<DOC>
[110th Congress House Hearings]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access]
[DOCID: f:42899.wais]
2010 CENSUS: REDUCING THE UNDERCOUNT IN THE HISPANIC COMMUNITY
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON INFORMATION POLICY,
CENSUS, AND NATIONAL ARCHIVES
of the
COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT
AND GOVERNMENT REFORM
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
JULY 9, 2007
__________
Serial No. 110-55
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/
index.html
http://www.oversight.house.gov
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
42-899 PDF WASHINGTON DC: 2008
---------------------------------------------------------------------
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512ÿ091800
Fax: (202) 512ÿ092104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402ÿ090001
COMMITTEE ON OVERSISGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM
HENRY A. WAXMAN, California, Chairman
TOM LANTOS, California TOM DAVIS, Virginia
EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York DAN BURTON, Indiana
PAUL E. KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, Connecticut
CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York JOHN M. McHUGH, New York
ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland JOHN L. MICA, Florida
DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana
DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois TODD RUSSELL PLATTS, Pennsylvania
JOHN F. TIERNEY, Massachusetts CHRIS CANNON, Utah
WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri JOHN J. DUNCAN, Jr., Tennessee
DIANE E. WATSON, California MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio
STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts DARRELL E. ISSA, California
BRIAN HIGGINS, New York KENNY MARCHANT, Texas
JOHN A. YARMUTH, Kentucky LYNN A. WESTMORELAND, Georgia
BRUCE L. BRALEY, Iowa PATRICK T. McHENRY, North Carolina
ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of VIRGINIA FOXX, North Carolina
Columbia BRIAN P. BILBRAY, California
BETTY McCOLLUM, Minnesota BILL SALI, Idaho
JIM COOPER, Tennessee JIM JORDAN, Ohio
CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland
PAUL W. HODES, New Hampshire
CHRISTOPHER S. MURPHY, Connecticut
JOHN P. SARBANES, Maryland
PETER WELCH, Vermont
Phil Schiliro, Chief of Staff
Phil Barnett, Staff Director
Earley Green, Chief Clerk
David Marin, Minority Staff Director
Subcommittee on Information Policy, Census, and National Archives
WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri, Chairman
PAUL E. KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio
CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York CHRIS CANNON, Utah
JOHN A. YARMUTH, Kentucky BILL SALI, Idaho
PAUL W. HODES, New Hampshire
Tony Haywood, Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on July 9, 2007..................................... 1
Statement of:
Gonzalez, Hon. Charles, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Texas............................................. 6
Kincannon, Charles Louis, Director, U.S. Census Bureau; and
Kevin Wolff, city council member, mayor pro tem, city of
San Antonio, TX............................................ 8
Kincannon, Charles Louis................................. 8
Wolff, Kevin............................................. 15
Rodriguez, Hon. Ciro, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Texas............................................. 6
Saldana, Steven, president, Catholic Charities Archdiocese of
San Antonio; Arturo Vargas, executive director, National
Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials
Educational Foundation; L. Diane Bennett, president and
CEO, Kineta Corp., Charlotte, NC; and Lydia Camarillo, vice
president, Southwest Voter Registration Education Project.. 32
Bennett, L. Diane........................................ 45
Camarillo, Lydia......................................... 61
Saldana, Steven.......................................... 32
Vargas, Arturo........................................... 35
Letters, statements, etc., submitted for the record by:
Bennett, L. Diane, president and CEO, Kineta Corp.,
Charlotte, NC, prepared statement of....................... 48
Camarillo, Lydia, vice president, Southwest Voter
Registration Education Project, prepared statement of...... 64
Clay, Hon. Wm. Lacy, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Missouri, prepared statement of................... 4
Kincannon, Charles Louis, Director, U.S. Census Bureau,
prepared statement of...................................... 10
Saldana, Steven, president, Catholic Charities Archdiocese of
San Antonio, prepared statement of......................... 34
Vargas, Arturo, executive director, National Association of
Latino Elected and Appointed Officials Educational
Foundation, prepared statement of.......................... 38
Wolff, Kevin, city council member, mayor pro tem, city of San
Antonio, TX, prepared statement of......................... 18
2010 CENSUS: REDUCING THE UNDERCOUNT IN THE HISPANIC COMMUNITY
----------
THURSDAY, JULY 5, 2007
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Information Policy, Census, and
National Archives,
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform,
San Antonio, TX.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:12 a.m., at
Henry B. Gonzalez Convention Center, 200 E. Market Street, room
103-A, San Antonio, TX, Hon. Wm. Lacy Clay (chairman of the
subcommittee) presiding.
Present: Representative Clay.
Also present: Representatives Gonzalez, and Rodriguez.
Staff present: Tony Haywood, staff director; Alissa Bonner,
professional staff member; and Will Ragland, staff assistant.
Mr. Clay. The Subcommittee on Information Policy, Census,
and National Archives will come to order. Today's field hearing
will examine the issues relating to efforts to reduce the
undercount among Hispanics and Latinos in the 2010 census.
Without objection, the Chair and other Members will have 5
minutes to make opening statements, and, without objection,
Members and witnesses may have 5 legislative days to submit
written statements or extraneous materials for the record.
I want to recognize my two distinguished colleagues who are
here today. Our gracious host, Mr. Charles Gonzalez, as well as
Ciro Rodriguez, for both being here and joining the
subcommittee today. Let me make an opening statement, and then
I will introduce these two formally.
Let me begin by thanking my colleague and friend,
Congressman Charles Gonzalez, for agreeing to host us in San
Antonio and for the hard work of his staff in helping us to
plan and prepare for today's hearing. Our relationship goes
back through generations. His father and my father served
together in the U.S. House. When I got here, he quickly became
a friend of mine, and I appreciate his friendship.
Let me also thank Mayor Phil Hardberger and the city of San
Antonio for their cooperation in making the Henry B. Gonzalez
Conference Center available to us today. In addition, I am very
pleased that we are joined today by my friend, Congressman Ciro
Rodriguez of the 23rd District of Texas. We in Congress are so
pleased to have Ciro back in Congress where he should be and
should stay. We can clap for him.
[Applause.]
Mr. Clay. The issues we will be discussing today are very
important to him and his constituents, and we are fortunate to
have our colleagues' participation in this hearing. Today's
hearing is the third in a series of oversight hearings looking
at the Census Bureau's preparation for the 2010 census. It is
our first field hearing related to the census.
Article 1, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution, it mandates
an actual enumeration of the U.S. population for the purpose of
apportionment of congressional seats. In addition, the
information is used to allocate $283 billion in Federal funds
and to manage Federal agencies. Therefore, it is imperative
that the data be complete, accurate, and timely. This requires
the Federal Government to exercise due diligence in its effort
to count each and every person in the 50 States and the
District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the island territories.
The 2000 census counted 35.3 million Hispanics living in
the United States. That was up 13 million from the 1990 census.
The Latino population as a percentage of the total U.S.
population grew from 9 percent in 1990, to 12.5 percent in
2000. Unfortunately, the Census Bureau estimates that it missed
over 3 million people of Hispanic origin in 2000, and this
undercount contributed in part to a loss of over $4.1 billion
in Federal funding for 31 States and the District of Columbia.
Another $3.6 billion of Federal funding was lost by the
Nation's 58 largest couties, including Harris and Dallas
Counties here in Texas. This loss of Federal funding taxed the
resources of State and local governments and compromised the
level of services provided to residents.
Data about Hispanic origin also helps to determine
compliance with Federal laws such as the Voting Rights Act,
Bilingual Election Requirements, the Home Mortgage Disclosure
Act, the National Affordable Housing Act, and other statutes
that address affirmative action, nutrition, education,
veterans' benefits, older Americans, public health, and energy
assistance. Reducing the Hispanic undercount is necessary to
ensure that these laws are enforced and administered
effectively.
This morning we'll discuss the Census Bureau's plan of
reducing the undercount of the Hispanic and Latino population
in the 2010 census, including efforts to improve outreach to
residents of hard-to-count communities. The tone of the ongoing
immigration debate and recent data breaches involving various
government agencies heighten the challenge of counting
residents in hard-to-count communities, where language barriers
and fear of or distrust of the government are prevalent.
To achieve a full and accurate count, the Census Bureau
must use every legal and viable means to instill public
confidence in the Bureau's ability to collect census data
without putting anyone's privacy at risk. These efforts should
include providing language appropriate materials for target
populations in the Latino community, hiring Hispanics as both
senior managers and enumerators, and maximizing cooperation of
community partners to strengthen outreach and education.
One week from Wednesday, the House will be voting to
provide funding for these efforts, and today's testimony will
inform the debate as competing priorities to consider on the
House floor. With the help of our witnesses, we hope to learn
this morning what the Census Bureau needs and must do to be
effective in meeting the challenges associated with obtaining
full information of the Hispanic population. This will be a key
component of the broader efforts of securing a complete and
accurate count of the entire population on census day 2010.
Now let me yield to my distinguished colleague and our
gracious host, Congressman Charles Gonzalez.
[The prepared statement of Hon. Wm. Lacy Clay follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2899.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2899.002
STATEMENT OF HON. CHARLES GONZALEZ, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS
Mr. Gonzalez. Thank you very much, Chairman Clay. First of
all, welcome to you and your staff. We all got together last
night. We were on the river, on a barge, so I think they had an
interesting dinner and hopefully an enjoyable evening. And I'm
going to be really brief. I know Ciro is going to also have
some comments.
What the chairman brings today with his staff is the
interest that Congress is showing on probably one of the most
important aspects of what government does, and that is the
census that has been there since the forming of our country.
This is a listening tour more than anything else, and we're
here to learn and to take back to our colleagues and to share
with them the information that is actually gathered at these
field hearings.
We will be touching, of course--and I think the chairman
has already touched on the importance of the census. We don't
really believe that most Americans understand the importance of
the census and how it impacts their daily lives. We're also
here to identify and to encourage, to promote partnerships. The
Census Bureau cannot conduct the census and be successful
without those local partnerships. And I think the Director and
other witnesses will be addressing that, as well as leaders
from our city in what we have to do.
The census tells us who we are as a Nation. It will
identify the needs of our Nation, and it will allow us to
provide the opportunity to our citizens that have always
distinguished this country more so than any other country. That
is how important the census is.
Minority communities occupy a very unique position, and you
will hear some of the concerns and some of the challenges that
face minority communities by some of our witnesses. They will
be those communities that are truly undercounted, and those are
the communities whose needs are the greatest and have to be
addressed by government, as well as the private sector. The
facts and figures that are gleaned, that are actually compiled
by the Census Bureau, are not just used--again, these figures
are not just used by the government, whether it's Federal
Government or it's State or local governments. The private
sector, in large measure, also makes very important economic
decisions that impact us all based on these same figures. So I
think that is our message today.
I am truly gratified that Chairman Clay chose San Antonio,
because he could have chosen other cities. But I think he
understands where we are and the position we occupy as a city,
and, of course, the large Hispanic population not just in this
city, but in all of the Southwest. And with that, I thank you
very much, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Clay. Thank you so much, Congressman. Now I will yield
to Congressman Ciro Rodriguez for an opening statement.
STATEMENT OF HON. CIRO RODRIGUEZ, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS
Mr. Rodriguez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me first of all
welcome you to San Antonio also. Thank you for coming out here.
I also want to personally thank you for doing what you're doing
right now. I know how important this is, how essential this is,
and I know how difficult it is to get people to start to pay
attention to the importance of this issue.
You mentioned the over 3 million undercount that occurred.
If we can just look at that--and those that are involved in
redistricting, that would have meant almost four additional
Congressmen, and not to mention that in Texas--that was a
conservative figure in Texas--we lost, just on the undercount
from the previous decade, over $1 billion. So you can figure
out--I know that a welfare counselman would know what to do
with a billion bucks. Right? [Laughter.]
So, in terms of the difference in the disparity that occurs
because of the undercount. And it's an issue that requires
these types of hearings so that we can start getting the word
out so that we can start doing those things that are needed in
making sure that everyone gets counted, and that's important.
[Speaking Spanish.]
Mr. Rodriguez. And so it's important for us to continue to
have these hearings. And I want to congratulate our chairman,
but I also want to congratulate Congressman Gonzalez.
Congressman Gonzalez played a very significant role in the last
census. I know he had a series of meetings on behalf of the
Hispanic caucus. He was engaged in trying to get them to do
some counts in certain areas and making sure that certain
people got hired in order for that to occur and that to happen.
No one knows this process better than Congressman Gonzalez and
the difficulty that we have here in the San Antonio area, in
South Texas, in making that happen. So I want to personally
thank him for his engagement. So congratulations. Thank you.
Mr. Clay. Thank you so much, Congressman Rodriguez. Thank
you for being here. The subcommittee will now hear testimony
from the witnesses before us today. Our first panel, we'll hear
from the Honorable Charles Louis Kincannon, Director of the
U.S. Census Bureau, and the Honorable Kevin Wolff, City Council
Member and Mayor Pro Tem of the city of San Antonio. Thank you,
Director Kincannon and Councilman Wolff, for appearing before
the subcommittee today.
It is the policy of the committee to swear in all witnesses
before they testify. Will you both please stand up and raise
your right hands?
[Witnesses sworn.]
Mr. Clay. Let the record reflect that the witnesses
answered in the affirmative. Thank you.
Dr. Kincannon, before you begin, I want to say again how
much we appreciate your service in leadership as Director of
the Census Bureau. Congressman Gonzalez and I had the
opportunity to meet with you and Dr. Steven Murdock, who has
been nominated to succeed you as Director. And based on his
credentials and our conversation, I am hopeful that Dr. Murdock
will bring a similar level of expertise and commitment to the
top job at the Census Bureau.
That said, you will have 5 minutes to make an opening
statement. Your complete written testimony will be included in
the hearing record. The timing system is malfunctioning, but we
will indicate to you when you get close. You may proceed.
STATEMENTS OF CHARLES LOUIS KINCANNON, DIRECTOR, U.S. CENSUS
BUREAU; AND KEVIN WOLFF, CITY COUNCIL MEMBER, MAYOR PRO TEM,
CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, TX
STATEMENT OF CHARLES LOUIS KINCANNON
Mr. Kincannon. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you very much
for holding this field hearing in San Antonio. And I must say I
have renewed respect for your foresight in that you chose to do
it on a day when it's 88 degrees in San Antonio and 100 degrees
in Washington, DC. But it will make our recruiting problems
here more difficult, I think.
I am very pleased to begin with Congressman Gonzalez and
with Congressman Rodriguez. I was born in Texas, in Waco. I
went through the 3rd grade here in San Antonio, and then I
spent the rest of my youth in Corpus Christi.
[Speaking Spanish.]
Mr. Kincannon. It stood me in good stead many times to
speak to people I otherwise could not deal with, the head of
the planning, William Frederico, the Waco community leaders
sometimes who were more comfortable speaking in Spanish. And
when I worked in Europe, I found that it opened some doors that
my English would not, so--that was taught in the public schools
in Corpus Christi, and I have gained all my life from that
opportunity.
Well, I'm still going to be held to 5 minutes, so I'll have
to say that in the past decade, a number of important changes
have taken place in our country. Among those noteworthy changes
is the continued growth of the Hispanic community, our Nation's
largest minority community. The importance of this growth
should not be underestimated. It is, therefore, critically
important for the Census Bureau to ensure that our plans for
2010 will provide accurate data that will be used to create
opportunity for the thousands of Latino communities throughout
our country. Based on the 2000 census, we think we can further
improve the accuracy and coverage of the census. That's our
primary goal for 2010.
One of the most significant achievements of the 2000 census
was reducing the undercount of the Nation's historically
undercounted communities, including Hispanics, African-
Americans, and American Indians living on reservations. This
success was in large part the result of extraordinary outreach
efforts from the inner-city neighborhoods of St. Louis, to the
colonias of South Texas. Working with partners in the Nation's
hardest-to-count communities was key to achieving trust and
encouraging participation.
We worked with national organizations, including NALEO,
MALDEF, LULAC, and the GI Forum, as well as the faith-based
community and locally elected officials. And to meet the needs
of the hardest-to-count communities, such a colonias, in
addition to outreach, we used different operational strategies
in the field. For 2010, we know improvements can be gained
throughout the census process, from the address list
development, to better response strategies, as well as outreach
among the Nation's hard-to-count communities.
In preparation for the 2010 census, we have conducted
extensive planning and testing. Thanks to congressional
support, this will be the best planned and most tested census
in our Nation's history. Throughout the decade, the Census
Bureau has placed a high priority on improving the accuracy of
the census address list. We are working extensively with U.S.
Postal Service to update this address list twice every year,
and we are working with local communities to update the address
list and gather information about group quarters; nursing
homes, college dormitories, and the like, so that we can count
that community well.
Our goals for language are to provide effective ways for
our Nation's diverse communities to participate and respond to
the census. For the first time we will mail bilingual Spanish/
English census forms to neighborhoods with higher proportions
of people who show need to reply in Spanish. We are also
identifying areas throughout the United States where
information--informational materials in other languages will be
helpful. We will also encourage local hiring efforts to ensure
that we hire enumerators with relevant language skills to the
neighborhoods in which they will be working.
The success of the census will also be enhanced through
partnership and outreach. It is our commitment to work with
communities throughout the Nation so each and every person
living in the United States can be counted on census day. To do
so, the Census Bureau is planning a multifaceted and integrated
communications program to reach every community. As a part of
the overall communication strategy, we intend to incorporate
the lessons and successes of the 2000 census, which included
both paid advertising and reliance on partnerships.
Partnerships are fundamental to the success of the census.
These partnerships encourage participation and demonstrate the
importance of the census to the community. Local leaders at the
grass roots, whether they are in churches or in schools or in
business or in grassroots organizations are more trusted by
local people than the Census Bureau. They believe us, but not
quite as much as they do people they know every day and see
every day. Partners are often our best Ambassadors in hard-to-
count areas.
As I mentioned at the beginning, this census is the most
planned and tested census in our Nation's history. Our primary
goal for the 2010 census is improved coverage and accuracy. We
believe all of our coverage improvements, efforts to date,
contribute to this goal. Chairman Clay, I assure you that the
Census Bureau is fully committed to the goal of counting every
American in their proper place and in their communities,
especially the hard to count.
Thank you for supporting the goals of the census, which you
have done consistently.
Mr. Clay. Thank you so much, Director.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Kincannon follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2899.003
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2899.004
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2899.005
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2899.006
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2899.007
Mr. Clay. Mr. Wolff, please proceed.
STATEMENT OF KEVIN WOLFF
Mr. Wolff. Before I dig into this a little bit, I do want
to give a special thank you to Congressman Gonzalez and
Congressman Rodriguez for the great work you do for our
community. Both of you have given a lot of your lives to
helping us, and I really want you to know we really appreciate
it here. I'm going to read a number of things here. That's not
my preferred mode of communication, but there's a lot of
important information in there, and I want to make sure I get
it across correctly.
So, with that said, chairman and members of the committee,
my name is Kevin Wolff. I'm the city councilman for District 9
and the current mayor pro tem. On behalf of the city of San
Antonio, I would like to welcome and thank the House Oversight
and Government Reform Committee's Subcommittee on Information
Policy, Census, and National Archives for this opportunity to
examine plans on how the Census Bureau can work better with the
city of San Antonio to ensure an accurate count in the 2010
census.
The city takes an active role in the legislative and
regulatory process in Washington, DC, and we are honored that
you have chosen our city as the site for this important hearing
concerning the upcoming 2010 census. We are very grateful for
the leadership of our hometown Congressman, Charlie Gonzalez,
on the issue of the census, and again thank this subcommittee
for holding a field hearing in our great city.
San Antonio, with an estimated population of 1.3 million,
is the seventh largest city in the United States and the second
largest in Texas. Ensuring the most complete count possible is
important to San Antonio because it affects city, State, and
Federal political representation, Federal and State funding of
programs, economic development, planning for physical growth,
and delivery of health and human services.
In addition to our increasing growth rates and geographical
size--we're 472.9 square miles--our population characteristics
also present unique challenges to the San Antonio census count.
Of special note, Texas is now a majority-minority State, with
an increasing diverse population. Texas has a minority
population of 11.3 million, comprising 50.2 percent of its
total population of 22.5 million. Following this trend, San
Antonio's minorities represent 68 percent of the city's
population. Currently, Spanish speakers constitute a ratio of
more than 1 in 10 U.S. household residents. San Antonio has a
Hispanic population of 59 percent and a significant number of
Spanish-speaking households.
Mail non-response was significant, ranging from 25 to 60
percent in areas with a median income below 24,000 during the
1990 count. In 2000, San Antonians had a median income of
36,000 and 17 percent of the population below the poverty
level. Based on this historic data, the potential for an
undercount is apparent.
In a post-enumeration survey of the 1990 census, it was
determined that approximately 39,000 persons, or 3.9 percent of
the population in San Antonio, was not counted. According to an
estimate from the Texas State Attorney General's Office, our
community lost approximately 142 million in Federal and State
funds over a 10-year period as a result of the 1990 undercount.
And, yes, I could figure out how to spend the 142 million as
well.
To boost response rates, the efforts of the Census Bureau's
Publicity Office should be enhanced. For the 2000 count, this
office provided paid advertising, a census in school programs,
a Partnership Program engaging businesses and community groups,
and special events to promote outreach and response.
San Antonio partnered with Bexar County to participate
financially to support the promotion efforts. The Census
Bureau's Publicity Office coordinated with our local
complement, the San Antonio-Bexar County Complete Count
Committee, to spearhead a four-point program.
One, a public awareness program that focused on media,
special events, newsletters of existing organizations, speaker
pool, posters, flyers, and mail outs.
Two, a targeted outreach program that identified targeted
areas, recruited outreach volunteers in existing organizations
and volunteer centers, and promoted block walks to improve
response rates.
Three, a shelter program that inventoried shelters and
participated in surveys.
Four, resource development to identify specific resources
needed to target the census efforts to improve response rates
and solicit resources from subcommittees and affiliated
organizations.
Community partnerships were critical in the developments of
these programs. A mailing and contact list had contacts ranging
from professional organizations, schools, colleges,
universities, public utilities, media, military bases, elected
and appointed officials, neighborhood and community groups, to
faith-based organizations.
Of special note, the city recently initiated the Haven for
Hope, a 10-year plan to end homelessness. This plan includes a
multifunctional campus near downtown that will deliver
comprehensive human services to address homelessness, in
partnership with health and human service providers, local
charities, and the private sector. This should provide an
opportunity to obtain a more accurate count of our homeless
citizens and assess their needs.
For the 2010 census, the Complete Count Committee would
continue its role in conducting promotional, educational, and
outreach activities to persuade people to be counted. Of
particular concern will be increased outreach among the city's
diverse population, low-income areas, and non-English speakers,
where the potential for an undercount exists.
Second, the Census Bureau should continue its move toward
an electronic format to help ensure the accurate--and my time
is dinging.
In closing, the U.S. Census Bureau should provide the most
efficient and effective counting program for the 2010 census.
It should strive to improve coverage of the population and
reduce the differential undercount; improve the accuracy of
responses and locating people geographically; increase mail
response rates; maintain and refine an open process with all
stakeholders; use the most effective modes for responding to
the census; increase the use and effectiveness of language
assistance guides and non-English language questionnaires; and
ensure a diverse work force and improve the effectiveness of
recruiting, training, and pay strategies in obtaining the work
force needed to conduct the field operations.
I believe that's exactly what the Honorable Kincannon has
said before. So, again, thank you very much for giving me the
opportunity to come and testify, and certainly I'll be here for
any question that you may have.
Mr. Clay. Thank you, Councilman Wolff.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Wolff follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2899.008
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2899.009
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2899.010
Mr. Clay. And you would make an excellent witness on
Capitol Hill. You understand keeping within those time lines,
and you're a speed reader. I appreciate it. I am going to defer
first to my host--my gracious host, Congressman Gonzalez and to
Congressman Rodriguez. Congressman Gonzalez, you have 5
minutes.
Mr. Gonzalez. Did you notice the chairman gave me 5
minutes? But I'm--a little bit of slack. Thank you very much.
This is to the Director. And I guess what I want to get to
right away is to acknowledge some of the issues that are out
there that confront us and then may make this particular census
a lot more difficult than the last one, if you can imagine. And
the reason I say that is obviously we're just coming off a very
intense immigration debate. And we have to acknowledge, first
of all, that everyone residing in our country is counted,
whether they are citizens or not. And we have individuals, you
know, Mr. Director, that would disagree with that proposition.
But other than the Constitution of the United States, which
mandates that be the order, there's not much arguing about that
particular principle, and that is, everyone is going to be
counted, regardless of legal status, citizenship, and so on.
And it is important, and there are a lot of reasons for that,
which we could go into.
On top of all that, we also have had data breaches at the
Federal level; people losing information and such that should
have been confidential. We've got that problem. We have large
segments of society that believe that government is more
intrusive now than ever since 9-11. So we have all those
factors working in--what I think actually mitigate against our
best efforts--success anyway. And so I'm trying to ascertain
how you view those factors, what you think the impact would be,
and how you would address it?
Mr. Kincannon. Well, that's a tall order for some of the
topics that you raised. I agree that the continuing public
dialog and relative discord about immigration will make our job
harder in 2010, but I don't know, even if a bill had been
passed, it might not have resolved all of that either. But we
have to work again very closely with partners in the community.
The census law is very clear. We cannot disclose
information about individuals to any law enforcement agency or
indeed to anybody who's not working for the Census Bureau, and
that is observed very strictly. Yes, there are flaws sometimes
where opportunity exists for risk of disclosure, but we're
continually plugging those kind of holes.
It is important that respondents who fear the government
for whatever reason, or whether they just don't think it's the
government's business, understand that law. And I could talk
about that law until I'm blue in the face in every major city
in the country, and it will not be nearly as effective as a
clergymen in South San Antonio talking to his congregation
about that law and saying, ``I've looked at this. I know it can
be trusted and accepted.'' Or local community leaders in civil
society or even in business, they convey with much more
persuasiveness a sense of trust. So we're going to be more
dependent than ever on partners in the community to conveying
that guarantee.
On other areas, I think that we have made important
progress. The fact that we will have a short-form-only census
in 2010 is very important, I think, to increasing the mail
response rate and the general cooperation of people. We're only
going to be asking about eight questions, and they're not
controversial questions.
Although, some people in this country are frustrated when
they get a race question that is historically based rather than
maybe their vision of what group should be identified. But
realists understand that this plays a role in guaranteeing the
security of five identified groups who have been legally
discriminated against in voting in the history of our country.
So we will get much better cooperation, I believe, in a short-
form-only census.
A small effect of that--maybe not so small--is that the
more controversial questions on the long form now are asked in
small monthly samples that are carried on throughout the
country and provide information through the American Community
Survey to communities such as San Antonio every year, and not
just once every decade. That means that a lot of fodder for
public complaint and discussion about the census is set aside.
There are questions on the long form that are more sensitive,
like income. There are questions that people don't understand
why the government needs to know, like your journey to work,
what time you leave the home, and how you--how far you travel,
and what means you do. Obviously, that's very important to
transportation planning in San Antonio and throughout Texas,
but it's not immediately obvious to the person who gets the
questionnaire at home. That all is set aside from national
controversy in the course of that census.
The fact that we can have a short-form-only means that we
can send in areas where the American Community Survey tells us
there is a concentration of households where Spanish is spoken
at home and English is not spoken well or very well. That means
that we can target those areas with the bilingual questionnaire
for the first time and not have to followup through a more
clumsy process of offering a questionnaire in Spanish if
someone requests it. I think that will be a big help in
Hispanic coverage particularly.
The fact that we will use a hand-held computing device in
order to do the nonresponse followup and other activities in
the census is going to be very helpful because it means if
someone mails their questionnaire late, we know that and can
tell the next day the enumerator who's going around to knock on
the door, ``You don't have to go to 129 East Vanderbilt Street.
You can switch that, because we've got their questionnaire.''
They know exactly the location of where they're going and
spotted with GPS technology and so on. All of these tools help
us to make sure that we can do a good job in countering overall
frustrating trends in our society.
Mr. Gonzalez. Thank you very much, Director. Do I still
have time? OK. Because I don't want Councilman Wolff--the same
question in many ways. And thank you for your service and your
kind words. Because of the political climate--and you're a very
sensitive political person, appreciating the impact and the
consequences to the efforts of the city in forming that
partnership and what we will be asking you as a partner to do.
How do you see it impacting what--you and the City Council and
city staff and others?
Mr. Wolff. Thank you, Congressman. It will impact us. As
you know--I've shared this story with you. My family and I
lived in Manhattan during 9-11 and worked in the city. And so,
you know, all of those things have served to sort of change our
country. Some in not so good ways. Some in perhaps some good
ways.
But the fact is that it has changed, and it's brought
issues about how we deal with immigration, how we deal with
border security. You know, certainly in my mind I see those as
two very different issues. And I think--well, quite frankly, I
think we've made a mistake in Washington by sort of combining
those two. I think we need to address them separately. That's
my personal opinion. But that personal opinion affects the
decisions I make here in San Antonio and how we can help
support this effort.
You know, I thought about saying this at the beginning of
my testimony. I can't think of a more important, I guess,
counting exercise we do than this one. You know, you mentioned
some things about either private sector--we know about the
government sector. I mean, it is amazing how these numbers flow
through our entire country and how many decisions we make on
that. And so, while I acknowledge that it's going to possibly
be tougher than it was before, just acknowledging that and
getting ready for it as we're coming up to it is going to make
us so much stronger than perhaps we've been in the past. And it
will really point to--and I think we can talk about this all
the time. How important it is to do this correctly.
And so I don't know that we have all those answers yet, but
I think just being cognizant that it is going to be a tough job
better prepares us to do it.
Mr. Gonzalez. Thank you very much, Mr. Wolff.
Mr. Clay. Congressman Rodriguez.
Mr. Rodriguez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me--I sit on
the appropriations, so I know that without the resources, you
can't make happen what you want to make happen. And if you
can't respond now, I'd like to get it later on.
No. 1, maybe how much resources were expended the last
time. Because my understanding is that we did put some money--
additional money last time to try to get to the undercount, and
I'd like get a full picture of that budget for last time, and
then a projected budget for this time that will be comparable
and/or--in terms of how to address that gap of that 3 million
that occurred last time so it's not 3 million and it might--and
it won't be worse. So I think--you know, and if you could maybe
respond on that.
Mr. Kincannon. Yes, Congressman. I can't respond fully
about the life cycle--cost cycle in--cost estimate for the 2000
census. I do know that first of all planning and testing was
not carried out as thoroughly and systematically as it has been
this decade. And then there were last-minute decisions,
including one by the Supreme Court, about a year before census
day that required an extensive revision of the procedures to be
used in the field. Congress responded to those unusual
circumstances by a significant infusion of money in the last
two fiscal years which made a big difference in the success of
that census.
This time we began with recommendations from the Government
Accountability Office and from the Inspector General at the
Commerce Department that we begin earlier in our planning, that
we test the options that we were planning, that we revised our
plans based on the test results, and we have done that. We
started testing earlier than ever before.
This census will cost, in life cycle, about $12 billion.
That's significantly more in nominal terms than the life cycle
cost in 2000. But it is about $1 billion overall less than
repeating the kind of census that we had for 2000. That census
only gave us information for small areas one time in the
decade. The plan for the 2010 census will give us observations
every year for small areas, have a short-form-only census in
2010, and have all the extensive automation that saves money
and improves quality for about $1 billion less than repeating
the old fashioned census.
Mr. Rodriguez. And my understanding also that your--that
your data is only as good as what you're able to obtain, for
example, from the postal office. And the post office, I know,
is having a real difficulty with their resources. You know, we
didn't give them sufficient resources after the anthrax stuff
that they had to go through, and they had to swallow that cost.
Were there any expenditures that went into some of those
other--like the postal and maybe other--in order to help out
with the census that you're aware of the last decade?
Mr. Kincannon. I'm not aware that we transferred any money
to pay the postal service----
Mr. Rodriguez. I'm sure you didn't, but do you know if we
provided any resources to the postal----
Mr. Kincannon. No, sir, I don't know that. I know the
postal service has continued good cooperation with us, sharing
with us their delivery sequence file which we use twice a year
to review the address lists and improve them. They go through a
number of exercises to make sure that we have the knowledge
that they have, and that's very helpful.
Congress changed the law in--before the 2000 census to
permit us to share our address list with local governments;
with mayors, with county commissioners, and with State
governments, as a part of fact, so that they could point out to
us where we might have missed housing units. After all, local
knowledge is really--has to be better than our knowledge in
many instances. I spent part of yesterday, about 3 hours, going
around Frio County with Judge Garcia, and he had excellent maps
pinpointing housing units and, of course, an extensive personal
knowledge of the situation. I hope he'll come work on the
census with us, and we're going to enlist what knowledge he
has.
Now, we will go to city governments, county governments,
and State governments formally in August. We've already
announced this program in the Local Update of Census Addresses
[LUCA], and we will be formally beginning it in August. They
can submit their--their information--their list of addresses to
us in an automated form, and--we will then be able to check all
of the additions that we make, the postal service makes, or
local government makes, when we do the address canvas, going
around every street and every block and every road in the
country. So that's an important improvement in the address
list.
Mr. Rodriguez. Thank you. That was the exact question I was
going to ask the Councilman, the Mayor Pro Tem Wolff, in terms
of the 3 million undercount, in terms of how political
subdivisions or cities, communities, and school districts can
help in that process in terms of the undercount?
Mr. Wolff. Well, certainly, you know, my answer is going to
be very similar. You know, sitting here, I was thinking about
something specific you had also asked in regards to the post
office and funding and those types of things. And as I look
toward, you know, certainly our limited means here at the city,
those types of dollars and how we spend those, you know, I look
at this quite frankly from a business decision model. If I can
spend $100,000 to make $142 million, that's a pretty good
investment, isn't it? Yeah.
And so, when--when we're looking at opportunities to
partner--whether it's with the, you know, local grassroots
level, which you absolutely need--and really that's going to
bring out the numbers--the honest numbers more than anything
else. When you're looking at those opportunities, you know, if
the question specifically is is the city going to be able to
sort of step up to that plate and help participate, I think
yes. And, you know, it will certainly have my support. Again,
because of that simple business analogy, if I can spend some
dollars today to make a lot more tomorrow, then it makes a
whole lot of sense to do that.
Mr. Rodriguez. I think that's a great recommendation when
you talk to elected officials, you know, Director Kincannon--
what the Councilman just said. You know, no better argument
then that. Thank you.
Mr. Clay. Thank you, Congressman. Director Kincannon, you
have outlined what appear to be very important and promising
steps for the reengineered 2010 census. It is good to hear that
the Bureau is attempting to be proactive in its planning. My
concerns mainly involve a followup to what Congressman
Rodriguez was saying, and that mainly involves securing funding
for the Partnership Program and ensuring effective execution of
the plan.
What is the Bureau's plan for addressing those factors to
reduce the undercount in the 2010 census, including in the
colonias where the challenges may be greater?
Mr. Kincannon. Well, we--we are planning an extensive
communications campaign nationally, focused on particular--you
don't conduct a communications campaign just at the national
level with a single message. You have to tailor your message to
localities and specific problems like the colonias. You have to
respect a different language media and different communication
channels that reach those areas.
Language is an obstacle in the colonias, and that's where
being able to mail a Spanish language questionnaire will help
us a great deal. And employing local enumerators to followup
for households that haven't returned the questionnaires who
will be able to speak Spanish and will know the neighborhoods
is very important.
Colonias do not always have regular addresses, paved roads,
all the identifying things that you're accustomed to in the
center of a great city. In Frio County yesterday I learned that
they have had the E-911 program carried out. They do have
street addresses, house numbers, but I did not see house
numbers on every house. And in some colonias in that county,
the mail is not delivered to the house, but delivered to a
central point. And those--those are complicating factors that
make it difficult for us to find households and make sure that
they're reported.
So that means we'll have to take special steps to know that
neighborhood and to be able to identify the household and
perhaps use techniques such as update/enumerate or--in which
case we actually update our addresses and drop off a
questionnaire at the same time.
Mr. Clay. Thank you for that. What modifications has the
Bureau made to improve your reporting for detailed race and
Hispanic origin questions? How will the modifications improve
response rates?
Mr. Kincannon. We tested, Mr. Chairman, a significant
number of refinements, I would say. Not major modifications,
but refinements in wording and examples. We tested different
ordering of the questions to see which resulted not only in
overall response, but in more accurate response about race and
ethnicity. We were very careful with this.
Last spring we presented the results of that research to
all of our advisory committees. We have ten census advisory
committees, five of them--six of them targeting the decennial
census itself, and four other professional advisory committees,
such as statistics, marketing, economics, and so on. They
endorsed, based on the evidence we had gathered, the wording
that we planned to use on the final census form in 2010. And
that's what has been permitted--will be presented to the
Congress next year for its review.
We continue to get suggestions for change. We are very
reluctant to make changes when we have not got research to
understand the effect. We made a rather late change on the
wording of the Hispanic questionnaire, the examples given, for
2000, without additional testing.
Congress was informed of this. Maybe only one or two
Congressmen actually focused on that. But we went through the
process of notification. The outcome was good and bad. It was a
silver--it was a cloudless sky, but there was one little dark
cloud. It improved the overall count of Hispanics, but for
Dominicans, because the example had changed, the count of that
community was not clear and not as accurate as it had been.
We've taken a lot of justifiable grief about that result. So
we're going to stand, God willing, with the tested proven
results that we got in this time.
Mr. Clay. Thank you for that response. Councilman Wolff,
the four-point program of the San Antonio, Bexar County--
Complete County Committee is commendable. It appeared to be a
model outreach program. What do you believe will be the biggest
challenge--challenges facing the Bureau during the 2010 census?
Mr. Wolff. Oh, I think it--I think probably the biggest
challenge is something that Congressman Gonzalez pointed to
earlier, and that is, you know, a level of fear, a level of
distrust, and sort of breaking through those lines. And I think
we've heard a number of times that the best way to attack that
problem is really at that grassroots level, and why I think the
model that we've utilized before is a good one, because it
really does help us contact those local institutions; whether
it's your church, whether it's your schools, whether it's your
community centers, those types of areas, and really sort of dig
in to the grassroots neighborhood. That's where we're going to
get the work done, but that is also the biggest challenge.
Mr. Clay. The Bureau is planning to mail bilingual Spanish/
English census forms to neighborhoods with people who might
need language assistance in Spanish. What impact do you believe
that this effort will have on reducing the undercount in the
Hispanic community?
Mr. Wolff. I think it will help in that you're leading with
the language that is most important to the individual that's
going to be receiving it. However, I think that has to be
coupled with the notice in the community from the community
leaders within that particular area the, you know, this is
something they need to respond to. This is very important. And
so it's--and I'll say again, that's why this grassroots level
is very important. You have to--you have to reach those
individual community leaders at the same time that you're doing
this. That way, you know, when it's in the mail and you get it
in the mail, you've already heard from your priest. You've
already heard from your local community leader that, ``Hey,
this is coming. You need to pay attention to it, and you need
to respond to it.''
Mr. Clay. So it needs to be a multipronged approach.
Mr. Wolff. Absolutely.
Mr. Clay. We need to be involved in it. You note in your
testimony that the city of San Antonio and Bexar County
partnered on promotion efforts in 2000 and worked with the
Census Bureau's Publicity Office in that effort. Based on your
experience, what improvements in the Partnership Program might
you recommend?
Mr. Wolff. Wow. Let's see. It's--because I was not here
when we did that initial one, it would be difficult for me to
say specifically what sort of improvements. I can tell you that
especially here recently we have seen a partnership between the
county of Bexar and the city of San Antonio, quite frankly,
like we have never had before, which I think bodes very, very
well. [Laughter.]
Mr. Gonzalez. I understand family affairs and so does
Congressman Clay, whose father was in Congress before for over
30 years. So we're glad that you and your dad are able to get
the county and the city on the same page.
Mr. Wolff. I was--I was actually referring to that County
Judge who I might be related to, and the mayor. I'll tell you,
the friendship and partnership between those two individuals
has, I think, done tremendous--for this city and really paved a
path in city-county relationships that I quite frankly think
will go forward.
That being said, in direct answer to your question, we have
the model. It's being able to make sure that we can sort of,
you know, cross our own little bridges and blockades between
governmental entities. That's probably going to be the biggest
challenge, and it always is, as you gentlemen know as well.
Mr. Clay. Thank you for your response. Mr. Gonzalez, do you
have any more.
Mr. Gonzalez. I just wanted--and only the Director can
actually address this one. And it was a question that one of
the reporters that was interviewing me this morning so that it
would be reported--and in San Antonio, we do have a large
Spanish language media, obviously, and that's the way many of
the households that would be identified as undercounted are
probably going to be receiving that information. And we know
there's going to be distrust. We know there's a lot of anxiety
right now in the communities that generally would be
undercounted.
But addressing that, when that census--when the person
actually is in that neighborhood--because we're assuming the
undercount is taking place because individuals have not mailed
back forms and so on. So we have more personnel on the ground
that are trying to gain the information one on one. The concern
is always are you going to answer the door?
That individual is going to introduce themselves, and
they're going to have to have some sort of--you know, whether
it's their identification and such. If you can just--as basic
as this sounds, it is really important that individual that is
at that door is, first of all, associated, an employee with the
census. What is the official documentation or proof that they
have? Any standard operating procedure? And again, if you would
remind individuals that the information that is gathered at
that moment is not shared with any law enforcement,
immigration, any agency or department of that nature?
Mr. Kincannon. The followup enumerator who comes to the
door when a household has not returned its questionnaire will
have a standard credential identifying them as an employee of
the Census Bureau and, therefore, they will have taken the oath
of office which binds them for the rest of their life to hold
secret the information that they collect. They will be trained
in that. They should be able to articulate that. There will be
a lot of advertising in English, in Spanish, in other languages
as well, communicating that confidentiality pledge that the
Congress has made by passing the law that set it up. And we--we
conform to that.
But it must--it is a message that--although it needs to be
said on the doorstep by a person who knows the language of the
area, who knows the makeup and the culture of the neighborhood,
but it must be reinforced by community leaders; the priest, the
rabbi, the minister, the imam, whatever--the union leaders,
club leaders, so on. That has to reinforce that, ``Yes, I know
about it, and I can endorse it.''
Mr. Gonzalez. Thank you very much.
Mr. Clay. Congressman Rodriguez.
Mr. Rodriguez. Yeah, one real quick one. I want to followup
on what Congressman Gonzalez--his initial question. To your
knowledge, has there been any lawsuits or any requests by the
administration or anyone regarding the number of illegals or
anything like that of the Census Bureau, or lawsuits?
Mr. Kincannon. I don't think there's been any lawsuits, to
my knowledge, against the Census Bureau or the administration.
Mr. Rodriguez. No cases pending.
Mr. Kincannon. We don't have any cases pending on the issue
of identifying illegals. I'm aware of proposed legislation
that's been introduced but not acted on in the House, and I
don't know that--it hasn't been acted on for some time. So
that's encouraging. There's a long legal precedent of--dating
back to 1790, of counting everybody who is really living here,
eating and sleeping here most of the time, and not just
visiting on business or as a tourist, is a very substantial
accumulation of precedent. It could be changed by legal--by a
new law being passed. I don't know that it could be challenged
successfully. I'm not a lawyer myself. But it would seem to be
hard to challenge a precedent set in law in the Census Act of
1790 when so many participants in the Constitutional Convention
were Members of that Congress and knew what they intended for
sure.
So that has been no--certainly no request of people within
the current administration, to my knowledge of the Census
Bureau, that we change our practice of counting everybody. A
lot--a lot of folks in this administration are from Texas----
Mr. Rodriguez. Where does the figure that we use now of 12
or 14 million that Ron documented come from?
Mr. Kincannon. I think the most often quoted figure comes
from estimates made by the Pew Trust, Jeffrey Pacell, who
worked many years at the Census Bureau, does work for them.
It's credible work. It goes farther out on a limb with
assumption than the Census Bureau does. We don't try to measure
whether an immigrant is here illegally. We do not ask in the
census short form about citizenship, let alone legal status. We
do ask about citizenship in the American Community Survey, but
we don't ask about illegal status. I'm not sure that if the
Congress directed us to do that by law we would be successful.
Can you manage asking somebody, ``Are you here legally or
illegally?'' Well, you know, who is going to answer that?
Mr. Rodriguez. Thank you.
Mr. Clay. Thank you so much for that interesting question.
Director Kincannon, in your testimony, you state that the
Bureau is now integrating planned improvements into the 2008
dress rehearsal. What are some of the improvements, and how
will they help to reduce the undercount in the Hispanic
community?
Mr. Kincannon. Well, I think the improvements I've
mentioned already in terms of use of automation, the hand-held
computers, will enable the nonresponse followup interview to
toggle between English and Spanish; the use of the short-form
census, which is much easier for people to complete, not as
demanding or complex in the case of a large family; work on
address list improvement and the maps that we use for the
census, which has been ongoing from the--from 2001--it began in
2001--to improve the maps, to centerline the roads in the TIGER
map system; and the work now reaching--just about to reach
fruition on updating the address list, which is a multi-phase
exercise.
You know, the census is built basically around a list of
housing units where people live. We can't just ask people
standing in the street, you know, ``What's your name, and we'll
count you.'' We need to pin them down to where they live,
because for the constitutional purpose of the census,
redistricting--reapportionment and redistricting, there is a
desire--a requirement for geographic exactitude. So we're
dependent on having a good list of addresses.
Mr. Clay. Thank you for that response. As we have heard in
previous hearings, there is some concern that the Bureau will
not have sufficient time to implement the changes required
after the 2008 dress rehearsal. Does the Bureau have an
implementation plan that will enable it to make the necessary
adjustments from the dress rehearsal in a timely manner?
Mr. Kincannon. Well, yes, sir, we think so. We are already
reacting to what we're learning from the early phase of address
canvas in the dress rehearsal, where we found that there were
some shortcomings in the software on the hand-held computers.
The hardware itself was fine, which is good because we'd
otherwise have a difficult problem to deal with. The software
changes can be made one time in one way in order to correct
those difficulties.
Some of the changes were simple and just a matter of
unsuccessful communication between the Census Bureau and the
contractor about the way certain aspects of the work would
come. Others a little more difficult but are going to be
solved. And I think we're finding that helpful and that we're
going to be able to deal with those kinds of problems as
they're identified during the dress rehearsal.
Mr. Clay. Both of you, how important is it for the Congress
to appropriate the necessary funds in 2008--in the fiscal year
2008 for the 2010 census?
Mr. Kincannon. In the 2000 cycle of the census, only about
6 percent of the funds for partnership were appropriated in
1998. The rest of it--the bulk of it was in fiscal 1999 and
fiscal 2000. It's useful if we have some money on partnership
in 2008, but it did not seem to us to be a sword on which we
wanted to fall for 2008. It's essential we have the funding in
2009 and 2010, because that's when everything roles out into
workers in the field.
We already had money in 2007 and in the proposal for 2008
for the planning of partnership. It's the extra funds for
rolling it out and hiring people in the regions that has to be
done. And if the House mark of adding $13 million comes--comes
to pass--the Senate has not matched that so far--then I think
that would be very helpful in getting the head start that we
need to ensure that those connections that we have with many
national and local organizations are solidified. We have
continuing work throughout the decade on partnerships, but it's
at a very low level, and that's not inappropriate. But it's--
the time is scaling up. The sooner you start, perhaps the
stronger your position.
Mr. Clay. Thank you. Mr. Wolff.
Mr. Wolff. Without knowing the specifics of the budgetary
cycle for the department, it's hard for me to say specifically.
But let me--let me give another business analogy. You know, do
it right the first time. You know, if you know that you're
going to need X and it's going to take Y to get X, then why
mess around with anything else? You know, if it's going--and
I'm--I feel quite confident that he will be able to give you a
budget that says, ``This is X. This is what we need.'' And, you
know, getting out in front of this saves you a heck of a lot
more money on the back side. I mean, and that's--and that's my
business analogy. In other words, do it right the first time.
Otherwise, what you're going to find as you get down toward the
end, he's going to be coming back to the table and saying, ``I
need twice as much as I needed before because we started so
late.'' So do it right the first time.
Mr. Kincannon. I'm getting to be a bit long in the tooth,
but I do have some interesting experience to speak from.
In 1980, I was working at OMB, not at the Census Bureau,
and the Census Bureau requested, during fiscal 1980, some extra
emergency cushion funds in case of unforeseen events. I don't
know whether--I don't remember whether it was OMB or the
Congress that didn't provide that money, but in fact exigencies
occurred, and we ran out of money in fiscal year 1980, and we
had to shut down local census offices, processing centers, and
so forth, for a period of a number of weeks before we got an
emergency appropriation through, which was difficult enough in
1980. And it's just about impossible now. We never recovered
from that loss of weeks. The census products were not weeks,
but years late in coming out as a consequence.
In 2000, we were given an ample cushion of money. As it
turned out, few emergencies occurred, and the mail response
rate was higher than we had experienced in three previous
censuses. Therefore, we were able to return to the Congress
$300 million that we did not spend. In that one little brief
period of time, it made the appropriation staff in the House
and the Senate very irritable because they had to work hard to
get that $300 million. But I still think it was better to have
it and not use it. And I hope that lesson is--we all remember
for 2010.
Mr. Clay. You covered a 30-year period there, from 1980 to
2010. You have a depth of experience. Gentlemen, any other
questions for this panel.
Mr. Rodriguez. If I could just briefly followup on what
you've indicated. We've been having floods, fires, disasters.
You know, I would just, you know, ask you that you get to us as
quickly as possible if something occurs that's going to create
a difficulty. Because I know that if you have a major flood in
a community or a State that gets impacted during the time of
the census, that's going to--I mean, nobody is going to be
thinking about the census. So you really need to come to us as
quickly as possible, and/or even look at the supplemental as an
emergency response as early as possible to--if you can foresee
some of that occur--not foresee some of that, but in terms of
the areas where they have already occurred, that you foresee
some difficulty in getting access to those addresses and those
households, you know, I would appreciate it. OK? Thank you.
Mr. Clay. That concludes the testimony of panel 1. Let me
again thank you both for being here, and we will--this panel is
excused. And we will now set up for panel 2. Thank you.
[Recess.]
Mr. Clay. The subcommittee will come back to order to hear
from our second panel. Our second panel will include Steven
Saldana, president of the Catholic Charities Archdiocese of San
Antonio--thank you for being here--and Arturo Vargas, executive
director of the National Association of Latino Elected and
Appointed Officials Educational Fund--so good to see you, sir--
and L. Diana Bennett, president and CEO of Kineta Corp. in
Charlotte, NC. Welcome, Ms. Bennett. Thank you for being here--
and Lydia Camarillo, vice president of the Southwest Voter
Registration Education Project based here in San Antonio, TX.
Welcome, and welcome to all of you. Thank you for being with us
here today. Ms. Bennett and Mr. Vargas, I know you had to
travel long distances to be here, and we appreciate it.
It is the policy of the subcommittee to swear in all
witnesses before they testify. Would you all please stand and
raise your right hands?
[Witnesses sworn.]
Mr. Clay. Let the record reflect that they have all
answered in the affirmative. Each of you will have 5 minutes to
make an opening statement. Your complete written testimony will
be included in the hearing record. We will indicate when you're
getting close to your 5 minutes. We will begin with Mr.
Saldana. Please proceed.
STATEMENTS OF STEVEN SALDANA, PRESIDENT, CATHOLIC CHARITIES
ARCHDIOCESE OF SAN ANTONIO; ARTURO VARGAS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF LATINO ELECTED AND APPOINTED OFFICIALS
EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION; L. DIANE BENNETT, PRESIDENT AND CEO,
KINETA CORP., CHARLOTTE, NC; AND LYDIA CAMARILLO, VICE
PRESIDENT, SOUTHWEST VOTER REGISTRATION EDUCATION PROJECT
STATEMENT OF STEVE SALDANA
Mr. Saldana. Thank you Chairman Clay. It's a pleasure to be
here to be able to speak in front of you, especially in front
of Congressman Gonzalez and Congressman Rodriguez. Thank you
for allowing me to say a few words on what is a very important
process to U.S. census. There is a great concern as to the
nature of the process and whether there is a real desire to
locate and register everyone in the country.
I would like to separate for a moment the political issue
of documented and undocumented peoples. It is widely understood
that people come from all over the world to the United States
looking for a better way of life. Regardless of how they get
here, they eventually marry U.S. citizens and have children who
are U.S. citizens. These spouses and children are guaranteed
under the law the access to benefits approved by the
government.
The census is critical to the Federal distribution of funds
for allowed benefits. What may not be widely recognized is that
not only does the undocumented individual fear governmental
processes, but the whole family fears them as well. Naturalized
citizens are put in a state of fear to protect loved ones who
are not documented. This fear affects their participation in
processes, such as the census, to which they are entitled. This
fear then leads to an undercount of the peoples in an area such
as Texas. This undercount leads to less Federal funds and to a
general deteriorating of the well-being of the community.
How, then, to help overcome this distrust and get an
accurate count? Practice has shown than there are institutions
that the families of mixed legalities do trust. One of these
institutions is the church of their belief. Statistically the
church that represents the largest block of Hispanics is the
Catholic church, but my remarks can be general to all churches.
It is vital that faith-based systems be heavily used in the
outreach for the census process. This use must be active and
not passive. Priest and ministers must be encouraged to
actively state that the census process must be participated in.
Posters and bulletin inserts must be used over and over to
convince individuals that the census participation will not put
them at risk.
I urge one more thing. During the last census, the
government sent mixed signals. While publicly proclaiming that
all people were hoped for during this census process, the
immigration service was conducting widespread raids and
roundups. This had the obvious effect of depressing
participation. The natural fear and distrust of the government,
coupled with raids, tells the Hispanic community that you do
not really want them to register. I urge you to demand a
moratorium on such raids during the census process. Only by an
open and fair process, one completed without fear, can the
census truly have meaning. Thank you.
Mr. Clay. Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Saldana follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2899.011
Mr. Clay. Mr. Vargas, you may proceed.
STATEMENT OF ARTURO VARGAS
Mr. Vargas. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm Arturo Vargas,
executive director of the NALEO Educational Fund. We're a
nonprofit, nonpartisan organization that facilitates the full
participation of Latinos in the American political process. As
such, our mission includes the census as a core element. And I
should acknowledge was a contemporary of your father, Mr.
Chairman, and your father, Mr. Gonzalez, the late Congressman
Edward Roybal founded this organization with the vision that an
organization promote the full participation of Latinos in the
American political processes, and the census is an element of
that.
I'd also like to applaud the nomination of Dr. Steven
Murdock to be Director of the Census Bureau. We have endorsed
this nomination. And we also thank Dr. Kincannon for the work
that he has provided in his leadership. We urge a speedy
confirmation by the Senate of Dr. Murdock because time is of
the essence.
Since 2000, we have served on the Secretary of Commerce's
2010 Advisory Committee, or its predecessor, and we have
enjoyed a long working relationship with the Census Bureau. So
my recommendations here are based on our more than 20 years of
experience working with the Census Bureau.
But let me just say at the beginning that to ensure an
accurate count of our Nation's population, an accurate count of
the 44.3 million Latinos who are now the Nation's second
largest population group, and the fastest growing, is
imperative. An undercount of such a large segment of the U.S.
population will mean a failed census. You cannot have a good
census if you don't have a good enumeration of the Latino
population. So we offer the following recommendations.
One, is Census Bureau must develop effective outreach and
education partnerships with community based organizations that
the Latino community trusts, building on the successes and
experiences of census 2000. I think this issue has already been
developed in the testimony presented by Dr. Kincannon; however,
I would add that we were deeply concerned that the
administration did not include funding in its budget request
for the Partnership Program in fiscal year 2008. And we
congratulate the leadership of the Commerce, Justice, Science
and Related Agencies subcommittee of the House Appropriations
Committee to allocate $13 million for this effort in 2008. This
effort must begin now.
No. 2, the Census Bureau must implement a communications
and outreach plan that uses culturally appropriate outreach
materials that takes into account the special challenges in
reaching certain Latino subgroups and other hard-to-reach
populations. Again, Director Kincannon has worked--described
this, but I would mention to the committee is that in the fall,
the Census Advisory Committee will have a meeting where the
focus of the agenda will be on the communications plan. So I
would encourage your offices to attend that meeting so that we
can all be together briefed on the Census Bureau's plan for its
communication strategy in 2008.
Third, special strategies and preparations will be required
to enumerate the Nation's immigrant population, regardless of
their status. And I'm glad that this issue already has been
raised, but I believe that the Census Bureau and the
subcommittee should not underestimate the challenge that we
will have. The current debate and its tenor has already
complicated the situation in the United States.
Many States and localities are considering measures
intended to target immigrants. Some of these measures require
local law enforcement agencies to enforce immigration laws.
Others require apartment owners to check the immigration status
of potential renters. This has created a climate which will
exacerbate immigrants' distrust of contact with government,
including the Census Bureau. Undocumented immigrants, legal
permanent residents, and even U.S. citizens who live in
households where family members have varied status of
immigration will be discouraged from answering the census. The
anti-immigrant climate today will harm confidence in the
confidentiality of the Census Bureau and promote the belief
among many residents that the Bureau will use the information
in a way that will harm them.
Now, we have seen local governments and even private
citizens take the law into their own hands. We have seen
efforts by the Minutemen to enforce border laws. We have seen
efforts by cities to enforce Federal immigration laws. I do not
believe it's unimaginable that we will see perhaps private
citizens try to take the law into their own hands and prevent
the Census Bureau from enumerating all persons and all
immigrants. I will call upon this committee to review what is
now on the books in terms of prohibiting interference with the
actions of the Census Bureau to ensure that the Census Bureau
can carry out its constitutional duties without the
interference of private citizens, or even local localities who
may not want to see all immigrants counted in the census.
We call upon the Census Bureau to begin working with the
Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency [ICE], to limit its
enforcement activity during the descending enumeration. This
happened during census 2000 with the predecessor agency, the
Immigration Naturalization Service.
With the failure of the U.S. Senate to enact comprehensive
immigration reform, we already have heard from Secretary
Chertoff, the Director of Homeland Security, that we will see
an increase in the enforcement activities and raids that have
separated parents from their children. This will only make the
situation worse and contribute to distrust in the census come
2010.
Fourth, the Census Bureau must ensure that its census 2010
work force reflects the diversity of its population. And it's
not just about making sure that enumerators reflect the people
that they're counting, but managers of the district offices,
people in decisionmaking roles at the Census Bureau need to
reflect that population as well. Many local offices are now
opening or preparing to open. Office directors must reflect the
local community as well.
It is one thing to ensure that we have Spanish-speaking
enumerators in San Antonio or the Valley. It's another thing to
ensure that we have Spanish-speaking enumerators in North
Carolina, in Tennessee, and in Arkansas. This will be the areas
of real challenge for the Census Bureau to ensure that work
force in those communities have the cultural competency to
actually enumerate those on populations.
So one of the things that the Bureau should work on is
securing a waiver in its hiring practice that would allow work-
authorized noncitizens to take on enumerator positions. Right
now U.S. citizenship is required to have a Federal job, and
being an enumerator is a Federal job. But in many local
communities, there will not be sufficient U.S. citizens with
the language skills necessary to conduct the work of the Census
Bureau. So we believe the Census Bureau should act now to
secure a waiver of that requirement.
And finally, the Census Bureau must be able to act quickly
to adjust its plans based on the outcomes of the 2008 dress
rehearsal. The dress rehearsal will occur in the San Joaquin
County, CA and certain counties in North Carolina. This will be
the first time that in an actual census setting we see new
features such as the mailing of bilingual questionnaires,
targeted replacement mailing, and new technologies, including
hand-held computers and global positioning software.
The Bureau must be able to be nimble and act on changes
that will be required based on the outcomes of the dress
rehearsal. We have already heard that the Bureau is reluctant
to make any changes to the census form without sufficient
testing because they don't want to make previous mistakes. We
hope that kind of consciousness doesn't carry over into the
results of the 2008 dress rehearsal. That will be our final
opportunity to act on changes needed based on what worked and
did not work in the field.
Finally, I will call upon this committee to continue to--
its vigilance, not just with this annual census, but also with
the implementation of the American Community Survey. Many of
the same issues that affect the annual census, affect the
American Community Survey, and that is conducted every single
year, where 3 million households are sent what is now the
equivalent of the long form. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Clay. Thank you, Mr. Vargas. Appreciate that testimony.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Vargas follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2899.012
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2899.013
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2899.014
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2899.015
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2899.016
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2899.017
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2899.018
Mr. Clay. Ms. Bennett, you may proceed.
STATEMENT OF L. DIANE BENNETT
Ms. Bennett. Thank you, Chairman Clay, Mr. Gonzalez, and
Mr. Rodriguez. I am here today--and I'm not going to prolong
this hearing talking about the importance of the community
Partnerships Program or the significance of doing just
something extra to make sure that the differential undercount
is reduced. I am going to talk today and share some
observations and also some recommendations based upon past
experience, lessons learned.
For census 2000, I acted as the special assistant to the
Director of the Census Bureau and also as special assistant to
the Associate Director for field operations. My primary
responsibility was the Partnership Program. For a brief moment,
I was acting partnership coordinator. I selected the then
current chief of partnerships and her deputy, who is now the
chief of partnerships. So what I wanted to share today is some
very practical--I believe some very practical observations and
recommendations consistent with what many of my distinguished
panelists have already mentioned, but I wanted to talk about it
from the other side. Because as I said, in 2000, I was a part
of that team. Every partnership decision that was made in 2000,
I was at the table. I can tell why they were made, and I can
tell you under what circumstances they were made. I'm not
guessing. I'm talking about my experience, and that's what I
want to share with you today.
One of the clear things that kind of distinguishes this
census and the preplanning that leads up to it from census 2000
was--and Dr. Kincannon alluded to--the dual tract census
planning that was going on. The great thing about that--
although we were overworked, the great thing about that was the
Congress, as you know, Mr. Gonzalez, gave us a robust budget to
do that. We were doing dual track censuses, and we had dual-
track planning going on, and we had the money, the resources to
do that. And that's one of the things that I want to talk about
today.
The other piece that the Congress said to us was when you
talk about all the challenges that these organizations are
going to face and the undercounted communities are going to
face, the mandate that they gave us was very clear. Be
innovative and be aggressive, and it takes money to do that.
So, if I may, everything that people are going to talk
about at this hearing is going to be very clear, is going to be
very important. But these realities are very different,
depending upon where you go. In San Antonio, where the
predominant population here is Hispanic--you go to some other
areas of the country, it is not that way. But from where I come
from--I'm from North Carolina--we are a predominantly rural
State. And some of the--some of where our largest growth has
been experienced with the Latino population has been in rural
areas, where that population has blown to 300 percent in some
areas. Those communities don't have the infrastructure of
Catholic charities or some of the--MALDEF, some of the other
organizations that are in place in larger cities. So what you
need is an effective Partnership Program that can do the kinds
of things that need to be done at the local level.
Now, when we talk about partnerships, to say we're going to
engage partners, that's pretty easy to say, but it's a
difficult process and it's a long process. It takes a lot of
time, a lot of preparation to do that. So some of the things
that I'm going to talk about today are centered around three
points, No. 1, resources; No. 2, timing, timing. No. 3 is
engagement, effective engagement. It's just not enough to say,
``We're going to go out there and do partnerships.'' Anybody
that's worked in the community knows that is real different.
And there's a greater challenge now with the immigrant--the
immigrant debate that's going on all over the country. With the
challenges in the black community, with the challenges in the
Arab community, with all of these challenges that are taking
place across the board, we cannot afford as an agency--and I
sometimes slip back and forth between my census life and my
real life now--but we can't afford to make those kinds of
errors in judgment.
The Director talked about great planning, and the Census
Bureau is the best in the world at that. But no plan, no
strategy, no initiative is as good as the assumptions that
they're based upon. And to say that the communications strategy
is come in and all is right--no, it is not. The communication
strategy is a national initiative. It's a national strategy.
They're going to set the message, set the tone. But then it has
to filter down to these organizations. They're the ones that
are going to have to make it work, and that's what I want to
talk about today.
First, the funding issue. I believe that the Partnership
Program needs to be funded now. We talked about 2008, putting
the Partnership Program in the budget for 2008, but let me give
you a scenario. If the Partnership Program is only funded in
2008, meaning October 2007, what happens to those regional
offices--there are 12 regional offices. It will take them
several months to ramp up, to identify the right staff--because
we hire indigenously. We hire people from the Latino community.
We hire people that have the language skills and the cultural
connections and the networks in those communities to be
effective. We've got to find them. We've got to advertise.
We've got to recruit. It takes time to do that. We've got to
train them. So, if the Bureau is forced to wait until October
2008--just for the sake of argument, say it takes them 6 months
to hire and train. That's 6 months we've lost. Then we have to
deal with community-based organizations. We have to engage them
and bring them along.
To dovetail back into my comment about the communication
strategy. The communication strategy, they're talking about an
integrated focus. We did integrated strategy in 2000. But the
key element of an integrated strategy is the Partnership
Program. How do we just dump a communications strategy on a
community and they don't know anything about it? We have to
bring them along. This is the most important element of the
census 2000 outreach campaign is the Partnership Program. It is
these organizations being engaged early enough in the process
with the right resources to do it their way. Everywhere you go
you're going to have similar challenges expressed to you. If
you're to take this tour all over the country, you're going to
hear basically the same kind of challenges. Local problems
require local solutions. No matter how well meaning
headquarters is--and I used to be a headquarters person, but I
was also a regional person. I was a regional partnership
specialist and a regional partnership coordinator.
So I would beg you to fund the Partnership Program. And
I'll throw a number out there. I'm a numbers person. Give the
Partnership Program--give the Census Bureau $3 million now to
start hiring. We have to identify the right people. Then in
2008, make sure that we're in the budget--a robust budget.
Moving on to Item No. 3 is to provide in 2009 funding for
special initiatives. In census 2000, the Congress gave us
approximately $14 million that we used for what we call in-kind
programs and also for special initiatives. That was critically
important for areas like the colonias because Alfonso Meribal
down in Dallas--I know you know Al. Al did a very comprehensive
campaign for the colonias, in getting those folks educated,
getting them motivated to complete the census questionnaire.
But that was all as a result of the special initiatives that we
got. And I know my time is running out quickly. OK.
Mr. Clay. Let's conclude.
Ms. Bennett. OK. In conclusion, all partners and
stakeholders depend upon the Census Bureau and this Congress
for honesty. Partners and stakeholders representing our hard-
to-enumerate communities need the Bureau and this Congress to
remember them, their contributions and their impact. The
Bureau's success as the premier statistical agency in the world
is tied to its ability to count everyone, no exceptions.
Decennial enumeration and operations are difficult. Politics
are complicated. Accountability and civic responsibility are
not. And you owe it to these communities.
Mr. Clay. Thank you so much, Ms. Bennett. We appreciate
that.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Bennett follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2899.019
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2899.020
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2899.021
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2899.022
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2899.023
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2899.024
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2899.025
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2899.026
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2899.027
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2899.028
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2899.029
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2899.030
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2899.031
Mr. Clay. Ms. Camarillo.
STATEMENT OF LYDIA CAMARILLO
Ms. Camarillo. Good morning. How much time do I really
have? Buenos dias, Chairman Clay and Members Gonzalez and
Rodriguez, distinguished panelists, and members of the
audience. I am Lydia Camarillo, vice president of Southwest
Voter Registration Education Project, the Nation's largest
nonprofit/nonpartisan organization of its kind. Since its
inception, we have registered 2.3 million Latinos. Thank you
again for the opportunity to testify before you.
Southwest Voter urges Congress to utilize the full
congressional oversight authority to ensure that the Federal
Government meet its constitutional mandate to count every
person in the United States. We urge Congress to protect and
uphold the constitutional obligation. Therefore Southwest Voter
urges the Census Bureau count--that the Census Bureau count
every person in the United States, regardless of their legal
status, that the necessary resources be provided to the Bureau
so they can meet this constitutional responsibility.
Article 1, Section 2, and the 14th Amendment of the U.S.
Constitution require that every person be counted every 10
years through the Bureau, regardless of whether they're legal
or not. This responsibility falls on the U.S. census.
An accurate count is essential for three reasons. First, it
provides Congress with the necessary population data from which
to determine how to apportion Congress representatives among
the States. Second, it provides State and local government
population data to assist in the redistricting of State and
local government representation districts. Third, it allows the
Congress and the Federal Government to allocate financial
assistance among the States. In addition, the census data
provides a wealth of information on population growth patterns,
demographic information, and statistical data to assist
government, opinion leaders, and policymakers, in the shaping
of public policy and legislation.
Historically, an incomplete, inaccurate census count denies
Latinos and other communities of color their constitutional
right to fair representation at all levels of the government.
An inaccurate count also deprives Latinos of the proper
allocation of Federal resources which are needed to assist such
communities to form some public policy to solve or alleviate
such issues facing the Federal, State, and local government,
including county, State, school boards, water boards, and so
forth. An undercount of the Latino and other ethnic communities
must be prevented, cannot be justified or excused in this, the
wealthiest country in the Nation. And if the IRS knows how much
we owe them, we should be able to count everybody.
In the last census enumeration, over 3.3 million
individuals were left uncounted. The Census Bureau estimated
that at least 1 million Latinos were not counted in 2000, in
spite of the numerous partnerships with the Latino community.
Bureau efforts to count every person and the statistical
adjustment of the census count, the undercount resulted in the
loss of at least three congressional seats during the
redistricting process in States like Texas, California, and
Florida. Moreover, Latinos also came up short during the
redistricting process of States and local municipalities
including school districts and other political subdivisions.
Thus, undercounts are unacceptable and must not be tolerated.
Southwest Voter urges Congress, through its oversight
function, to ensure that undercounts are not repeated in the
2010 count. It violates the U.S. Constitution.
The 2000 undercount of Latinos resulted in the loss of our
communities of thousands of Federal dollars that should have
been used at the State and local levels. The loss is
unconstitutional and should not be accepted as common practice
by the Federal administration. Moreover, the U.S. Congress
should be diligent to prevent this type of behavior as common
practice. It is up to Congress to make sure that the U.S.
Constitution is upheld.
Over the decades, the Census Bureau has made an important
commitment to work with National, State, and local nonprofit
organizations in an accurate count of all persons in the Latino
community, including citizens and noncitizens and those without
legal status. Southwest Voter urges Congress to continue this
practice and hold the Census Bureau accountable for a full and
accurate count of all persons in the United States.
The Latino community and its leadership can be helpful
partners in promoting the census among the community. Latino
leaders and organizations stand ready and committed to inform
Latinos about the importance of participating in the census to
ensure a full and accurate count. But this does not mean that
the Census Bureau or Congress can skirt its constitutional duty
or shift the burden of inaccurate count on Latino communities
and local communities. Latino national organizations are
prepared to advise and promote the importance of the accurate
count; however, Latino leaders will hold the Bureau and
Congress to its constitutional obligation and mandates so that
every Latino living in the United States at the time of the
count is counted.
Furthermore, the Latino elected leadership will hold
Congress responsible for its oversight on the census--on the
count. An accurate and full count will depend on the Federal
Government's ongoing actions over the next years. Should the
Federal Government's actions contradict its assurance of a full
and fair count such that Latinos in our community feel they
cannot trust the Federal Government gathering information, the
results, I assure you, will be the communities of color not
willing to participate in the census count.
The Federal Government must honor its mandate to count
every person with absolute discretion, confidentiality, and
privacy. The information obtained during the count must be
devoid of the current anti-immigrant sentiment that exists in
our political climate. When our Federal agency--in this case,
the Census Bureau--wants the Latino community to trust it and
provide it confidential information, and other agencies such as
ICE are conducting immigration raids.
These acts and actions only serve to relay the message that
the Federal Government cannot be trusted to honor its work to
maintain confidentiality. These actions will result in
hundreds, if not thousands, of Latinos not taking part in
completing their census forms, a repeat of what took place
within the Latino community in the 1980's, not trusting the
Federal Government, not taking part in the census enumeration.
Therefore, the Federal Government, all its agencies must create
an environment of trust and confidence within the Latino
community and other ethnic communities.
Southwest Voter makes the following recommendations based
on the lessons learned over the last three census enumerations
and applauds those efforts if they are incorporated or once
again use. We encourage the U.S. Census Bureau to fulfill its
constitutional requirement according to the U.S. Constitution.
Southwest Voter respectfully recommends the following steps
to ensure a more complete and accurate count, but should not be
limited to: Provide legal assurances to Congress, the President
of the United States, the Bureau leaders and staff, the
communities can be confident that their information will be
held in complete privacy, confidentiality, and that it will not
be shared with other agencies, in particular ICE. Allocate the
necessary resources to count every person residing in the
United States, regardless of legal status. Provide local
hearings on what the Latino community expects and participates
from the U.S. Census Bureau. Partner with Latino national,
statewide, and other organizations. Hire and train sufficient
bilingual Latino staff members early who come from those
communities that face historical undercounts. I believe the
Bureau calls them indigenous hirings.
Cultural awareness must be part of the training when
conducting count. Use long-cuts, not shortcuts only using the
short form--it should not only resort to statistical sampling
after the count is completed, incomplete, and accurate, but it
should resort to making sure that persons are counted from the
get-go.
During the cleanup period of the count, if necessary, hire
more individuals to help communities complete the form, and, if
necessary, should provide more resources to ensure a complete
and accurate count. Provide enough time to have the cleanup
period that is realistic and practical to ensure a full and
accurate count. And finally, call for and ask the President to
maintain a moratorium on immigration raids.
Mr. Chairman, Members Rodriguez and Gonzalez, thank you
once again. And I thank the three of you for being champions in
making sure that every person of color is counted. Thank you.
Mr. Clay. Thank you so much, Ms. Camarillo.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Camarillo follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2899.032
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2899.033
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2899.034
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2899.035
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2899.036
Mr. Clay. And thank the entire panel for their testimony. I
appreciate that. We will go in the same order as before with my
host, Mr. Gonzalez starting.
Mr. Gonzalez. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I
appreciate it. And I'll try and see if I can hit everybody
with--an observation first is--you may not know--of course you
would not know this, Mr. Chairman, but Mr. Saldana, the fine
work that he does, is equally matched by his wife who works for
United Way. It's just a wonderful family, and what they do for
this community is amazing. I don't know if they ever see each
other, but they truly work in unison in many other ways.
But, Steve, I think you were pointing out--and even the
Director pointed out--that people aren't going to be
forthcoming unless someone they trust in their community--and
now we're really getting out in the grassroots. It's not
necessarily Charlie Gonzalez, Member of Congress--and sometimes
not even a city councilman or whatever, but it's going to be
someone in their social or their civic life or the church. So
you've indicated different ways that--let's say Catholic
charities--and not just limited to Catholic institutions and
such, but the other churches, different denominations here.
What specifically--I mean, I know what y'all did last year.
Are y'all planning anything already this--because we think this
is early, but this will be on us before we know it. Is there
anything that y'all are currently doing so that y'all will be
prepared when the census comes and solicits you as a partner?
Mr. Saldana. Thank you, Congressman. And thank you for the
kind words on my wife. She'll be glad to hear them.
Yeah, absolutely in our immigration program we're already
starting to talk to people about the need to participate in
this. I did mention some specific things. A church bulletin,
for instance, has specific requirements as to its insertion.
So, if the documents by the Census Bureau are created for that
process, then it will be truly efficient. And Ms. Bennett
mentioned the rural communities. The church of any faith in a
rural community is the center point of that community. And by
working with them, that will garner the support of that whole
community and the confidence of those people who attend that
church.
But it's very important that all of our organizations right
now start to get the details--we don't have any documentation--
if the census--you heard about early on things of 2008 and
2009. If the Census Bureau can get us posters and things, we
can get these up and have them posted and use those as
reminders to individuals to start this process.
Mr. Gonzalez. Thank you very much. Mr. Vargas, also I want
to point out that you are a member--and I'm trying to remember
the exact title--on the Census Advisory Commission and such.
What exactly is your service with the Census Bureau?
Mr. Vargas. There are--as Dr. Kincannon mentioned, there
are ten advisory committees to the Census Bureau. One of those
committees is the Decennial Census Advisory Committee for the
2010 census. It's made up of about 20 national organizations.
Some represent stakeholder communities. Some represent
professional associations. We are the only Latino stakeholder
in that committee. And it is that committee that has been
working with the Census Bureau to vet different changes and
plans for the 2010 census.
Mr. Gonzalez. And quickly--because you've been in this for
so many years with MALDEF and NALEO and such, and you know that
there's political sensitivities and such. All of you have
pretty well pointed out that there should be some sort of a
timeout--and I don't want to mischaracterize it. I think we
have to be very, very careful how we describe this--to allay
any fears to individuals that may not be documented, that it's
not going to lead to an arrest, an apprehension, or
deportation. So the census, obviously, is not Immigration
Customs Enforcement.
But politically how do you address that particular
sensitive subject when there are so many individuals in this
country that currently believe that there's not enough
enforcement, that we would be asking in the next couple of
years that either a timeout or a relaxing of enforcement be
undertaken? Because I see that as very problematic as far as a
message for the census to be going out there and engaging ICE,
Immigration Customs Enforcement, or anyone else.
Mr. Saldana. Congressman, you're raising perhaps one of the
biggest challenges the Census Bureau will have. And there is
precedent for this, and I think that's something that this
Congress should look to, that there was precedent for this in
2000 and in 1990. What there is not precedent for, though, is
the taking of the law into their own hands by private citizens,
such as the Minutemen who have taken it upon themselves to
enforce the border, because they see a failure of this by the
Federal Government. Again, I don't think it's unimaginable that
we will see private citizens taking it upon themselves to
prevent the Census Bureau from counting all immigrants.
So I would call upon the Congress to review now what are
the penalties for interfering with the actions of a census
enumerator, and what protections do we have to make sure that
all enumerators themselves accurately count everybody in the
household. We know of instances in the past where Federal
employees have taken it upon themselves to make decisions that
would keep immigrants out of certain activities, or even the
enumeration. So this is something that I think the Congress
should take a very close look at.
Mr. Gonzalez. Thank you again just for your observations,
because I think we do need people that have been on the ground
for many years, which leads me right into Ms. Bennett, who I've
known for a very long time. And thank you for all your fine
work. But I think what you pointed out--and I had someone in
the audience come up during the break, and they said, ``You
know, Charlie. We've got a bunch of materials that we put
together in concert with the City Council on our partnership
effort of 10 years ago--or 8 years ago.''
And so I was thinking what utilization should there be of
all the information that all these different partners--it's all
out there, and I don't think we have to reinvent the wheel. But
what it was was their own observations, what were areas that
they thought they fell short and what they could improve. Isn't
there a fast, you know, I'd say availability of already
performance-based evaluations? And what can we do to assure
that the Census Bureau is going to--in gathering that
information and using that? Is it going to have to be the
partnerships themselves to say, ``Look. We've got this
information. We want to share it with you,'' and such?
Ms. Bennett. That's a perfect segue. I believe that--first
of all, the answer is yes to the question. There is just a
plethora of information that is out there, as well as
innovative strategies, lessons learned. And I'd like to just
kind of refer everybody back to the GAO report on census 2000
and community partnerships. I think it was GAO report ``2000
Census Review of Partnership Program Highlights Best Practices
for Future.''
One of the key things that they talked about was
consistency, is maintaining a connection in communities down
through years, so that we don't have to go in and reinvent the
wheel. That falls back on my initial point about resources.
Yes, some of our partners still have things that work.
They've got lessons learned. They've got connections. They know
what they need to do. But I think that it is unfair to this
Congress to say to communities, ``Well, go on out there and
count your people,'' when it's the Census Bureau's
responsibility in concert with communities.
So, in order for us to take advantage of the lessons
learned, the brochures, the materials, the public service
announcements that these community organizations some of them
already have and more need, they need the resources. And the
reason the Partnership Program is so critical is because these
organizations have to be trained in what the new procedures
are. The census has been re-engineered. And in order for us to
educate the public, we also--they need to know what to expect
for certain operations. They need to know when the operations
are coming. It's not enough to put an ad on the television and
think everybody is going to say, ``Oh, I need to be aware
there's an enumerator in my neighborhood.'' No.
We need to start working now, because we also have to--even
though these organizations have material that they can use,
that material then needs to be integrated into the
communications strategy, because the communications, whenever
that contract is let, the contractor is responsible for setting
the message--the census message so everyone is saying the same
thing. So what we need to be able to do with resources--these
community organizations can be trained in what that message is,
how that message is to be implemented, and how their
implementation strategy is consistent and aligned with what the
Census Bureau is going to do. You don't want to confuse the
public.
Mr. Gonzalez. And thank you very much. I think that's one
real clear message is the timeliness of the budget and getting
the resources to the census. And I know the chairman is going
back with that message, and, of course, I will join him on the
floor, as Ciro will, when we advocate.
Ms. Camarillo, last but not least, Southwest Voter--I mean,
I just assume--and maybe this is an assumption and I'm wrong.
But you already work those particular areas that generally
would be identified as the undercount areas. Are--is there a
place for you--and I'm thinking is there any conflict--is there
any reason that you wouldn't be one of those partners? And in
the past, have you been able to lend any assistance to the
census?
Because I just think, one, you already know the
neighborhoods, you know the families, and you've identified
individuals that actually have gone to those homes, knocked on
the door, have conversations--have had meetings, and so--
regarding voter registration. How does that lend itself to be
in a partner, if at all possible?
Ms. Camarillo. I don't think we've had--thank you for the
question. I don't think we've ever had a formal partnership in
any way, shape, or form with the Bureau. I know that Southwest
Voter is committed to partner with other nonprofit--MALDEF,
NALEO, and the other organizations around the country to make
sure that every Latino is counted. It is a natural process for
us to--because we are in the neighborhoods working across inner
cities and rural communities to have conversations and
partnerships. And as we know for the Latino community, the
messenger is also very important. And so Southwest Voter is
already a staple, if you will, for this community. We can say
that by the way that if we register a Latino and it's--or
individual register by Southwest Voter and then we later ask
them to turn out and vote, they know who we are. They know that
we stood there and fought for them day in and day out. So I
think that there is an opportunity for us to figure out how to
work that.
But I do want to reemphasize my point. In the 2000--and I
must say I wasn't as actively involved around that time as I
was in the 1990's with Arturo Vargas and MALDEF, because I
actually worked for Arturo, I believe. So the point--the point,
though, is that--it seemed to me then--and I hope we don't do
this again--that the burden was shifted to communities of color
for the undercount. And so I think if I can stress the point is
it's a constitutional obligation of the administration of the
Federal Government to make that count, and we want to be
partners to make sure there is no undercount for the obvious
reasons. It has implications in terms of representation, and it
has implications in terms of resources for our community.
But I don't want the Bureau to turn around and say, ``Well,
we didn't do the count right because we didn't do this right.''
We want to be there. We want to be partners. And we're happy to
see how we, Southwest Voter, might be able to do that in the
various neighborhoods that we work in across almost 20 States,
including North Carolina and Georgia and places where you would
think we're not there. It's not just the Southwest.
Mr. Gonzalez. Well, thank you very much. And I want to
emphasize that Southwest Voter is nonpartisan, so we have to
make sure that people understand that. Again, thank you very
much.
Ms. Camarillo. The voters decide.
Mr. Clay. Thank you so much for those questions. Mr.
Rodriguez.
Mr. Rodriguez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me once again
thank you. I think you've done a beautiful job with the
panelists that we have before us. I know, Ms. Camarillo, the
work you've done throughout on voter education, voter
registration, as well as Ms. Bennett.
I was glad you mentioned the rural communities. I represent
one of the--probably one of the largest districts in the
country, expanding some--through the--if you go through the
border, it's more than 700, 750 miles. A straight shot on the
road is 650 miles long. Mr. Vargas, I know your impact with--
with the elected officials from throughout--you know, has a
direct, you know, contacting throughout. And, of course, Mr.
Saldana, thank you, also. You're definitely in all our
communities.
And I want to ask I guess just an open-ended question to
all of you. I've got--it's been very good to me. I've gotten
good feedback in terms of the--and, Ms. Bennett, your request
for us to get on the forefront. Ms. Camarillo, your request to
make sure at the tail-end we don't forget that closing or
cleanup period and how important that is.
Taking into consideration my rural community--and I'm going
to be very selfish here--how would you look in terms of going
after--since we had 3 million undercount the last time, how do
we go in those rural communities and/or--you know, maybe
identifying those problematic areas that you might already
foresee? And I know you've mentioned some of those areas. How
do we address those this time around? And I'll leave it open to
any of the ones, you know, from the church down to, you know--
--
Ms. Bennett. Thank you. Just to give you an example of
what's happening in South Carolina; South Carolina is
predominantly a rural State. It has the lowest mail response
rate of any State in the union. And my grandparents on my
mother's side came from South Carolina, so a special place in
my heart for South Carolina.
We've been working with--and me, as a private citizen, also
as a contractor, have been working with partners and local
governments that we worked with in 2000 because they knew that
they undercounted a substantial number of folks--African-
Americans in those very rural communities and Latinos, now, in
those very rural communities.
One of the things that they're doing in the State of South
Carolina, Bobby Bowers, he has petitioned the legislature to
give him resources. They've got $1 million a year from now
until 2010 to count the undercounted. So he has engaged the
churches, he has engaged local community-based organizations
that work directly with the Latino population there, saying to
them, ``Look. We know there's a problem, but we need to address
it head on.''
And I have been working with African-American organizations
who also have partnered with the Latino community. It's not a
battle between us in terms of who's No. 1 and who's No. 2.
Because if you're a minority, we're all in the same boat, you
know. If our end has a hole in it, you're going down, too. So
we don't look at it that way, and so--and us country folk, you
know, we look at it as we're all in this together.
So--the NAACP, some of the national Panhellenic
organizations like the Omegas, the Kappas, and the Deltas,
they've been working with service providers saying, ``Look.
We've got a significant part of our population that has not
been counted, and it does all of us good if they are counted.''
So we're not driving them underground. We're encouraging them.
We're holding meetings with them. And we're using those
resources. And that--$1 million is really not a lot of money
when you look at the kind of percentage--the growth percentage
in South Carolina.
So that's what we've done. We've started up front. We
talked to elected officials and said, ``Look. We've got this
situation. It is our situation. These are people in our
community. They're living here. They're working here, for
however--whatever their legal status is, and we need to make
sure that they're counted.''
The State has also sent a letter out to all of these--the
elected officials, because you're right. People are looking at
this--this issue and taking some matters into their own hands.
So the local elected officials are saying to them, ``Look. We
need to count everybody because we need these resources back
into our community.'' And what they've done is they've sent
letters to the cities and the counties saying how much money
they lost in 2000. So there's a very--a very graphic
explanation.
Mr. Vargas. Congressman, in addition to everything that's
been mentioned about how to reach rural communities, I think
this is an important role that the media will have to play in
reaching these communities; not just television, but radio. And
we should not underestimate the power of the radio to reach our
community and the mobilizing impact that it can have.
We saw the impact of radio in mobilizing millions of
immigrants and their supporters to take to the streets last
year. It is that kind of mobilization, that kind of call to
action that we will need from our friends in the media. And
it's not just going to be the large, you know, conglomerates of
media, but the small radio stations that are emerging in these
rural communities that residents of rural communities listen to
day in and day out. And, actually, that's where they get their
information. They trust the local anchor or DJ, and I think
it's those people that need to be the effective messengers.
Mr. Saldana. Congressman Rodriguez, I think it's important
to realize, as we were talking about the raids here, that's
where they took place in this area. They took place in the
rural communities, and that's because we have the undocumented
and Hispanic populations on farms and ranches out--out in the
community. So this becomes a prime attack on your specific
congressional district.
Also, I would like--again talking about the churches, not
just in writing material, but enlisting the heads of these
churches. Getting the face of the archbishop, for instance, and
his name attached to promoting the census would be a very
powerful weapon out in the church communities, especially in
your district areas.
And the faith communities, again, are very powerful in the
small--in the small, rural communities because nonprofit
agencies such as Catholic Charities--that start to expand the
very far reaches of where they can service, and so it's
important to work with those kind of systems that are inherent
in those small communities and not just depend on agencies, and
that's where churches are most powerful.
Ms. Camarillo. The difficult part about working with the
rural community is that because it's so spread out--and also,
there is less people in larger numbers of geography--it's
important that in addition to what has already been discussed
by--by the panelists about the press and the media and
nontraditional ways of communication--and certainly a
relationship and a partnership through the churches--that you
really do spend extra resources to go find the individuals.
There will be, I think, lots of ranchos where you won't
know that there are several families there, that you have to
make sure that you have folks out there working also with the
communities and trusting.
So it's going to be a lot of word of mouth, lots of trust,
and lots of resources. It costs more--if we do an analysis at
Southwest Voter, it costs us more to be in a rural community
than it does in an inner city, by as much as, sometimes, 100
percent. So that's what you have to sort of think about.
But the communities are there, and we need to make sure
that they're counted.
Mr. Rodriguez. Thank you very much. And, Mr. Chairman,
I'm--with that, I'm going to have to personally leave. Thank
you. Congratulations, and I'll see you tomorrow in Washington.
Mr. Clay. Thank you so much for being here, Mr. Rodriguez.
We appreciate your participation in this hearing, and I will
see you tomorrow. Take care.
Let me start with Mr. Saldana. Many churches and other
religious institutions were actively involved in the 2000
census. You supplied the Bureau with enumerators, with
volunteers, and we appreciate your efforts in that past census.
Which actions taken by the Archdiocese were most successful
in reaching the Latino community?
Mr. Saldana. Well, in the Archdiocese of San Antonio, we're
very fortunate to have a Catholic television station and a
Catholic newspaper. And so these were very instrumental in
repetitively being able to get the word out. We ran PSAs, and
we ran printed ads repeatedly in this media.
We are now fortunate to have Catholic radio as well in this
area, just recently has come on board, and I think the use of
this media, also with the confidence that the church brings,
will be very strong in working with the census this coming
year.
Mr. Clay. So those are additional steps that you would
recommend to the Bureau as far as the outreach----
Mr. Kincannon. Yeah, absolutely. The--the census in 2000
was very good at using Spanish language media here in this
community. And so, using alternative media processes, I think,
is going to be very important.
Mr. Clay. Thank you so much for that. Mr. Vargas, in your
testimony, you pointed out that you were concerned about the
interference of enumerators. For the record, it is a Federal
offense to interfere with a census enumerator, and the FBI
would take that issue up with whoever interfered with that
enumerator.
You also suggested some very intriguing--and what I think
to be helpful--recommendations, such as review laws that
prohibit the interference--a moratorium should be implemented
on raids by the INS. I think that's very interesting. You also
recommended that the Bureau get a waiver for non-citizens. I
find all three of those recommendations to be helpful.
Let me ask you about your involvement with the Secretary of
Commerce's advisory committee. As a member of this committee,
NALEO has made recommendations for improving outreach to the
Latino community. In the past, how effective has the Bureau's
implementation of your recommendations been, and what
recommendations have you made to the Bureau for the 2010
census?
Mr. Vargas. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The most recent
recommendations we made had to do with the actual composition
of the short form and the race and Hispanic origin question.
And this is an example where perhaps the Census Bureau has
not been as nimble and quick to change as we had hoped, which
is why I think responses to the 2008 dress rehearsal be very
important.
We were presented with the Bureau's recommendation of how
the short form--the Hispanic race and Hispanic origin question
should be worded in--in the 2010 census. And at that meeting,
we did have some recommendations of how we could tweak it, but
the Census Bureau again expressed its reluctance to make any
changes because it--these changes would not have been tested in
time, even though we thought that the improvements that we were
recommending would actually improve the composition of the
question.
So sometimes our recommendations are taken into
consideration and we see action upon them. Sometimes the Bureau
just simply does not have the time or is reluctant to make
changes because they don't believe they have the time to do
that, which is why I think the nimbleness needed by the Bureau
is something that we hope that Dr. Murdock will introduce.
Mr. Clay. Thank you for that response. Ms. Bennett, you
recommend outsourcing parts of the Partnership Program, in part
because you believe it will be a more efficient use of capital
and human resources and increase external accountability in
monitoring. Which elements of the Partnership Program do you
believe should be outsourced? How would outsourcing those
elements benefit the Bureau and taxpayers?
Ms. Bennett. First of all, the recommendation is consistent
with how the Bureau is doing business during--for 2010. This is
the most contractor-driven census ever. Our field data
collection has been outsourced. Communications has been
outsourced, and the communications contract encompasses almost
everything that was previously under the census--under the
Partnership Program's umbrella.
One of the things that I'm looking at when I make that
recommendation--and this is after having talked to three
regional directors, past regional directors, and some other
folks that are still very much interested in what's going on
with the Bureau. The reason we make that recommendation is
because there's a lack of nimbleness, as Mr. Vargas has alluded
to.
The Bureau has a plan, and the Bureau is going to be very
diligent with that plan. Given the timing, just for the sake of
argument, if there is not budget for partnerships in 2008, an
outsourced contractor will be able to do things faster. They
don't have the restrictions on hiring. They don't have the
restrictions on being able to implement programs and to be able
to move throughout communities as effectively.
Also, when it comes to the quantitative aspect of this
census, one of the--one of my biggest disappointments in 2000
was the--was the way the Partnership Program was measured.
Because of the timing of things and because of the amount of
money that we were given, Congress said, ``You will be judged
based upon the number of partnership agreements that you
engage.'' OK?
So then our specialists were running around--they had a
quota. They were running around trying to get these agreements
signed without really dealing with the qualitative aspect of
our partners. And so, by outsourcing, you can better define the
quantitative aspect of the census and better manage the
resources. Because you--with a contractor, you don't have all
of the overhead and those kinds of----
Mr. Clay. But, now tell me, in 2000, there was quite a bit
of dissension within the Bureau about the Partnership Program,
is my understanding. That there were some inside the
department, in the decisionmaking positions, that really did
not appreciate the Partnership Program. Is that accurate?
Ms. Bennett. It's somewhat accurate, just as--just as--just
as there is right now. I heard the Director say that they
decided not to fall on their sword for the Partnership Program
for 2008. OK. So what does that mean for partners? What are we
saying to our partners? That just as soon as we get ready for
you, you're just going to drop out of the sky, and the
infrastructure is going to be there. The infrastructure has to
be in place, and the Census Bureau has not done that. So I
guess my question is how serious are they about counting those
that are undercounted.
And one other point, please. When we talk about ``This is
not early,'' this is early. Six percent of the budget was spent
before 2008. Six percent of $125 or $126 million is a lot of
money.
Mr. Clay. And that leads me into the next question. What
specifically do you see as shortcomings of the Bureau, leading
to the dress rehearsal as well as to the 2010----
Ms. Bennett. I'm sorry.
Mr. Clay. What do you think are shortcomings that you are--
just as an outside observer, what do you see as shortcomings
that----
Ms. Bennett. OK. OK. One, I definitely believe that the
commitment to the Partnership Program early on is a definite
miscalculation. Because these partners and all of the other
thousands of partners out there need us to be--need to be
engaged with the Bureau right now.
These agencies have changed. The leadership has changed.
Yeah, there are some things that we won't have to reinvent the
wheel on, but what about their issues? We can't just come in
and say, ``Well, we're from the Census Bureau, and you need to
count your people,'' and just go about doing it.
Their--they have issues. They have an agenda of their own.
So what the Bureau needs to do is to be able to integrate with
them early. That's No. 1.
The second thing is--the other assumption is that the
communication strategy is just going to--that's the magic
bullet. That's the second miscalculation.
The communications contract, if it is--just for the sake of
argument, if it is let in September, it will take them at least
a year to develop the campaign. They're not going to come in
with a campaign. They have to develop the campaign. Then we're
looking at 1999, early 2000. What are partners doing in the
meantime? What are the communities doing in the meantime?
That's the second thing.
And the third thing, again, goes back to--to resources, to
say that, ``The Partnership Program has ongoing efforts now,
and so we don't need any until 1999,'' I think is a--is a big
miscalculation.
In 2000--I came on in 1996. All regions had their
partnership coordinators on in 1997. We had partnership
specialists working with local governments on LUCA in 1997.
None of that has taken place this time around.
Third, by the time 2008 rolled around, we had our first
wave of partnership specialists in place with that 6 percent of
the budget. It's a small amount in contract, but when you look
at 6 percent and you've got people on the ground working, it--
they laid the groundwork for the folks that came on in 1999.
Mr. Clay. Thank you for that. Ms. Camarillo, please know
that the laws of representation due to the undercount is a
major concern of this subcommittee, and thank you for
highlighting that in your testimony.
In addition to Texas, California, and Florida, what other
States do you think lost----
Ms. Camarillo. Well, there were 3 million people--that's so
many more seats that we lost. So I'm not sure exactly what the
losses were, but if it--I would assume that if 3 million
voters--3 million folks were not counted, that means that one-
third of that was Latino. I wouldn't be surprised if one-third
or more is African-American. That means the African-American
community lost a seat.
I'm not sure where, what city, what State--I mean what
State, but clearly--and then I'm sure--there were the other
communities where communities also of color and Native
Americans, and then there's a combination. But I don't have an
absolute sense--I'm not an expert on the census. In 2000, I was
busy running the--the 2000 Democratic Convention, so I didn't
follow it as closely as you-all did.
But--but for Southwest Voter, counting every person is a
constitutional mandate, as I mentioned in my testimony. But I
find the irony that this country, being the richest country in
the world, can make sure that we pay all our taxes to the IRS,
but we can't count voters when we vote, and we can't count
every person when the--the Constitution calls for us being
counted.
So I think that it's--it's important that if I say one
thing that is not in my testimony is that the administration
currently in place today will set in motion lots of the--the
plan that will be executed in the next administration, whether
it sits with the current GOP leaders or whether it sits with
the Democrats.
If this current plan isn't a plan that looks to include all
communities of color, then as much as the communities want
whoever is in charge the next time, even if they're 100 percent
committed by money, resources, and soul, it will be very hard
to move that quickly. So it's imperative that we are diligent
in making sure that the administration is honest and clear and
committed to making sure that every person is counted.
Mr. Clay. What is the best way to communicate--and I'll ask
you and Mr. Vargas to answer this. What's the best way to
communicate to communities the importance of representation and
the importance of being counted accurately so that--accurately
so that you don't lose your representation in Congress or you
are not cheated out of your representation? What is the best
way that we can communicate through the Bureau and through
organizations like yours?
Ms. Camarillo. I think it has to be a partnership that is
multifaceted. It's going to have to be the government at all
levels, the Federal, the State, the local, because everybody
loses. It has to be the--the nonprofit organizations, the
churches, labor.
But it also has to be, now, some money sent out to do some
campaigns that people listen. I mean, one thing that we can
say--those of us who are involved in getting out the vote,
whether it's for the Latinos or other communities, if you
hear--if you put it out once, it's as if you didn't hear it. So
it has to be repeated, repeated, repeated, repeated until
people get it that, No. 1, it has implication on services for
them, as well as representation.
When people think about bread-and-butter issues, maybe your
child might have better books or a computer that they don't
have. If it--if we send a message that resonates to people
about what they're losing--sometimes, when you say you're
losing $1 million or $1 billion or whatever it is your
community is losing, it doesn't make sense to them unless they
hear that it might mean, you know, the street corner pothole is
fixed, no more floods, better schools--it has to resonate, and
everybody, including from the President to Congress, has to
start sending out that message and spending the money telling
the communities that it's almost time again to get ready to be
counted.
The importance--and more importantly, that we have a
commitment that confidentiality is going to be kept and that
agencies are not going to be getting information that we, by
the Constitution, are mandated to keep confidential.
Mr. Clay. It sounds like you should be part of the
communications team also. Mr. Vargas.
Mr. Vargas. Yes, Mr. Chairman. With regard to
reapportionment, let's not forget that it's a zero-sum game.
There are only 435 Members of Congress that have to be
reapportioned among the States. So not only did California and
Texas and Florida not gain a seat because of the undercount,
but it's also quite possible that the State of New York may
have lost a seat because not everybody was counted in New York.
So this is a key issue not just for gains, but for losers
in the reapportionment. There's been a lot of focus on Utah in
the last reapportionment, because Utah just narrowly missed
that extra seat.
Ms. Bennett. It went to North Carolina.
Mr. Vargas. It went to North Carolina instead. [Laughter.]
Utah has experienced, also, a significant increase in its
immigrant population. So it would be in Utah's interest to make
sure that all immigrants are counted in that State, given
2010's reapportionment--or 2011's reapportionment.
Mr. Clay. Thank you for that response. Mr. Gonzalez.
Mr. Gonzalez. Just real quick. Ms. Bennett, I know we've
gone on--all to the different partnerships. Something that we
haven't discussed that just occurred to me, how do we utilize
the schools; to what extent and, of course, are there any
obstacles? Because, I mean, that is, you know, a gold mine. You
know, you have the child there who takes the information home,
I mean--as an assignment. You know, there are different ways of
doing this.
Ms. Bennett. That is an excellent question. The Census in
Schools program that we utilized in 2000 was a phenomenal
program, and I think everyone knows the reasons.
Many times, when you're dealing with households that are of
immigrant standing, they don't necessarily read English well.
So the children go back and take the message. Many times, the
children are the ones that complete the questionnaire.
The same thing holds true for communities that have
literacy challenges, whether they be Appalachia, KY, or West
Virginia, or rural North Carolina where you've got parents
that--black families that don't read well, the children are
actually doing the questionnaire. And as a part of the Census
in Schools campaign in 2000, that was a key. And that was where
we spent a lot of--a lot of resources, and it was extremely
important.
Now, that goes back to my original--I'm just kind of
beating this. When it comes to the Census in Schools campaign,
they need resources now. Now, let me--let me say--let me say
this to you. And you guys know--I'm sorry. You-all know this
better than I do. I'm sorry. If the Census in Schools campaign
is not started now, it will be a waste of taxpayer dollars.
Given the No Child Left Behind mandates on local school
districts, they began doing their curriculum planning two and 3
years out. So, if the Census in Schools campaign is rolled out
in 1999, it's just information that's going to be sitting in a
corner.
Because teachers are saying, ``Hey, look. I've got to get
these kids ready for end of--end of grade tests. I've got the
State requirements, and I've got the Federal requirements. Oh,
and by the way, I want to get that bonus. And you want me to do
the census on top of that?''
So, if the Census Bureau--to hear people say that this is
too early is ludicrous. This should have started a long time
ago with the right resources with Census in Schools so that we
could have engaged the right partners, we could have been
before the right curriculum committees, the right education
associations to have them engaged, and have this incorporated
into the strategy. To drop this on schools in 1999, as I said,
will be a waste of taxpayer dollars.
Mr. Gonzalez. And, Mr. Chairman, probably--since--I mean,
I'm not on the committee, but maybe we need to establish where
are we with the Census in Schools program, if at all, if we're
anywhere--I'm just looking here. March 2010, census--census
questionnaires are mailed or delivered to households. We're
obviously at that point, you know.
And then the timing of everything, too. Because--because of
No Child Left Behind and the mandated test, I think they're
probably taking place right around the same time.
One last observation--and we haven't touched on it--and
some people are going to say that it doesn't--it's not as
relative to minority communities because of the digital divide.
I don't exactly believe that. I mean, I think there is a
digital divide. Don't get me wrong. But the use of the
Internet--and I know we have individuals here, I think, from
the regional office. And again, I think when we leave here
today, I would like to inquire--and I may formally do that
through you, Mr. Chairman, as to what is the intended use of
the Internet.
And I'm not just talking about a Web site for the Census
Bureau where people get information. I'm talking about
proactive, affirmative use of the Internet. It is the most
incred--it has revolutionized society. And where we were in
2000 and where we will be in 2010, it's light years of change.
And I haven't heard anyone allude--and maybe it was because of
the topic, minority communities, and people sort of write us
off and don't think that, you know, the cyberworld really
applies to us, but I think that it does.
Again, availability of the information--and Steve is
talking about maybe the centers where they have the immigration
information and the workers that do have access to a PC. Is it
just having the Web site? Is it going to be more than that?
Obviously, I just assume all that is out there, but really
being proactive in the use--because what you have are different
services that are being provided by different entities that I
think would be happy to partner up with the Census Bureau.
And I am talking about the huge search engine Google or
Yahoo and so on. This would be incredible. So--and this does
filter down to our communities. Maybe not to the degree or
extent of other communities, but, nevertheless, I think it's a
resource that we may have overlooked and has some implication
to the topic at hand today.
And so, with that last observation, if anyone has any other
observations regarding either the schools or the Internet, I'm
happy to entertain that now.
Mr. Vargas. You're absolutely right, Congressman. Those are
the new media that we need to utilize. Also cell phones.
One of the biggest mobilizing tools used in the marches of
2006 were young people text messaging each other and advising
each other of the marches and using it to really to mobilize.
These are the kind of media that the Bureau needs to employ in
2010.
Mr. Saldana. Please. Ladies first.
Ms. Bennett. I was just going to say, I do believe that the
Internet and the Web site and all those kinds of things are a
part of the communications contract, but I totally agree with
Mr. Vargas. When you look at the capability of texting now and
how our children get their messages--many times we're looking
at households that have--everybody in the house has a cell
phone, and they may not have Internet connection, but they've
got a cell phone, because everybody is all over the place. So
that's a--that's a valuable resource.
And also, when it comes to the Internet and also to the Web
sites, in 2000, members of organizations such as the
Panhellenic organizations, the Delta Sigma Theta organizations,
Alpha Kappa Alphas, the Kappas, the Omegas, those
organizations--nine major organizations connected their Web
sites to the Census Bureau's Web site. That was how they got
information to their ministers, to their local elected
officials.
So it is going to be critical for us--and I think, you're
right, that anyone--the Bureau, any agency makes--makes a
strong miscalculation when they assume that the digital divide
has left us all behind. We are very well connected, and I think
that's an asset that they need to take advantage of.
Mr. Saldana. Two things. The--schools were very
instrumental in our success at outreaching to the CHIP program,
another Federal/State program. And when we were able to see the
receptivity working through the schools of being able to get
children enrolled on CHIP and being able to take that
information to their families, I would certainly encourage the
Census in Schools program, and I agree it needs to be done now
so that we can get to those parents on a repetitive basis.
The other thing, the State of Texas has gone to an
integrated eligibility process in which computers are used for
the outreach of all social service systems in the State. And
all of that has been problematic in its implementation. Most
agencies are set up for the use of computerization systems for
working with families in the State of Texas.
And so I would encourage, then, the outreach to the State
system in saying, ``We need this integration with the census,
because all these agencies are going to be using that system to
working with families.''
Mr. Clay. Thank you so much. And--oh, I'm sorry. Go ahead.
Ms. Camarillo. Mr. Chairman, thank you. I know we're out of
time, but I am not going to suggest that I know what works
better, but I will caution us that we don't allow the Census
Bureau to go technology high in spending all their moneys.
What I do is I work with grassroots communities. That's how
our communities turn out to register and turn out to vote. And
I would argue that would be the same way. It should be a
partner component, but it should not be the solution to--to the
problem--to the issue. Remember, our communities don't trust
that.
On the computer question, most of the schools in Texas do
not have one computer, menos everybody else. So I'm not going
to suggest it's a good good idea. I'm not going to suggest it's
a bad idea. I know it's a new form of technology that we have
to invest and figure out how we use it, but it should not be
exclusive or the only--or the star flagship.
Mr. Clay. I appreciate the point that has been made here by
Congressman Gonzalez to get a timetable from the Bureau on
their outreach to--to schools throughout this country. We will
make the request from this committee--and I will share that
with you and your caucus--so that we have a clear indication of
timetables and what is to be expected throughout this country
by the Bureau. That's a very valid point.
And as Ms. Bennett said, it may require a reshaping of
that--of that contract or--or the--the entire Bureau's plan. So
we will assess that once we get a response back.
Let me just quickly ask Mr. Vargas on another issue--in
recent memory, there have been a number of well-publicized data
breaches at various Federal agencies, including the Census
Bureau, as well as in the private sector. Are you concerned
that these breaches of personal privacy might undermine the
public's confidence in the Bureau's ability to protect their
information? Is this further compounded by the tone of the
information policy debate?
Mr. Vargas. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for that question.
Absolutely. Shortly after 9-11, the Census Bureau actually
compiled a list on Americans--or census tracts with large
number of Americans for use by DHS, and that was very
problematic.
We raised this through the Census Advisory Committee
directly with the Bureau, and as a result, they established a
new office, the Chief Privacy Office within the Census Bureau.
Now, I am not aware of what the role of the Chief Privacy
Officer will be in implementing the 2010 census. And I think
that would be an appropriate question from the committee to the
Census Bureau about the role of the Chief Privacy Office in
the--in the enumeration.
Also, new revelations have come forward about what the true
role of the Census Bureau was in World War II and the
identification of Japanese Americans. All of this is not
helpful now.
So, to the extent that the Bureau can assure us that it's
going to be on the up and up, will enforce Title 13 of the
Privacy Act, is going to be key, because all of us are going to
be on the line telling our communities, ``Trust the Bureau.''
You know, if the Bureau, you know, undermines that, then we all
have egg on our face.
Mr. Clay. What steps do you think the Bureau must take to
cultivate confidence in the Latino community regarding the
Bureau--2010 census without divulging personal information?
Mr. Vargas. Well, I think this is--this gets to the point
that's been made to this committee, that the partnerships are
exceedingly important, and they need to start now. Because in
order for anybody to stand up to the Bureau, they need to have
that trust themselves with the Census Bureau. They need to know
who the Census Bureau employees are going to be. They need to
trust them, that they know exactly who the community is.
It is unreasonable to expect that--a few months out, that
people from the community will stand up and defend the Census
Bureau if they have not developed that relationship with the
Census Bureau over time. Which is why the fact that we didn't
have the Partnership Program continue from 2000 to 2010 means
we lost some ground. The Bureau probably lost some of those
relationships and has to rebuild bridges and rebuild trust,
because the Bureau needs to have the trust of the local priest,
of--of the school teacher, of the community organizer, who is
going to be telling the community, ``Trust the Census Bureau.''
Because, ultimately, it's the Census Bureau doing enumeration,
not us.
Mr. Clay. Ms. Camarillo, you recommend that the Bureau use
the long form, which has been replaced with the ACS to make
sure everyone is counted. What role can an organization such as
SVEP play in increasing awareness of the ACS?
Ms. Camarillo. Well, again, we'd be happy to talk to our
communities and share the communities, and as you know, that
takes resources. We have yet to take--and I don't believe we
ever will--government money, because we want to continue to be
nonpartisan, so that always continues to be an issue. But--but
for us, we think--and again, not being experts on the census,
but understanding that it's our responsibility to understand
and figure out how each community is counted and respected,
that by having more information allows us to understand better
our communities; and, therefore, the public policymakers can
better form policies and legislation that can take care of
their issues.
That is why I think the long form is necessary, but if I am
wrong, then I will be told that and--on occasion, I change my
mind, but I'm very stubborn, so----
Mr. Clay. Thank you for that response. I'll recognize my
colleague----
Mr. Gonzalez. I have nothing further, Mr. Chairman. Just,
again, to thank you and your staff for the wonderful work, the
fact that you picked San Antonio. To all our witnesses that had
so much--it was really substantive in nature, and obviously
we--the chairman has said we're going to followup on some of
your own questions, and such.
And to everyone that attend--I know that some of you are
just private citizens that are here in that capacity. Others
are representatives of a different agency or an entity or a
governmental unit. Thank you for your interest. And, of course,
we look forward to forming those partnerships with each and
every one of you. Thank you again.
Mr. Clay. Thank you so much. And let me again thank my--my
host, Charlie Gonzalez, for showing us around this beautiful
city and the Southwest. I have appreciated my first visit here.
It will probably not be my last.
I think that this first field hearing of the subcommittee
on the census was a success, and it will be part of an ongoing
process of listening to the people throughout this country to
find out what their reaction is to the census and what their
impression is of the Census Bureau.
From testimony today, it's certainly obvious that the
climate in this country must change as far as the whole
immigration issue is concerned, and that's imperative among
Members of Congress to help change that debate, and refocus it
on what's really important to this country.
Diversity is essential in and outside of this Bureau, and
it should be reflected within the Bureau and in the way they
conduct business. That point was hammered home today. The
undercount must be eliminated. That should be their No. 1 goal,
and this committee will certainly keep them focused on that
objective of how we eliminate the undercount throughout
America's communities.
The Bureau must instill public confidence, also, in its
ability to collect data and keep it private. We must--they must
do a better job, and governmentwide--we must all do a better
job in that.
So let me again thank this panel for your testimony today
and for participating in this. I appreciate it, and I
appreciate the city of San Antonio.
Let me also recognize Congressman Gonzalez's staff for all
of their help, especially Angela Manson, Theresa Rangle, and
Stephanie Smith. Thank you all.
And thank you all for being here. That concludes this
hearing.
[Whereupon, at 11:59 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
[Additional information submitted for the hearing record
follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2899.037
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2899.038
<all>