CTPP

ctpp@listserv.transportation.org

3075 discussions

by ed c

From: Keri Monihan <kmonihan(a)ccmc.org> September 25, 1998 Second Court Rules That Law Bars Sampling For Apportionment Commerce Official Says Census Could Still Include Sample Survey To Adjust Counts for Redistricting and Federal Aid A second federal district court panel ruled today, 3 - 0, that the Census Act prohibits the use of sampling methods to produce the population counts used to reapportion seats in Congress. The opinion was issued in the case of Glavin v. Clinton, filed last February by Matthew Glavin, president of the Atlanta-based Southeastern Legal Foundation. The plaintiffs, including Rep. Bob Barr (R-GA), also had asked the court to rule that the Constitution does not permit the use of sampling to conduct the census for apportionment purposes. However, like the three-judge panel in U.S. House of Representatives v. U.S. Department of Commerce, the Glavin court declined to address that question, finding instead that the statute governing the census (Title 13, United States Code, section 195) prohibits sampling for congressional apportionment. The Supreme Court announced recently that it would hear the U.S. House of Representatives case on November 30. Rep. Dan Miller (R-FL), who heads the House census subcommittee, said in a written statement that President Clinton should "immediately instruct the Census Bureau to abandon its plan for sampling in the 2000 Census." But Commerce Under Secretary Robert Shapiro told members of the 2000 Census Advisory Committee earlier today that the Administration fully expected to prevail at the Supreme Court. And even if the Supreme Court upholds the lower court rulings, Shapiro told the group of census stakeholders, the 2000 census would still include a large post-census survey to measure and correct for under- and overcounts. The adjusted numbers could then be used, he said, for the distribution of federal aid and by state legislatures to draw political district lines. In that event, Shapiro said, the Census Bureau would drop plans to contact a sample of unresponsive households in order to meet a Supreme Court mandate to produce census numbers without sampling for apportionment, while preserving the quality-check survey to derive a second set of counts that the Bureau believes will be more accurate. (The Census 2000 Initiative will provide a more complete summary of the Advisory Committee's proceedings in a future News Alert.) The Glavin case was filed in the Federal District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia on Feburary 12, 1998. The court heard oral arguments on August 7. Congress provided in this year's census funding bill that legal challenges to the use of sampling in the census would be heard by a three-judge panel, and that any appeal of the lower courts decision would go directly to the Supreme Court. The Eastern District of Virginia does not post decisions on the Internet. Those who want to obtain a copy of the opinion from a law library or other source may refer to Case Number 98-207. Questions about the information contained in this News Alert may be directed to TerriAnn Lowenthal at (202) 484-2270 or, by e-mail at <terriann2k(a)aol.com>. Please direct all requests to receive News Alerts, and all changes in address/phone/fax/e-mail, to <census2000(a)ccmc.org> or 202/326-8728. Please feel free to circulate this information to colleagues and other interested individuals.

27 years

[CTPP] NEWS ALERT

by ed c

September 22, 1998 From: Keri Monihan <kmonihan(a)ccmc.org> Senate Committee Hears from Census Director Nominee Bureau Operating under Temporary Funding Measure As Congress Tries to Complete Work on FY99 Bills The Senate committee with oversight responsibility for the census held a hearing last week to consider President Clinton's nominee for Census Bureau director. After an introduction by Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D-NY), Dr. Kenneth Prewitt received a cordial welcome from committee Chairman Fred Thompson (R-TN) and ranking minority member Sen. John Glenn (D-OH). Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI) also listened to Dr. Prewitt's brief prepared statement and joined in the questioning. The Committee on Governmental Affairs has scheduled a business meeting for September 24 and may vote on the Prewitt nomination at that time. Dr. Prewitt told the committee that he had not yet visited the Census Bureau and could not comment specifically on elements of the 2000 census plan. In written responses to questions submitted earlier by the committee, the nominee cited four primary responsibilities for the Bureau's director: management, constituency relations, planning and professional standard-setting. At the hearing, he said the success of the census must be judged not only by its numerical accuracy but by whether the public has confidence in the process and results. Sen. Thompson emphasized the importance of "formidable management skills and a vision for the future" for the next director. The chairman did not press Dr. Prewitt for a firm position on the use of sampling methods in the census but instead sought a pledge that the nominee would speak openly if he concluded that the Bureau's plan was technically unsound or operationally unfeasible. Census Bureau operating under temporary funding bill: Late last week, Congress approved a continuing funding resolution to keep government agencies running past the end of the fiscal year on September 30 while legislators continue to work out final agreements on most of the 13 regular appropriations bills. While most agencies must operate at current spending levels, the temporary funding measure, which runs through October 9, allows the Bureau to spend at a higher rate set for decennial activities in the House-passed Commerce appropriations bill. The House allocation of $952 million is $104 million more than the Administration had requested for Census 2000 activities in fiscal year 1999. The additional funds are for the Bureau to prepare for a census without sampling methods. The Commerce Department said the temporary spending allowance was enough to keep decennial census preparations running on schedule in October but cautioned that 2000 census preparations would require three times the amount allotted in the temporary bill in November. House panel continues to focus on sampling methods: The House Subcommittee on the Census held a hearing on September 17 to review the Integrated Coverage Measurement (ICM) component of the Census Bureau's 2000 census plan. The ICM includes a quality-check sample survey of 750,000 households designed to measure under- and overcounts in the initial enumeration for various demographic subgroups and adjust the numbers accordingly to produce a final count. Majority (Republican) members of the panel invited five statisticians to testify: Dr. Leo Breiman (University of California at Berkeley); Dr. Lawrence Brown (University of Pennsylvania); Dr. Robert Koyak (Naval Postgraduate School); Dr. Martin Wells (Cornell University); and Dr. Donald Ylvisaker (UCLA). In general, the group believed that a post-census survey to gauge the accuracy of the initial count could add more mistakes into the census because it involved difficult matching and statistical procedures. Dr. Brown concluded that the ICM procedure would worsen the distribution of population among states and other areas, which he said was more important than achieving more accurate population totals. Dr. Breiman said that mistakes in conducting the quality-check survey were magnified when applied to the larger population. The five witnesses did not discuss any specific alternative methods to reduce the undercount of minorities and the poor. The subcommittee's minority (Democratic) members were allowed to choose three additional witnesses: Dr. Barbara Everitt Bryant, Census Bureau director in the Bush Administration; Dr. Eugene Ericksen (Temple University); and Dr. Stephen Fienberg (Carnegie Mellon University). Dr. Bryant said that unless the Supreme Court overturns the recent federal court ruling that sampling cannot be used to supplement a direct headcount, the prohibition "virtually guarantees [an] undercount" in the 2000 census. She told the panel that the 2000 census plan "[was] not a scheme conceived by the present Administration," but was based on evaluations of the 1990 count and research both within the Bureau and by independent experts. Dr. Fienberg said it was a "myth" that the 1990 census was 98.4 percent accurate because evaluations revealed as many as 25 million counting mistakes, a ten percent gross error rate. Dr. Ericksen disagreed with the earlier criticism of the ICM process, saying that changes in the post-census survey planned for 2000 should reduce matching and estimation problems associated with the 1990 statistical process. Census Monitoring Board activities: The meeting of the Census Monitoring Board originally scheduled for September 18 was postponed. The Board has not yet announced a new date for the meeting. Questions about the information contained in this News Alert may be directed to TerriAnn Lowenthal at (202) 484-2270 or, by e-mail at <terriann2k(a)aol.com>. Please direct all requests to receive News Alerts, and all changes in address/phone/fax/e-mail, to Census 2000 Initiative at <census2000(a)ccmc.org> or 202/326-8700. Please feel free to circulate this information to colleagues and other interested individuals.

27 years

[CTPP] census 2000 bulletin #2

by ed c

********** C E N S U S 2 0 0 0 B U L L E T I N ********** Vol. 2 - No. 43 Sept. 11, 1998 In today's second report on his testimony before the U.S. House of Representatives' Subcommittee on the Census Wednesday (Sept. 9), Acting Census Bureau Director James F. Holmes' focuses on "critical activities" that must occur in Fiscal Year 1999 if Census 2000 is to be a success. Holmes said in part: "Mr. Chairman, before continuing with answers to the specific questions in your letter of invitation, I want to emphasize that many critical activities vital to the success of Census 2000 must be conducted on schedule in FY1999. These activities, as I said earlier, apply both to a census with sampling or without. A key activity is the continuing development of an accurate Master Address File. In FY1999, we will begin and complete work to verify the estimated 94 million addresses that use house number and street name, commonly referred to as 'city-style addresses.' Also, we will complete the locating and listing of an estimated 22 million non-city style addresses that do not use house number and street name, known as 'rural address listing.' We will also extend our efforts to validate the address list with state, local, and tribal authorities, a program made possible by the Census Address List Improvement Act of 1994 that authorized these governments to review and validate the list. "Other key Census 2000 activities in FY1999 include beginning the process of opening local census offices in every congressional district; purchasing and putting in place the automation and telecommunication infrastructure to support the nationwide network of facilities; completing software development and testing; finalizing preparations for data capture; and printing questionnaires, notification letters, and other Census 2000 forms. Another critical activity to be completed in FY1999 is an evaluation of this year's full-scale Dress Rehearsal. We also will finalize plans for enumerating people without a traditional home and for making available telephone assistance to answer respondents' questions about the census process and questionnaire. And our expanded partnership program will continue to work with state, local, and tribal governments, as well as community-based organizations, local media, and other public and private sector organizations to promote public awareness of this nationwide mandate. "These are all activities that will be necessary for a successful census under either design and if any of them are seriously delayed, the census will be put at risk. "Moreover, our address listing operations will be put in a state of failure by any delay in the FY1999 funding stream in early October. We would have to release 1,800 supervisors and crew leaders already trained and on the payroll. We would have to tell 22,000 staff who list addresses not to come to the planned training, as well as cancel all space accommodations for the training. We would lose a significant portion of the staff we released as well as the listers we told not to come to training. This would mean starting the entire recruiting process over again and would result in a delay of at least one month in the second wave of listing. We would not be able to recover from this and would not be able to complete the second wave on time. "Any delay of this magnitude will seriously impact subsequent operations including the third wave of listing in rural areas and block canvassing in areas with city-style addresses. Each stage of the field work for all operations must be completed on a timely basis so that we can meet the absolutely critical July 1999 deadline for delivering to contractors an address file for labeling the census questionnaires. Field activities must be completed on time if we are to meet this critical deadline necessary to ensure the timely mailing of census questionnaires." For further information about this bulletin, contact J. Paul Wyatt of the Public Information Office on 301-457-3052 (fax: 301-457-3670; e-mail: pio(a)census.gov).

27 years

[CTPP] Census 2000 Bulletin

by ed c

********** C E N S U S 2 0 0 0 B U L L E T I N ********** Vol. 2 - No. 42 Sept. 10, 1998 Acting Census Bureau Director James F. Holmes testified Wednesday (Sept. 9) before the U.S. House of Representatives' Census Subcommittee about the status of planning for a census in the year 2000 that does not use sampling for purposes of apportionment. In his prepared text, Holmes said the Census Bureau was abiding by the agreement reached in the fall of 1997 to pursue a "dual track" in planning for Census 2000. "While I continue to believe that a census with sampling will be more accurate and cost less," Holmes said, "we are on track to conduct a census without sampling in the event that a decision to do so is made by next March." Today and Friday, this bulletin will carry excerpts from Holmes' remarks. Today's excerpts focus on Census Bureau activities related to a census without sampling: ".... Let me now address some activities related to planning specific to a nonsampling census: "First, we are conducting the Dress Rehearsal census in our South Carolina site without the use of sampling and estimation procedures and including enhancements to nonsampling procedures. These enhancements included increased advertising and partnership activities, increased quality assurance, increased marketing and promotion activities, as well as 100-percent follow-up of nonresponding housing units and of all addresses for which the U.S. Postal Service could not deliver a questionnaire because the housing units were believed to be vacant. We have completed all field work through nonresponse follow-up in the South Carolina site. "Second, in order to comply with the agreement to prepare for a census that does not use sampling, it will be necessary to open in early FY1999 130 temporary local census offices to manage and control the activities necessary to collect data from all households that do not mail back a questionnaire in 2000. It is necessary to open these offices a year earlier than planned in order to prepare for the significantly increased work load associated with a census that does not use sampling. These lease negotiations for these 130 offices are nearly all completed and we will award the contract for equipment for these offices in the near future. "Third, we have made substantial progress toward developing a plan specifically addressing components of a census without sampling. "--We submitted to the Congress in April a 'Status Report on Planning for a Decennial Census in Year 2000 Without the Use of Scientific Sampling.' "--We have reorganized our decennial management structure to accommodate dual track planning successfully and we have hired staff to accomplish this planning. "--We have formed staff into some 20 chartered groups to address a wide range of issues concerning programs and operations that might be components of a census without sampling. These groups are exploring such broad issues as the use of administrative records, questionnaire development and delivery strategy, coverage improvement programs, ways to improve the nonresponse follow-up operation, and the marketing and partnership programs. These groups are preparing operational analyses of the components they are examining, which will be completed from mid-September to mid-October; these analyses will describe how an operation should be conducted if it were part of the plan for conducting a census without sampling. I will discuss these groups in more detail later. "--After integrating the groups' analyses, we plan to complete development this November of a plan to conduct a census without sampling, an associated master activities schedule, and interim cost estimates for the potential components of a plan. In February 1999, we will have a detailed plan." For further information about this bulletin, contact J. Paul Wyatt of the Public Information Office on 301-457-3052 (fax: 301-457-3670; e-mail: pio(a)census.gov).

27 years

[CTPP] Census 2000 News Alert

by ed c

Supreme Court Sets Date for Oral Arguments At Hearing, Rep. Miller Says Sampling OK for Federal Aid, Not Apportionment; Rep. Maloney Presses Critics for Undercount Remedies Stakeholders Renew Call for Full Funding or Veto; Senate Schedules Prewitt Nomination Hearing The United States Supreme Court announced today that it would hear oral arguments in the case of U.S. House of Representatives v. U.S. Department of Commerce, on November 30. A special three-judge federal district court ruled in the case last month that the Census Act barred the use of sampling and statistical methods to derive the census counts used for congressional apportionment. Congress provided for a speedy review of census challenges and a direct appeal to the Supreme Court. Both sides in the case had asked the high court to review the case quickly. At a hearing on Wednesday, the chairman of the House census subcommittee called on the Census Bureau to abandon a census plan that includes sampling to produce population counts for congressional apportionment but suggested that scientific methods could be used to produce data for distributing federal aid. Rep. Dan Miller (R-FL) also said it would be "unwise" to delay a final decision on the use of sampling until the Supreme Court rules on the constitutionality and legality of the methods. He said it is time "to put the 'issue' of sampling to bed." Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), who supports the Bureau's census plan, challenged the chairman "to propose a credible alternative" that will reduce the undercount. The subcommittee's senior Democrat chided panel Republicans for suggesting counting options, such as administrative records, without exposing the methods to a thorough review. She also accused sampling critics of having a "political agenda," citing a fundraising letter for a court challenge against sampling that included a Republican National Committee memo about the potential loss of Republican legislative seats if the Bureau's plan goes forward. Reps. Miller and Maloney made their remarks at a hearing yesterday to review the Census Bureau's effort to prepare for a census without sampling methods. Under Secretary of Commerce Robert Shapiro told the subcommittee that any lapse in funding for census preparations would put the entire census "at grave risk" by delaying completion of address lists, questionnaire printing, and opening of local offices. Mr. Shapiro noted that failure to reach agreement on the Bureau's 1999 funding bill by October 1 (the start of the fiscal year) could lead to a temporary funding measure that only allows spending at current levels (known as a Continuing Resolution). Without a steady increase in funds leading up to the actual census, the Bureau would be forced to lay off 22,000 address list employees immediately, he said. Mr. Shapiro also warned that the $476 million allocated by the House for 2000 census work through March 31, 1999 would only last through January, resulting in delays of all census preparations. Mr. Shapiro promised to present a full plan for a traditional census in November but cautioned that the Administration is likely to request additional funds in 1999 if it is required to proceed with that plan. Chairman Miller pledged to help ensure that the Census Bureau would be exempt from spending caps in a temporary funding measure and that it would receive sufficient funds to continue preparations on schedule through March 31. Acting Census Bureau Director James Holmes noted in his testimony that most of the Bureau's pre-census work and funds were devoted to activities that were needed for a census with or without sampling methods. He said the Bureau had created 20 teams to explore options for a nonsampling census, including the use of administrative records, staffing needs for door-to-door visits to all unresponsive households, and targeting replacement forms to historically low-response communities. Stakeholders Call for Full Funding: At a Washington press conference on Tuesday, the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights released a letter to Congress from Americans for a Fair and Accurate Census, calling for full, uninterrupted funding for 2000 census preparations. The coalition of religious and civil rights groups, children's and women's advocates, scientific associations, and local government officials said it would ask the President to veto any spending measure that limits funding to six months. Leaders of the National Council of La Raza, the Council of Great City Schools, and the Children's Defense Fund also spoke at the press event. The latter organization released a new analysis of how the undercount of children in 1990 affected education in 195 cities and counties across the country. According to the post-census survey conducted by the Census Bureau in 1990, 52 percent of those missed in the census were children. At yesterday's congressional hearing, Chairman Miller admonished the stakeholder groups for "blindly supporting an Administration on the brink of ruin" and not working with Congress to improve the census count without using sampling. The chairman, extending a self-described "olive branch," said he hoped stakeholders would help devise other ways to reach hard-to-count communities. Congressional hearings: The House Subcommittee on the Census will hold another hearing to review the proposed use of sampling in the 2000 census, focusing on the Integrated Coverage Measurement program. The hearing is scheduled for September 17, at 10:00 a.m., in 2154 Rayburn House Office Building. Census Bureau Director news: The Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs, chaired by Sen. Fred Thompson (R-TN), will hold a hearing on the nomination of Dr. Kenneth Prewitt to be director of the Census Bureau. President Clinton nominated Dr. Prewitt, who heads the Social Science Research Council in New York City, in June. The hearing is scheduled for September 17, at 10:00 a.m. in 342 Dirksen Senate Office Building. Census 2000 Initiative Web Site: The Census 2000 Initiative is pleased to announce that its web site is up and running. The site includes current and past News Alerts, fact sheets on key census policy issues, links to web sites for census stakeholder organizations, and a calendar of official census-related meetings and hearings. We hope you will visit our new site at <http://www.census2000.org>. Questions about the information contained in this News Alert may be directed to TerriAnn Lowenthal at (202) 484-2270 or, by e-mail at <terriann2k(a)aol.com>. Please direct all requests to receive News Alerts, and all changes in address/phone/fax/e-mail, to Keri Monihan at <kmonihan(a)ccmc.org> or 202/326-8728. Please feel free to circulate this information to colleagues and other interested individuals.

27 years

[CTPP] 2000 Census NEWS ALERT

by ed c

September 3, 1998 Justice Department Will Appeal Census Ruling To Supreme Court Congress Presses Administration for "Nonsampling" Census Plan On August 25, the Justice Department notified a federal court that it would appeal the court's order barring the Census Bureau from using sampling or statistical methods to produce the population counts used for congressional apportionment to the U.S. Supreme Court. This year's Commerce funding bill (Public Law 105-119) set up a direct appeal to the high court in lawsuits challenging the constitutionality and legality of sampling and called for an expedited review by the court. A special three-judge panel of the District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on August 24 that the Census Act (title 13, United States Code) prohibits the use of sampling to count the population for purposes of apportionment. Other federal courts, in cases dating back to the 1980 and 1990 censuses, reached the opposite conclusion. During the 1990 census, the Justice Department concluded that the Census Act and the Constitution permitted the use of sampling methods to improve a good-faith direct counting effort, although it noted the difficulty in interpreting seemingly conflicting provisions of the law. Then-Commerce Secretary Robert Mosbacher decided against a statistical correction of the undercount on other grounds. The court in the current case did not address the constitutional question (and therefore did not find that the Constitution requires a physical headcount of the population, as the plaintiffs argued). The district court opinion in the case of U.S. House of Representatives v. U.S. Department of Commerce, et al. is available on the internet at www.dcd.uscourts.gov/ <http://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/>. Congressional hearing: The House Subcommittee on the Census will hold a hearing on Wednesday, September 9, to review the status of census preparations. Secretary of Commerce William Daley and Acting Census Bureau Director James Holmes have been invited to testify. The discussion is likely to focus on plans for conducting a census without sampling and statistical methods in light of the district court ruling. The hearing will begin at 1:00 p.m. in room 2203 Rayburn House Office Building. Appropriations update: Before leaving town for its August break, the Senate appointed members who will serve on a conference committee that must iron out differences between the House and Senate versions of the Commerce funding bill for fiscal year 1999. The conferees, all members of the Senate Appropriations Committee, are: Republicans: Judd Gregg (NH), Ted Stevens (AK), Pete V. Domenici (NM), Mitch McConnell (KY), Kay Bailey Hutchison (TX), Ben Nighthorse Campbell (CO), Thad Cochran (MS). Democrats: Ernest Hollings (SC), Daniel Inouye (HI), Dale Bumpers (AR), Frank Lautenberg (NJ), Barbara Mikulski (MD), Robert Byrd (WV). The House will appoint its conferees when it reconvenes after Labor Day. Census Monitoring Board activities: The Board has scheduled a meeting for September 18 in Washington, DC (Exact location and time to be announced). The Board has moved into its new offices at Census Bureau headquarters in Suitland, MD. The presidentially-appointed Board members (led by co-chair Tony Coelho) and their staff can be reached at 301/457-9900. The members appointed by the congressional Republican leadership (led by co-chair Kenneth Blackwell) and their staff can be reached at 301/457-5080. Media Watch: Increasingly, press accounts of the controversy over census methods have described the population subgroups most likely to be missed as people "who tend to vote Democratic." Editorials both supporting and opposing the use of scientific methods in the 2000 census, as well as many news articles, have relied on this description to explain why the disagreement has been largely along partisan lines. It's important to remember that the census doesn't count voters, and people who are counted in the census don't necessarily vote. About half of those not counted in 1990 were children and immigrants who can't vote. Others who the census is likely to miss are alienated from or mistrustful of government, and are therefore less likely to vote, as well. So the next time you read in your local paper about the census counting voters, consider dashing off a letter to the editor to set the record straight! Stakeholder activities: The 2000 Census Advisory Committee will hold its quarterly meeting on September 24 and 25 at the Embassy Suites Hotel in Washington, D.C. The meeting is open to the public. Census Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ's): From time to time the Census 2000 Initiative will address frequently asked questions about census policy issues and operations. Question: Under its 2000 census plan, what will the Census Bureau do if more than 90 percent of households in a given census tract mail back their census forms? Answer: Every census form that is returned by mail will be counted, even if the mail-back rate exceeds 90 percent in a census tract. Here's how it will work: All (100%) known households will get a census form in the mail. A certain percentage will mail back the form. Next, census takers will visit enough of the unresponsive households to ensure direct contact (mail, telephone, and personal visits) with at least 90 percent in every tract. For example, if the mail-back rate in tract "A" is 60 percent, census takers will visit three of every four unresponsive households. Finally, the Bureau will estimate characteristics for the remaining 10 percent based on the characteristics of the other unresponsive homes in tract "A" (60% + 30% + 10% = 100%). For all census tracts with mail-back rates of 85 percent or above, census takers will visit one of every three unresponsive households. In 1990, there were no census tracts with mail-back rates over 90 percent. Nevertheless, in 2000, no census forms will be discarded, no matter how high the mail-back rate in a census tract. Consider a hypothetical census tract where 94 percent of the households send back their forms. All of those questionnaires will be counted. Then census takers will visit one in three of the remaining six percent (or two percent of the total number of households in the tract). The final four percent will be estimated based on information gathered from the nonresponsive households that were visited in person (94% mail response + 2% visited + 4% estimated = 100%). Questions about the information contained in this News Alert may be directed to TerriAnn Lowenthal at (202) 484-2270 or, by e-mail at <terriann2k(a)aol.com>. Please direct all requests to receive News Alerts, and all changes in address/phone/fax/e-mail, to Keri Monihan at <kmonihan(a)ccmc.org> or 202/326-8728. Please feel free to circulate this information to colleagues and other interested individuals.

27 years, 1 month

[CTPP] C E N S U S 2 0 0 0 B U L L E T I N

by ed c

Vol. 2 - No. 40 Aug. 25, 1998 On Tuesday afternoon, Aug. 24, Secretary of Commerce William M. Daley issued a statement in response to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia's order enjoining the Census Bureau from using "any form of statistical sampling" in Census 2000. The Secretary's statement follows: "We are obviously disappointed with today's ruling on the Census. What is at stake here is the ability of the Census Bureau to use the most modern scientific methods to ensure an accurate and fair census. We will ask the Solicitor General to appeal the ruling and we expect the Supreme Court to reverse it. Meantime, the Census Bureau will proceed with its two-track planning process, preparing for both a census using an element of statistical sampling, and a census that would not use those methods. "In the cases arising out of the 1980 and 1990 census, courts have held that the use of statistical sampling methods in the decennial is both constitutional and lawful. In 1991, Congress passed and President Bush signed legislation directing the National Academy of Sciences to determine a more accurate method for counting the population, including the possible use of statistical sampling. We concur with the findings of the Academy and other experts that a census using statistical sampling will produce much more accurate results, and at far less cost, than a census not using these methods." For further information concerning this bulletin, contact Mary Hanley (202-482-4883) or Karen Cowles (202-482-1523) at the Office of Public Affairs, U.S. Commerce Department.

27 years, 1 month

[CTPP] Census 2000 News Alert

by ed c

Date: Mon, 24 Aug 1998 16:42:23 -0400 From: census2000 <census2000(a)ccmc.org> BREAKING NEWS ALERT Federal Court Finds Law Bars Census Sampling Methods Commerce Department Will Appeal to Supreme Court; Three-Judge District Court Panel Avoids Constitutional Question A federal district court panel ruled unanimously today that a census statute bars the use of sampling methods to produce the population counts used to reapportion seats in Congress. The opinion, written by Judge Royce Lamberth, was issued in the case of U.S. House of Representatives v. U.S. Department of Commerce, filed at the direction of Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-GA) to stop the Census Bureau from using scientific methods in the 2000 census. The special three-judge panel heard the case on June 11. Judge Lamberth was joined by Judges Douglas Ginsburg and Ricardo Urbina in his opinion. A copy of the 31-page decision is available on the internet at <http://www.dcd.uscourts.gov>. The court found that the plaintiffs had legal "standing" to bring their lawsuit, which the Justice Department, representing the Commerce Department and Census Bureau, had disputed. The court wrote that Congress intended to prohibit the use of sampling methods to conduct the population count when it amended the Census Act (title 13, United States Code) in 1974. One provision of that statute (section 195) requires the Secretary of Commerce to use sampling techniques whenever possible to collect census and other survey data, except for purposes of apportionment. Another provision of the law (section 141) requiring a census every ten years allows the Secretary to conduct the count using any methods, including sampling. Several federal district and appellate courts have considered those apparently conflicting provisions in cases dating back to the 1980 census and have found that the law does not bar sampling to supplement a "good faith" direct counting effort. In a joint statement, Congressional Census Caucus Co-Chairs Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) and Christopher Shays (R-CT) said that they expected the Supreme Court to decide the issue ultimately. Former Congresswoman Patricia Schroeder (D-CO), who chaired the census subcommittee when the contested provisions of the law were enacted, said that the court's opinion "directly contradicted the intent of Congress" in amending the Census Act. Harvard Law professor Laurence Tribe called the ruling a "temporary blow" and said the history of the statute "[doesn't] provide any basis" for the court's interpretation. Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform, released a statement that opened with the following quote: "Americans for Tax Reform welcomes the court's rejection of this blatantly illegal scheme to advance the agenda of the forces of big government." The court did not rule on whether the Constitution also prevented the use of sampling and statistical methods in the census, saying that it did not need to reach that question since it believed Congress had barred the methods by law. In the major lawsuit challenging the accuracy of the 1990 census, the Supreme Court found that Article I, section 2, of the Constitution gives Congress "virtually unlimited discretion" in how to conduct the census. A second lawsuit challenging the constitutionality and legality of sampling, Glavin v. Clinton, was heard by a three-judge district court panel in Roanoke, Virginia on August 7. Matthew Glavin, head of the Atlanta-based Southeastern Legal Foundation, and Rep. Bob Barr (R-GA) filed suit on February 12 to stop the Census Bureau from carrying out its 2000 census plan. Questions about the information contained in this News Alert may be directed to TerriAnn Lowenthal at (202) 484-2270 or, by e-mail at <terriann2k(a)aol.com>. Please direct all requests to receive News Alerts, and all changes in address/phone/fax/e-mail, to <census2000(a)ccmc.org> or 202/326-8728. Please feel free to circulate this information to colleagues and other interested individuals.

27 years, 1 month

[CTPP] [Fwd:Standard Occupational Classifications]

by ed c

Don--i reposted your response to the mailing list. i hope that is ok with. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

27 years, 1 month

Re: [Re: [CTPP] Standard Occupational Classifications]

by lmugler.drcog＠usa.net

In reply to Ed Christopher's question about the NAICS changes- Here in Denver, we are looking forward to these changes. The old SIC codes are no longer reflecting the character of the economy, at least in our setting. With the service sector becoming such a dominant part of the economy, the new system will break services into several major groups. We are hopeful that this will be useful for transportation modeling as well. the new system will provide n opportunity to group industires together that have similar travel patterns. Again, changes in the way business functions are making the SIC groupings less releevant to transportation modeling. Hope that encourages you to review the changes. Larry Mugler Director, Development Services Denver Regional Council of Governments. owner-ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net wrote: > Chuck thanks for the heads-up. Anyone on the list care to comment on > this NAICS thing? Is it a good thing? Working in an agency that gets its > employment data given to it by another agency I really do not have a good > read on this. I am sure there are others equally unaware of what NAICS > means to them. > ed christopher > director of information services > chicago area transportation study > > Chuck Purvis (MTC) wrote: > > > Dear CTPP Listserv recipients: > > > > I'm forwarding this message that a colleague received from the state > > data center listserv. > > > > Chuck Purvis, MTC > > > > *************************************************************** > > > > The Census 2000 will be using 2 new classification systems. NAICS or > > North American Industry Classification System will be used for > > classifying employment by industry. SOC or Standard Occupational > > Classification will be used to classify occupations. > > > > I encourage you to become familiar with the SOC revisions and to > > submit comments. Thanks. > > Patricia Roberts > > paroberts(a)mt.gov > > 406.444.4393 > > ------------------clipped------------------------- > > ____________________________________________________________________ Get free e-mail and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1

27 years, 1 month

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

CTPP