NCAI

THE CENSUS, AMERICAN INDIANS AND ALASKA NATIVES

SEPTEMBER 1999

Article I, section 2, of the U.S. Constitution calls for a census every ten years to determine the number of seats each State will have in the House of Representatives, based on population. Congress is responsible for carrying out this mandate, which in the original document states:

"Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States …, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, … and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons."

Although the reference to counting slaves as only three-fifths of a person was removed by the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868, the modified census requirement still excludes Indian tribes that do not pay Federal taxes. Nevertheless, most tribes participate in the once-a-decade count, and a significant portion of Federal aid to these tribes is based on census data

Why An Accurate Census Is Important for American Indians

The U.S. Constitution requires a census to apportion seats in Congress among the 50 States based on population. The census numbers also are used to draw political boundaries within States, for Congress, state legislatures, and local governing bodies such as school boards.

Beyond reapportionment and redistricting, census data are used to allocate $180 billion in Federal aid to states, counties, cities, and Indian tribal governments. The information also is needed to assess the well-being of American Indians and other Native people who maintain a unique trust relationship with the Federal government by virtue of treaties and statutes.

Federal programs that distribute aid to Indians and other Native people based in whole or in part on census data include:

• Job Training Partnership Act
• Native American Employment and Training Programs
• Grants to Local Education Agencies for Indian Education
• Special Programs for the Aging/Title VI Grants to Indian Tribes
• Family Violence Prevention and Services

Background

The 1990 census was the first to be less accurate than the one before it. Census Bureau evaluations revealed that about 8 million people were missed, while another 4 million were counted twice, resulting in a net national undercount of 4 million people. Including other types of miscounts, such as people counted in the wrong place or included erroneously, the 1990 census contained about 25 million mistakes, or about 10 percent of the count, according to the U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO).

The accuracy of the 1990 census also varied greatly among population subgroups. Continuing a disturbing trend that the Census Bureau first identified with scientific measurements in 1940, people of color and poor people in urban and rural areas were missed at much higher rates than Whites. In 1990, this gap in census coverage between Whites and African Americans, Hispanics, American Indians, and Asian Americans, known as the "differential undercount," was the highest ever recorded. While the net national undercount was 1.6 percent, only 0.7 percent of non-Hispanic Whites were missed, while nearly 5.0 percent of Hispanics and 4.4 percent of African Americans weren't counted.

The undercount of American Indians in 1990 was similarly disproportionate. About 4.5 percent of all Indians (nearly 175,000 people) weren't counted. The census missed 12.2 percent of Indians living on reservations. Like all children, Indian children were missed at a higher rate; 6.2 percent were left out of the census. And young Indian males (age 18 - 29), like their peers in other population subgroups, were more likely to be missed: 6.4 percent weren't counted.

The high undercount was not the only significant concern about the 1990 census. The cost of taking the census also skyrocketed to $2.6 billion. The cost per household rose to $25, up from $11 in 1970.

Not long after the 1990 census ended, Congress, state and local officials, community leaders, and the Census Bureau itself set their sites on the 2000 count, calling for a fundamental review of the census process that would lead to increased accuracy and reduced costs. In 1992, Congress passed and President Bush signed into law the Decennial Census Improvement Act, which mandated such a review by the National Academy of Sciences.

In Pursuit of a More Accurate Census

I. The 2000 Census Plan

With guidance from two expert panels convened by the National Academy of Sciences, its own advisory committees which include American Indian and Alaska Native representatives, and the non-partisan GAO, the Census Bureau developed a plan for Census 2000 that combined more aggressive traditional counting methods with widely-accepted statistical techniques to improve accuracy and rein-in costs. The plan centered around four strategies for achieving the dual objectives identified by Congress:

• build partnerships throughout the census process with local and tribal governments, community groups, the private sector and other stakeholders;
• simplify methods and operations as much as possible;
• take advantage of advances in technology to improve and simplify the census; and
• use sampling and statistical methods to make the census more accurate and cost-effective.

However, a Supreme Court decision in January 1999, in a case challenging the proposed use of statistical sampling methods forced the Bureau to modify its plan for 2000. The revised (and final) Census 2000 plan relies on direct counting methods only, including mailed or hand-delivered questionnaires and follow-up visits to all unresponsive households, to determine the population of the 50 states for purposes of congressional apportionment. The Census Bureau will then conduct a quality-check survey to measure the accuracy of the direct count and to provide a basis for scientifically correcting the first set of numbers to account for people missed and eliminate double-counting.

II. Overview of Census Operations on American Indian Reservations

Here's an overview of the Census 2000 plan, followed by a step-by-step guide to how the census will work on Indian reservations. Operations that are still subject to change are noted.

The Bureau plans to place $100 million in paid advertising to build awareness of how communities benefit from programs that hinge on census data. It will send out a notice before the census forms are mailed and a follow-up mailing to remind people to send their forms in. It will also make forms available in public places, such as libraries and community centers, to maximize opportunities for people to participate.

Households that receive a census form in the mail will have until late April to mail it back. Then census enumerators will fan out across the country to visit unresponsive households and collect the information. On Indian reservations, enumerators will visit all households that have not returned a questionnaire or provided information to a census worker on a previous visit. The household visits are conducted in the "nonresponse follow-up" phase of the census.

The direct counting phase, including mailed questionnaires and personal visits, will stretch from March through July 2000. Based on past experience, many people and some households will still be uncounted after these operations. The Bureau will conduct several additional programs to improve the accuracy of the census, such as revisiting all housing units on its address list initially identified as vacant or non-existent. The census counts compiled through mailed questionnaires, door-to-door visits, and coverage improvement programs, will be used to apportion the 435 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives among the 50 states, as required by the Constitution.

The Census Bureau also plans to conduct a large quality-check survey after nonresponse follow-up visits are completed. This scientific sample survey - called a post enumeration survey, or PES - is part of the original Census 2000 plan and was not barred by the Supreme Court ruling except to calculate the state population totals used for congressional apportionment.

Here's how the PES will work. The Bureau will send its best enumerators out to reinterview 300,000 representative households across the country - including on Indian reservations -- starting over completely with a new set of address lists. This kind of sampling is well known to quality assurance managers in manufacturing and retail businesses. The PES will measure the accuracy of the direct count and can be used as the basis for correcting undercounts and overcounts in the first set of numbers.

III. Step-by-Step Guide to the Census on Indian Reservations

The Census Bureau will use a combination of methods to count Indians living on reservations. The Bureau will work with Tribal leaders to determine the best method for each reservation, taking into account the accessibility of homes and the style of addresses used. Here's how the census will work on Indian reservations:

• Census Day is April 1, 2000. The information collected in the census reflects how many people live at each address on that date. (The census counts people at their "usual place of residence.")
• In March 2000, census enumerators will visit each household and leave a questionnaire for the resident(s) to mail back. At the same time, they will update the address lists and maps, making any corrections or additions as they go from house to house. This method is called "update/leave".
• In areas where homes are very remote, census workers will go from house to house, compiling an address list, spotting the house on a map, and collecting the information requested on the census form. This operation, called "list/enumerate", will be conducted in April 2000.
• The second phase of the census, called "nonresponse follow-up", will run from late April through mid-July. Census workers will visit all households that did not return a questionnaire by mail (in 'update/leave' areas) and try to collect the information from residents. They also will revisit any other households where they failed to collect the information during earlier visits.
• After the follow-up phase is complete, the post enumeration survey will be conducted in representative census blocks across the country, including on Indian reservations.
• The PES results will be compared with the information gathered from the households in the survey during the direct counting operations. This matching process allows the Bureau to measure how many people were missed, counted twice, or otherwise miscounted the first time. The Bureau will use statistical estimation to project those findings onto demographically and geographically similar blocks across the country. It will use that information to adjust the first set of numbers to account for people missed or eliminate double-counts. (Congressional critics of sampling methods oppose a second set of numbers, while the Administration supports adjusting the census counts to be used for purposes other than congressional apportionment.)
• The Bureau will conduct additional programs after nonresponse follow-up is complete, to improve the accuracy of the census after the initial counting operations. These activities, called "coverage improvement programs," include a recheck of housing units classified as vacant or nonexistent during earlier operations and additional visits to households that failed to provide complete information on the census form. Census workers will also visit homes built after the address list was finalized in the summer of 1999.
• By law, the Census Bureau must report the total population of each state to the President by December 31, 2000, in order to apportion U.S. representatives among the states. More detailed population counts for counties, cities, tribal lands, census tracts, and census blocks must be published by April 1, 2001, and will include data on race, ethnicity, gender, and age.

The Dispute Over Sampling in the Census

The Census Bureau's original Census 2000 plan, which supplemented traditional counting methods with scientific sampling, had widespread support among scientific experts and stakeholders. However, some congressional lawmakers opposed the use of statistical sampling, arguing that these methods were unconstitutional and illegal, and invited manipulation of the numbers for political advantage. (The census includes a longer questionnaire that is sent to a one-in-six sample of households to collect more detailed demographic and economic information. Sampling for long form data is not the subject of dispute.)

The controversy over sampling delayed decisions about funding for the census and spawned two lawsuits that eventually reached the U.S. Supreme Court. As a result of negotiations between Congress and the Administration, the Census Bureau had been preparing for the census along two tracks: one that uses sampling according to its original plan, and one that relies only on direct counting methods. The Bureau tried out both plans in its Dress Rehearsal for the 2000 census, conducted in three sites in 1998. However, a ruling by the Supreme Court in one of the census cases forced the Bureau to modify its plan yet again.

In the two census lawsuits, opponents of sampling claimed that the Constitution, in requiring a census every 10 years, specifies "actual enumeration," meaning that only a physical headcount is acceptable. The Census Bureau contended that the framers left the method open by requiring a census "in such manner as [the Congress] shall by Law direct." Sampling opponents also asserted that the Census Act (Title 13, U.S.C.) bars such methods to count the population for purposes of apportioning seats in Congress among the 50 states. The Census Bureau pointed out that the Act appears to contain two contradictory instructions, and contended that Congress did not intend to prohibit sampling as a supplement to a good-faith counting effort.

Glavin v. Clinton was filed Feb. 12,1998, in Federal district court for the Eastern District of Virginia by Matthew Glavin, president of the Atlanta-based Southeastern Legal Foundation, and Rep. Bob Barr (R-GA). U.S. House of Representatives v. U.S. Department of Commerce was filed Feb. 20, 1998, in Federal district court for the District of Columbia at the direction of then-House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-GA). Separate three-judge panels ruled Aug. 24, 1998, in the House case and Sept. 25, 1998, in the Glavin case. Both found 3-0 that the Census Act prohibits the use of sampling in the census for purposes of congressional reapportionment. Neither panel ruled on the constitutional question. The Supreme Court heard arguments in both cases on Nov. 30, 1998.

On January 25, 1999, a sharply divided Supreme Court issued a ruling in the Glavin case (the second case was dismissed). The five Justices in the majority concluded that the Census Act barred sampling methods to compile the state population totals used for congressional apportionment. Writing for the majority, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor also said that this provision of the law "required" the use of sampling for all other purposes, if the Secretary of Commerce deems it feasible. The dissenters, in an opinion written by Justice John Paul Stevens, strongly disagreed. They concluded that the Census Act clearly permitted sampling to produce the most complete and accurate census possible. The Court's ruling did not address the constitutionality of sampling. (The sampling decision is cited as U.S. Department of Commerce v. U.S. House of Representatives, notwithstanding the Court's dismissal of the House's claim.)

The Census and Redistricting

The Supreme Court ruling in the Glavin case did not end the sampling dispute. Sampling opponents contend that the Court's decision prohibits sampling not only for congressional apportionment but for producing the more detailed numbers used to draw legislative district boundaries. Supporters believe that the decision only bars sampling for apportionment, and that sampling may be required to produce more accurate numbers for other purposes, such as redistricting and the allocation of federal aid to state and local governments.

The continued controversy over the use of census data complied, at least in part, with sampling methods, has moved to the states. Earlier this year, four states enacted laws prohibiting the use of census number produced with statistical methods for congressional or state legislative redistricting. Those states are Arizona, Alaska, Colorado, and Kansas. The Arizona and Alaska laws, however, must receive "pre-clearance" from the U.S. Department of Justice before they can take effect because those states are covered under Section 5 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act (as amended). All or part of 16 states are covered under Section 5 must show that any changes to election laws so not have the purpose or effect of denying or abridging the right to vote of racial, ethnic, or language minorities. The pre-clearance process is continuing; interested or concerned American Indians and Alaska Native leaders may write to the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division, Voting Section.

Getting Ready for the Census

The Census Bureau needs the help of Tribal leaders and other community activists to ensure an accurate count in 2000. Some preparations, such as developing a list of addresses on reservations, are largely completed, while other activities, such as advertising, will begin in late 1999 and continue through the census.

Here are some ways that Tribal and community leaders can help the Bureau:

• Ensure accurate geographic boundaries for Federally-recognized and State-recognized Tribes with and without a land base on census maps
• Identify effective avenues for promoting the census among Indians and Alaska Natives, including electronic and print media that reach large portions of the community.
• Establish Complete Count Committees to supplement the Bureau's promotion efforts with messages and materials that will resonate at the grassroots level. The Committees can include Tribal leaders, service providers, educators, business owners and labor leaders, and other individuals who are trusted in the community.
• Help the Bureau recruit people for temporary positions as supervisors, crew leaders, and enumerators during the census. (There also will be several thousand data entry and clerical positions available next year in the three data processing centers in Phoenix, AZ.
• Sponsor meetings or forums to educate Indians about the importance of an accurate census for their communities and families, and to encourage participation.
• Help the Bureau set up and operate Questionnaire Assistance Centers during the census in accessible locations.

 

Race and Tribal Affiliation

As in previous censuses, the 2000 census questionnaire will ask respondents to identify their race. For the first time, however, respondents may check off more than one race. The racial categories set by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), which oversees the collection of statistics by Federal agencies, are: American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, Black or African American, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and White. The census asks a separate question on whether respondents are Hispanic or Latino. People who identify themselves as American Indian will be asked to write-in the Tribe in which they are enrolled or their principal Tribe

The OMB has issued preliminary guidance for Federal agencies, including the Census Bureau, to follow in deciding how to tabulate multiple responses to the race question. The guidance (which is provisional until after the census is complete) discusses several options for tabulation multiple race responses, and encourages Federal agencies to determine which tabulation best meet their policy and programmatic needs. Technical issues to consider include comparability of data over time and the level of geographic or demographic detail necessary for program evaluation and implementation.

Possible tabulation methods for individual choosing more than one race include: reporting data on all 63 possible racial combinations; assigning each multiple response to only one category, based on pre-specified standards; and, including multiple responses in the totals for each selected race (totals would add to more than 100 percent of the population). So far, the Census Bureau has advised state legislators that it will provide data for all 63 possible race responses/combinations in the data used for political redistricting. (There will actually be 126 combinations, as each one also will be designated as "of Hispanic origin" or "not of Hispanic origin.")

# # #