stores will be replicated in 2000 by

dozens if not hundreds of businesses, small and large, who know how important an

accurate and thorough census is to the future ofthe communities they serve.

Census data allows the private sector to make prudent decisions that spur

economic growth, create jobs, improve the quality of life in all communities, and ensure

that products and services meet the needs of a diverse population. Collection of

demographic and socio-economic data in the census is a sound investment that benefits
100

13

virtually all Americans and the communities in which they live.

We urge the subcommittee to accept the Census Bureau's proposed questions for

the 2000 census, as well as the planned sample size for the long form, so thai our nation

will have a solid foundation of reliable, consistent and detailed information to guide us

into the new century.

Thank you for your consideration of our views. The industries and companies

that comprise the Coalition to Preserve Census Data look forward to working with the

subcommittee to ensure a successful census in 2000 that portrays the rich tapestry of

people and communities that are America's strength.

"Modernizing the U.S. Census," National Academy Press. Washington, D.C. 1995, p. 119.

'[bid, p I.

"Ibid, p. 47.
101

Mr. MILLER. MS. Samhan, am I pronouncing that right?

Ms. SAMHAN. Yes, thank you.

Mr. MILLER. DO you know•this question was asked in 1990, I'm

sure, by somebody else. Do you know what percentage response we

get on that question?

Ms. SAMHAN. On the ancestry question?

Mr. MILLER. Correct.

Ms. SAMHAN. I believe it was above 80 percent, if I'm not mistaken.

Mr. MILLER. What about the question of people having multiple

ethnic backgrounds, how do you get this kind of information?

There's no room for that. How do you fill that out?

Ms. SAMHAN. I believe what the census form allows for two ancestries to be listed, so many Americans fill out•if they have two

predominant ancestries, they would put those. There are some very

common triple ancestries that are also measured in the data collection like Scotch-Irish-English, for example. They are able to pick up

a certain number of triple ancestries. But for the most part, it's

multiple ancestries up to two.

Mr. MILLER. HOW do you relate this information to the need of

the Federal Government to collect useful information, but specifically what does the Federal Government need the information for

as far as allocation of funds. Obviously we don't need it for a

proportionment of Representatives, which is our only constitutional

reason. What would you justify the need for?

Ms. SAMHAN. The primary justification by the Federal Government has been from the court system, because there has been a

need for national origin data that is not picked up by the race

question.

Mr. MILLER. Why can't it be picked up by the race question?

Ms. SAMHAN. Because there is differentiation on the race question•there are many, many ethnic groups that are not differentiated in the single race question. For example, there are groups

that are identified as white, by race, but they are victims of discrimination, like the community I represent, the Arab American

community.

And there are times when there has been discriminatory behavior toward people from the Arab world, but because they're counted

as white, they're not differentiated. It's only the data from the ancestry question that picks that up.

Mr. MILLER. DO you have an opinion about the Taiwanese question?

Ms. SAMHAN. No, I don't.

Mr. MILLER. Mr. Crowe, did you participate in the Census Advisory Board?

Mr. CROWE. Yes.

Mr. MILLER. YOU did. How is that working right now?

Mr. CROWE. I think it's working very well. It's a hands-on exercise to allow the people interested in the census to work with the

Bureau to make advice on developing very small level details about

the 2000 census.

Mr. MILLER. The Coalition to Preserve Census Data, who is that

now?
102

Mr. CROWE. That's an organization of businesses and associations that utilize this data and felt compelled to unify and make

aware our concerns about the long form. It's a wide-ranging group.

It ranges from retailers, the home builders, some of the other housing institutions, the mortgage bankers, and newspapers, and some

retail sales organizations.

Mr. MILLER. The long form, of course, will be conducted for the

upcoming 2000 decennial census. What about the proposal for the

American Consumer Survey? I mean, this is not the hearing on

that subject, but, there are other ways to collect data, and this is

all sample data anyway, so

Mr. CROWE. That's true. And the American Community Survey

has the advantage of having more current information. The decennial census information for the long form is extremely useful right

after it's collected, but as we are right now, we're 8 years out from

that information, and it does begin to get stale. We do the best we

can with that information. ACS would solve at least that problem

by making it a continuous collection over the 10-year period.

I suppose we haven't made an absolute decision on that, because

there are other downsides, one of those being it's kind of a fragile

piece of budget sitting out there for potential attack each year since

it would have to be appropriated every year.

Mr. MILLER. DO you have an opinion about the ACS, Ms.

Samhan? Are you familiar with that?

Ms. SAMHAN. I'm not that familiar with it, but my understanding

is that the questions that are currently asked on the long form

would hopefully be included on that, and so our position would be

that as long as the question on ethnicity was included in the ACS,

that we would be fine with that.

Mr. MILLER. Let me ask Mr. Crowe one more question. If this

data is so important to you and, you know, the private sector, do

{'ou think there should be any effort to help defray the costs of colecting this data?

Mr. CROWE. I guess I would argue that the American taxpayer

pays for it, and they pay for it through the business taxes that support the census. This is such a broad-based information source, it's

used in such a wide variety of industries and operations, that it

would be almost impossible to figure out how to allocate the cost.

It's much the same as the response to trying to impose the costs

on the individual Federal agencies. How do you charge for the

question on incomes since virtually everyone uses that? I see this

as a basic infrastructure need to this country and not something

that can be priced out to just the users, because effectively the

home building industry uses it not because home builders themselves need it, but because it is needed to answer the demands of

the citizens as an example.

Mr. MILLER. All right. Thank you.

Mr. Davis.

Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Ms. Samhan, did I understand that Arah•individuals of Arab

heritage are counted as being white?

Ms. SAMHAN. Yes, sir, that's correct.

Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Where do we get the designation, the numbers for the number of Arab Americans?
103

Ms. SAMHAN. Currently the only place we get it is from the ancestry question.

Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. And so has that particular group indicated

any special concern other than continuing to use the information

or to generate the information that we are currently collecting?

Ms. SAMHAN. We have been concerned about the classification

system, that is the Federal Directive 15, and we have in the past

decade made proposals to the OMB about considering broadening

the ethnic categories that are included within the white race question.

We, however, have a greater concern right now on the eve of the

2000 census that we have the ability to at least measure our population through the ancestry question, and we will deal with the

question of classification at a later date.

Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Thank you.

Do you work with Jim Zogby?

Ms. SAMHAN. I sure do.

Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Would you give him my best?

Ms. SAMHAN. I sure will.

Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. All right. Mr. Crowe, I really don't have a

question, but I'd like to commend you and the business community

that's a part of your coalition, because I think what you have described is one of the greatest pieces of work that a business trade

group, association can actually do in terms of understanding what

I call not only individual self-interest or individual business interest, but interest as related to the totality of the country.

I think that this is just a tremendous undertaking that you've

generated, so I commend you and other members of the group.

Whoever thought it up and decided to do it, I think they should get

a good citizenship award, because I think it is indeed a tremendous

effort, and I appreciate the work that you've described.

Mr. CROWE. Thank you, Mr. Davis.

Mr. MILLER. Mr. Snowbarger.

Mr. SNOWBARGER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Ms. Samhan, I'm looking at the form, the question on the form,

and I haven't got the slightest idea how to answer it for myself,

partly because the only time I ever get this question is once every

10 years on a census form, if I happen to get the long form. It's

not something that I think about.

Now I understand that obviously we have ethnic communities

and those who follow very closely with their ancestry, and it's not

I don't have any interest in that, it's just that it's not a focus for

me. And I honestly get frustrated when I have to answer a question like that, because I have to sit back and think, well, now, I

know where my father came from, and I know where my grandfather came from, and on and on and on. As was mentioned earlier,

frankly, you put them all together. And I need about 10 times that

amount of space. I guess I'm just one of those Heinz 57 kind of

guys that doesn't look back and have one specific.

So I find the question frustrating; however, you have an interest

in getting that information. And I guess my question would be

since this long form•the ancestry question is only on the long

form; is that correct?

Ms. SAMHAN. That's correct, yes.
104

Mr. SNOWBARGER. That only goes to 1 of every 6 households, as

I understand it. Would you like to see this information on the short

form?

Ms. SAMHAN. I think the answer to that is, yes, we would like

to see it on the short form. I know that there was some testing

done by the Census Bureau in response to the requests by the

OMB to reevaluate the way that race and ethnicity are measured.

I think that the results of the tests were inconclusive, but I know

that the members of our coalition would certainly support including

the question on ancestry, if it were done in a sound methodological

way on the short form. But it doesn't minimize the need for the

questions on the long form, because without data on socioeconomic

mobility, the head count from the short form is really not sufficient.

Mr. SNOWBARGER. DO you think that the format that we currently use is sufficient?

Ms. SAMHAN. We are certainly anxious to have it retained in its

current format. I know that one

Mr. SNOWBARGER. IS that because you think it may be deleted,

or because it's doing the best job we can do?

Ms. SAMHAN. We think that the data that are derived from the

ancestry question for the last two censuses has been so valuable

that we are very satisfied with the data that we have. If the data•

if the question were to be added on the short form, it would just

mean that every household would be able to respond to their ethnicity, rather than the sample. But we certainly believe that it's

sufficient.

Mr. SNOWBARGER. Mr. Crowe, let me kind of cut to the chase. I

think the main question, at least in my mind, for the whole hearing, obviously the long form gives us a lot of information and a lot

of data that is very interesting, very helpful even in some respects,

but when we look at trying to do the best possible job that's required of us under the Constitution, which is the enumeration, I

guess I'm concerned that we may be affecting the quality of that

relatively simple count as opposed to the additional questions that

are asked.

I think the Census Bureau has information that the return rate,

for instance, on the short form versus the long form, drops off by

about 15 percent when you go to the long form, obviously requiring

that much more follow-up to get the information.

Bottom line question: Should we be pursuing the elimination of

the long form so that we can do the constitutional responsibility

first, and hopefully better?

Mr. CROWE. I think it's an excellent question, because I do think

you have to question that, and I think we have answers to that.

First, I'm not sure that the fall-off in response rate is that severe,

and the numbers I was looking at were more like 4 percent difference between responses for mail-back response.

Mr. SNOWBARGER. Let me correct myself here. I think that 15

percent was in the hard to enumerate areas. So you already have

a problem area to count, and then this causes an even greater falloff in that situation.

Mr. CROWE. YOU should pause and think about that. And I think

what I ask back is that the information•I think I would argue,

and I think most of us would agree•that the information is need-
105

ed. You have to figure out some way to run Federal programs to

evaluate what's going on for many of the local programs to evaluate

what they're doing and to give them a base so that they can go forward with basic information.

If you don't do it in the census, are you not imposing an even

greater burden on the citizens for responding? If you don't do it in

the census, then you've got to go back out and ask the same questions over again, because you first have to establish who these people are, how old they are and some things that are in the basic

Mr. SNOWBARGER. You're doing it on a statistical basis, and I

guess the alternative that we may have here is a count every decade that's required by the Constitution and follow-up sampling

throughout the rest of the decade on these kinds of issues.

Mr. CROWE. Which is basically what the chairman mentioned in

the ACS, and I think that needs to be investigated and looked at

as an alternative. It just can't be done this soon. In frank terms,

if it were to go to that, we would have to wait until 2010. It's too

late to depend upon that method to establish that kind of information for 2000.

Mr. SNOWBARGER. Well, but you could establish it before 2010 if

you were doing

Mr. CROWE. Yes.

Mr. SNOWBARGER [continuing]. If you were doing, you know, the

sampling between the enumerations.

Mr. CROWE. Yes, I'm saying the same thing.

Mr. SNOWBARGER. OK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. MILLER. Thank you, Mr. Crowe, Ms. Samhan. Thank you

very much for being here today. I appreciate the information you

shared with us. And the meeting will stand adjourned.

[Whereupon, at 3:50 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]

O