Transcript

Press Conference on Census 2000 Redistricting Data

Participants:
Commerce Secretary Donald L. Evans
Census Bureau Acting Director William G. Barron

U.S. Department of Commerce,
Washington, DC

March 6, 2001
2:30 PM

Transcript by
Federal News Service,
Washington, DC

SEC. EVANS: Good afternoon, one and all. Come on in, Bill.

Good afternoon, all of you. Let me begin by saying thank you; thank you to Acting Director Bill Barron; John Thompson, chairman of the Executive Steering Committee for Accuracy and Coverage Evaluation Policy, affectionately known as ESCAP. Bill and John, you and your colleagues proved the Bureau was up to the decennial exercise, a challenge as old and big as the nation itself. You set ambitious goals and you exceeded them.

Census 2000 heralded the idea, "Quality Counts." We have achieved a quality count. And the credit doesn't just belong to statisticians and demographers grappling with all the numbers, it also belongs to the men and women standing behind me: Marvin Raines, the national field director; Fernando Armstrong, the head of our Regional Office in Philadelphia; Mae Davis (sp). Mae (sp) manages D.C. East here in Washington, D.C. It is one of America's 520 local Census offices, part of an unprecedented commitment of more than six billion taxpayer dollars to make this census, the 2000 Census, the most accurate census. And it was the most accurate census in the history of this great nation. May was not alone. There were almost one million temporary workers that worked on the census. Partners Programs involved more than 140,000 local partners; 23,000 Questionnaire Assistance Centers across this great nation; 28,000 Be Counted sites, and 11,800 Complete Count committees.

The individuals involved in this massive undertaking recognize that what FDR articulated more than a half-a-century ago is true, that, "The Census," as Roosevelt said, "is one of the requirements of good citizenship. It is a vital part of what it means to be an American." Their toil and their sweat set a very high standard on the issue of whether to statistically adjust. To make that decision, we required and followed a process that was open, transparent, reasonable and fair.

Last Thursday, the ESCAP recommended that unadjusted data be released as the Bureau's official redistricting data. Acting director, Bill Barron, concurred with that recommendation. I weighed their recommendation, evaluated their report, and contemplated the analysis that they presented. I also talked with outside experts from across the scientific spectrum in the census field. They helped me ask the right questions and left me with a broader, better sense of the debate.

Finally, I met with the Census Monitoring Board, sat down with members of the Hispanic Caucus, and talked with other members of Congress on both sides of the aisle. I concluded that the recommendation of the Census Bureau professionals and Acting Director Barron was correct and prudent. Thus, we will send unadjusted data to the states for the purpose, and only the purpose, of redistricting.

My attention now turns to the 2010 and preparations for the next census. We must build on the innovations and also review the initiatives that did not meet our expectations. Most importantly, we must work to build a national consensus on census participation. Being counted is a civic duty.

I would be pleased to take your questions. But before I take that, let me say one other thing about these fine people standing up here with me. They represent the millions of Americans that participated in this process for the census. Their leadership was -- is unquestioned. The results are unquestioned as to whether or not this was the finest census ever. And I'm always touched by the feeling and the notion and the -- and knowing of the millions of people that went all across this great land knocking on doors to make this the great success that it was.

So I want to say something about these people, thinking that they really represent the millions of people that were out there working. Bill Barron has been acting director of the Census Bureau since January 20th, 2001, in addition to continuing his duties as deputy director and chief operating officer, a position he has held since April, 1999. Bill served with distinction in top management posts at the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics for nearly 30 years before moving to the Commerce Department in August of 1998. So Bill has been a public servant for this great country for over 30 years.

John Thompson is associate director for the decennial census and is responsible for all aspects of the 2000 Decennial Census. John started with the Census Bureau in 1975, 26 years ago, and was previously responsible for directing the statistical activities for the 1990 Census. Again, John is one who has served this great country as a servant for some 26-plus years.

Marvin Raines. Marvin has served as the associate director for field operations since February of 1996. One of the many activities Marvin is responsible for is creating and fostering partnerships in community outreach programs. Marvin joined the Census Bureau in 1987 as an assistant division chief.

Mae Davis (sp). Mae (sp) served as an enumerator and eventually manager of Census 2000 D.C. East Office. Mae (sp) is one of the thousands of Americans from across this country that volunteered their time and their energy and gave their love to this great country in this cause to make the Census 2000 the success it was.

Fernando Armstrong. Fernando is the director of the Census 2000 Philadelphia Regional Office. Fernando also worked on the 1990 Census and he also worked on the 1980 Census. Fernando believes that the effort to reach out to churches, community groups, and public was an important part of the success of Census 2000.

So for all of these people and through all these people, I give my thanks and deep sense of appreciation for those who participated in this huge success of Census 2000.

Let me take a few questions.

Yes, sir.

Q: Mr. Secretary, the -- with the idea that everyone counts, how do you explain the leaders, for example, in remote villages in Alaska who say "Without sampling my community won't be able to be counted simply because of logistics based on your decision"?

SEC. EVANS: Well, like I said, this is most accurate census ever. We've made great strides relative to our counts historically. We have the lowest undercount in history by far. We have the smallest differentials in history by far. We looked at, the bureau looked at the ability to use statistics for a more accurate count. They have concluded at this point in time they cannot recommend to me that we would have a more accurate count using statistics.

But I'd like to again re-emphasize that this is the most accurate census we've had in the history of this great land. The undercount was slightly more than 1 percent, which is a remarkable achievement.

Q: What do mean, the flaws of sampling?

SEC. EVANS: Well, you know, I've turned some of the technical details over to the team here. But, you know, they are continuing to evaluate the data.

I can tell you one of the biggest challenges they had was the compressed timeframe. They were trying to and they were working with a vast amount of information and data in a very compressed time frame. And so this data will continue to be evaluated, continue to be looked at. There's issues they hope to resolve in the months ahead. I wish that it was possible that they could resolve some of these issues in the few weeks ahead. They tell me that that's not possible, they won't have additional information to evaluate the data for months, and in some cases years. So I think one of the issues was just a compressed time frame. These are all terrific professionals that worked on this, and they did yeoman duty over the last number of months, working long hours through the weekend. But at the end of the day there were some issues that they couldn't resolve. And being professionals that they are, they acknowledged that and said, well, because we can't resolve those issues we're going to have to -- we are recommending that we not release statistically-adjusted data.

Yes, ma'am.

Q: Do you plan to release the adjusted data at some point --

SEC. EVANS: Well, I can't say I will or I won't. I mean, I think that's a decision for the future. In fact, I know it is. Today we're releasing the unadjusted data only. And it's for the redistricting decision that's being made.

That was the focus of ESCAP.

ESCAP's responsibility was to recommend to the director and then to me whether or not you should statistically adjust for redistricting, not the question of whether or not statistically adjusted numbers should be used for other purposes. And those are questions that we will consider in the months ahead, after they've had additional information and additional data to evaluate some of the issues that are of concern to them.

Yes, sir?

Q: Mr. Secretary, some of the critics of the decision not to recommend adjustment have suggested that political pressure might have been brought to bear on the professionals in the Census Bureau. Can you speak to that? Can you -- or how can you assure people that there was no such political pressure, or if there was, what kind of political pressure was there?

SEC. EVANS: Yeah. Let me turn that over to Mr. Barron. And if you'd like to say something to that, Bill --

MR. BARRON: Absolutely. As I have met this secretary and known him since mid-January, and -- I can just say in no manner, way, shape, or form has he done anything except encourage me to stay at my post at the Census Bureau and do the best professional job I know how to do.

He's asked for explanations about what we do and how we do the Census, and I provided those. And certainly that's the kind of information I have provided a lot of Cabinet officers over the years.

But in terms of that particular issue, absolutely no pressure whatsoever, just encouragement and for me to go do the best job I can do as a professional. That's what I've tried to do.

SEC. EVANS: Thank you, Bill.

Yes, sir?

Q: Can you tell me when the first redistricting files will be released? Will it be later this week? And if so, when?

MR. BARRON: Well, we're going to release the first files tomorrow morning, for Virginia and New Jersey, I believe -- tomorrow morning.

SEC. EVANS: Yes, sir?

Q: I understand you're not ruling out, then, releasing the adjusted data for use of -- distribution of federal funds. If that's true, what would be the factors in whether you would or would not release it?

SEC. EVANS: Well, the first factor would be that the Census Bureau would come to me and say to me that they have concluded that the statistically adjusted data is more accurate than the unadjusted or -- data.

Q: Are there other considerations? Is that the only one?

SEC. EVANS: No, I mean, that's one of them. And you know, I just have to consider that when it comes to me.

Yes, ma'am.

Q: Absent that, how will you decide to distribute those federal funds?

SEC. EVANS: That's not my decision. I mean, my only decision is whether or not the statistically-adjusted numbers should be released or not. And, you know, what I know today is I'm not going to release adjusted data because the Bureau has advised me that it's -- they can't say it's more accurate than --

Q: Absent that, then the non-adjusted data will be used.

SEC. EVANS: That's correct.

Yes, sir.

Q: Mr. Barron, do you have any confidence that, given the opportunity to crunch the numbers another few weeks -- another few months that, in fact, you can satisfy these mayors who think that adjusted data would do them more good with the federal Treasury?

And, Mr. Evans, aren't there a lot of business interests that want district-by-district numbers, block-by-block numbers, and they use poll takers all the time.

MR. BARRON: The -- if I may?

SEC. EVANS: Sure, yeah, absolutely.

MR. BARRON: I mean, at this point, based on everything we could see in the timeframe we had, we've given the country the best estimates we can provide. I mean, that was the whole --

Q: The timeframe, again --

MR. BARRON: The timeframe was important.

Q: You now have six months; then what?

MR. BARRON: In six months I think it's possible that we would have extra data from something that's called a Census Supplemental Survey that would provide us more information on people who might have come to this country from foreign countries and better enable us to assess this discrepancy that we found, and really couldn't explain, between the Accuracy and the Coverage Evaluation Survey, the census itself, and demographic analysis. So it's possible that within six months we'll have an answer on part of the dilemma that we faced.

It's also possible that within six months -- perhaps closer to nine, we're going to be able to delve back into the long form for Census 2000, perhaps look at speeding up part of that processing, and see if we can get answers from the long form for Census 2000. So those are two things that we're going to try to do.

I mean, the bottom line here was -- I don't think anybody anticipated that we would arrive at a juncture where we had the type of discrepancy that we had between traditional demographic analysis, the census, and the ACE. I think that surprised everyone.

Q: What does that mean -- that there are more people than you ever expected to find?

MR. BARRON: Well, I think when the data for apportionment were released in December, that was the general reaction -- not just of experts in the Bureau, but the press and others -- was that that first count did seem to find more people than people expected us to find.

And then, indeed, with the Accuracy and Coverage of Evaluation Survey, we found more people yet. So it is possible that in the summer of year 2000, with an economy with world record unemployment rates -- or with record unemployment rates for the United States economy, an employment-to-population ratio in April of that year that was an all- time record for the U.S. economy -- with things like that, it's conceivable. But, you know, we can't give out adjusted data based on plausibilities; we need to have more proof, and that's why we came out the way we did.

SEC. EVANS: Thank you all very much. Appreciate it.