[House Hearing, 110 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
CENSUS 2010: USING THE COMMUNICATIONS CAMPAIGN TO EFFECTIVELY REDUCE
THE UNDERCOUNT
=======================================================================
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
SECOND SESSION
__________
JULY 10, 2008
__________
Serial No. 110-124
__________
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
47-524 PDF WASHINGTON : 2009
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; DC
area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM
HENRY A. WAXMAN, California, Chairman
EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York TOM DAVIS, Virginia
PAUL E. KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania DAN BURTON, Indiana
CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, Connecticut
ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland JOHN M. McHUGH, New York
DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio JOHN L. MICA, Florida
DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana
JOHN F. TIERNEY, Massachusetts TODD RUSSELL PLATTS, Pennsylvania
WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri CHRIS CANNON, Utah
DIANE E. WATSON, California JOHN J. DUNCAN, Jr., Tennessee
STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio
BRIAN HIGGINS, New York DARRELL E. ISSA, California
JOHN A. YARMUTH, Kentucky KENNY MARCHANT, Texas
BRUCE L. BRALEY, Iowa LYNN A. WESTMORELAND, Georgia
ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of PATRICK T. McHENRY, North Carolina
Columbia VIRGINIA FOXX, North Carolina
BETTY McCOLLUM, Minnesota BRIAN P. BILBRAY, California
JIM COOPER, Tennessee BILL SALI, Idaho
CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland JIM JORDAN, Ohio
PAUL W. HODES, New Hampshire
CHRISTOPHER S. MURPHY, Connecticut
JOHN P. SARBANES, Maryland
PETER WELCH, Vermont
JACKIE SPEIER, California
Phil Barnett, Staff Director
Earley Green, Chief Clerk
Lawrence Halloran, 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 10, 2008.................................... 1
Statement of:
Harrison, Roderick, director, Databank, joint Center for
Political and Economics Studies; Dr. Barbara A. McKinzie,
Chair, 2010 Census Subcommittee, National Pan-Hellenic
Council; and David J. Lange, general manager, Scholastics
Marketing Partners, Scholastic, Inc........................ 73
Harrison, Roderick....................................... 73
Lange, David J........................................... 96
McKinzie, Barbara A...................................... 85
Murdock, Steven H., Director, Bureau of the Census, U.S.
Department of Commerce; and Jeff Tarakajian, executive vice
president, Client Services, DraftFCB....................... 34
Murdock, Steven H........................................ 34
Tarakajian, Jeff......................................... 43
Letters, statements, etc., submitted for the record by:
Baca, Hon. Joe, a Representative in Congress from the State
of California, prepared statement of....................... 112
Clay, Hon. Wm. Lacy, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Missouri, prepared statement of................... 3
Clyburn, Hon. James E., a Representative in Congress from the
State of South Carolina, prepared statement of............. 10
Gonzalez, Hon. Charles A., a Representative in Congress from
the State of Texas, prepared statement of.................. 27
Harrison, Roderick, director, Databank, joint Center for
Political and Economics Studies, prepared statement of..... 76
Lange, David J., general manager, Scholastics Marketing
Partners, Scholastic, Inc., prepared statement of.......... 98
Maloney, Hon. Carolyn B., a Representative in Congress from
the State of New York:
Prepared statement of.................................... 23
Prepared statement of Donald L. Evans.................... 15
McKinzie, Dr. Barbara A., Chair, 2010 Census Subcommittee,
National Pan-Hellenic Council, prepared statement of....... 87
Murdock, Steven H., Director, Bureau of the Census, U.S.
Department of Commerce, prepared statement of.............. 36
Rangel, Hon. Charles B., a Representative in Congress from
the State of New York, prepared statement of............... 114
Tarakajian, Jeff, executive vice president, Client Services,
DraftFCB, prepared statement of............................ 45
CENSUS 2010: USING THE COMMUNICATIONS CAMPAIGN TO EFFECTIVELY REDUCE
THE UNDERCOUNT
----------
THURSDAY, JULY 10, 2008
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Information Policy, Census, and
National Archives,
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2 p.m., in
room 2154, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Wm. Lacy Clay
(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Present: Representatives Clay, Maloney, Watson, and Turner.
Also present: Representatives Clarke, Clyburn, Baca,
Gonzalez, Sires, Honda, Jackson-Lee of Texas, Lee of
California, and Kilpatrick.
Staff present: Darryl Piggee, staff director/counsel; Jean
Gosa, clerk; Alissa Bonner and Michelle Mitchell, professional
staff members; Charisma Williams, staff assistant; Dorian
Rosen, intern; Benjamin Chance, minority professional staff
member; and John Cuaderes, minority senior investigator and
policy advisor.
Mr. Clay. The subcommittee will come to order. The
Information Policy, Census, and National Archives Subcommittee
of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee will now come
to order and good afternoon.
Today's hearing is entitled, ``2010 Census: Using the
Communications Campaign to Effectively Reduce the Undercount.''
We will examine the Census Bureau's plans to use the 2010
integrated communications campaign to attain an accurate
enumeration of traditionally hard to count populations. We will
also examine whether the Bureau is on course to build on the
successes of the 2000 census.
We are privileged to have with us today several guests who
are here. We have, in attendance, Members of the tricaucus. The
tricaucus is comprised of Members of the Congressional Black
Caucus, the Congressional Hispanic Caucus and the Congressional
Asian Pacific American Caucus.
Two of the Chairs are here, and one is the Honorable Mike
Honda, and filling in for the Honorable Joe Baca will be Mr.
Gonzalez from Texas. Also, we have the Honorable Yvette Clarke
and the Honorable Albio Sires. I want to welcome them all here.
Also, Honorable Yvette Clarke from New York, thank you for
being here too.
I am going to ask unanimous consent that they and our other
colleagues who will show up today to join us be recognized for
opening statements and questions and allowed to sit on the
dais. Without objection so ordered.
And, without objection, the Chair and the ranking minority
member will have 5 minutes to make opening statements followed
by opening statements not to exceed 3 minutes by any other
Member who seeks recognition.
And, without objection, Members and witnesses may have 5
legislative days to submit a written statement and extraneous
materials for the record.
As I stated earlier, we will focus on the U.S. Census
Bureau's plans to accurately count historically undercounted
populations including racial, ethnic and language minorities
during the 2010 decennial. I am pleased to welcome several
visiting Members to this important hearing.
The census is a vital, constitutionally mandated survey
that policymakers and demographers rely on to make decisions,
allocate over $300 billion in Federal funding annually,
reapportion congressional seats and redistrict within States.
Therefore, it is essential that the data be complete and
accurate.
The Bureau will use its communications campaign to help
improve accuracy, increase the mail response rate and reduce
the differential undercount. Unfortunately, cost overruns in
other areas have fueled concerns regarding the Bureau's budget
for the communications campaign.
Given the high level of distrust of government in hard to
count communities, the Bureau cannot risk the impact of
underfunding the campaign which encompasses the successful
Partnership and Census in Schools Programs.
While I can appreciate the budget challenges that resulted
from the Bureau's decision to revert to a paper census, most
would agree that the communications campaign is underfunded. In
order to duplicate the accomplishments of the 2000 census,
which undercounted over 3 million people, the communications
campaign needs millions of more dollars.
It is equally disturbing to learn that funding for outreach
to minority communities has been cut or reprogrammed when these
communities have the greatest needs.
An inaccurate 2010 census will leave many States without
their fair share of Federal dollars and will handicap local
governments for 10 years.
With less than 2 years until the 2010 census, I looked
forward to the testimony of our witnesses and learning how
Congress can best partner with the Bureau in addressing these
concerns.
Now I will yield to the ranking member to be recognized for
opening statements.
[The prepared statement of Hon. Wm. Lacy Clay follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Turner. Thank you, Chairman Clay, for holding this
important hearing on the communications plan for the 2010
census.
As the hearing title indicates, we will examine the use of
the Census Bureau's communication campaign to help effectively
reduce the undercount for 2010. The Bureau's communication
campaign is a key component in the overall strategy to ensure a
fair and accurate census.
I agree with Chairman Clay that as we move closer to census
day, we need to pay more attention on how we reach the
traditionally hard to count areas. We should also ensure that
the guiding principle for the communication campaign is the
same guiding principle for the census, to reach as many people
as possible.
To be a truly effective communication campaign,
communication efforts should reach all those living in the
United States and its territories. It is important to address
the traditionally hard to count areas as we can all agree that
an undercounted census does a disservice to all of those
involved. It is equally important, however, not to neglect
other areas.
I hope this hearing will give us a better understanding of
the Bureau's efforts to communicate to American people the
importance of participating in our national census.
Furthermore, I look forward to reading about the types of
communication strategies to be employed by the Bureau. With all
of the tools available in today's information age, the Bureau
should have a sound and relevant plan to make the best use of
its resources.
Census Day is April 1, 2010. Therefore, with less than 3
years for the Bureau to effectively communicate their message
to the American people, this hearing is as timely as it is
relevant.
Again, I would like to thank the chairman for holding this
hearing. Additionally, I would like to thank the witnesses for
their testimony and participation.
With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. Clay. Thank you very much, Mr. Turner.
It is our privilege to have with us today our distinguished
Majority Whip, the Honorable James Clyburn. Welcome, Mr.
Majority Whip and you may proceed.
Mr. Clyburn. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you
so much for allowing me to participate in this hearing, and I
thank you, Ranking Member Turner and other distinguished
members of the subcommittee.
This decennial census is an essential constitutionally
mandated program that determines representation in Congress,
State legislatures and local boards and councils for the next
decade. In addition, data from the census is used to allocate
billions of dollars in Federal funds for housing, social
services and other vital programs. Therefore, it is imperative
that all citizens be fully counted.
Unfortunately, in each census, from its very beginning, the
Bureau has missed millions of people. While the Bureau improved
its performance in 2000 relative to 1990, the 2000 census is
estimated to have mixed 6.4 million people and double-counted
3.1 million for a net undercount of 3.3 million.
Now I have a real, real problem with these statistics
because what it says here, as we know from our own experiences,
the people who are undercounted live in communities that are in
the most need and the people who get overcounted are those
people with second and third homes and, therefore, are people
who live in communities that have less need.
Therefore, I think it is very, very important this year, in
view of what our experiences have been, Mr. Chairman, with
immigration issues, with our community responses to
immigration, with the catastrophic events that we have had all
over our Nation that have displaced people significantly. I
think that we need to do more in this coming census to make
sure that we put in very sophisticated procedures to make sure
that we lessen the undercount and hopefully eliminate the
overcount.
Now some census data are used to determine government
dollars, paved roads, provide healthcare in addition to drawing
election district lines. Accurate census data are the only way
to assure that local communities receive their fair share of
Federal funds and for people to get effective representation in
their various elective bodies. Thus, every available means must
be employed to ensure a fair and accurate census count in 2010.
The Census Bureau must let the Members of Congress know
where its funding needs are to effectively plan and execute the
2010 integrated communications campaign. I want to really
emphasize that fact.
We are, especially the House of Representatives, this is
where constitutionally the money is supposed to start. Please
make us aware of what the actual needs are.
I don't think we ought to start out shortchanging this
process. We must find out exactly what we need to do because it
is important to the Members here that people get counted and
communities get the services that they need.
I think it is imperative that the Bureau continue to
establish partnerships with neighborhood organizations to
assist and encourage individuals to fill out their census
forms.
I have had real experiences with this, and I can tell you
that in many communities where we have not used local people,
there is not comfort level existing among the enumerators, and
therefore they tend to look down certain streets or what we
might call pathways and estimate what may exist in certain
homes. I guess it would be better said to guesstimate what may
exist there than to have actual counts.
When we form partnerships with people who live in these
communities, who socialize in these areas, we stand a much
better chance of getting a good count. To truly reach out to
historically undercounted communities, the Bureau must hire a
larger percentage of minorities and people who have great
contact with minority communities.
I, along with my colleagues, am committed to working with
the Bureau to ensure that our constituents are adequately
represented and counted, and I might add appropriately so.
Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. I yield back the balance
of my time.
[The prepared statement of Hon. James E. Clyburn follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Clay. Thank you, Mr. Whip. I appreciate your opening
statement and your participation in this hearing.
Mr. Honda of California is recognized for an opening
statement.
Mr. Honda. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Before I start, I just want to acknowledge the Majority
Whip Clyburn for not only being at this hearing but also at
other hearings such as the health disparities and representing
the party and the communities from a leadership level also. So
I just wanted to acknowledge that and let him know that it is
being recognized.
Now with the questions about the ability of the Census
Bureau to conduct a successful 2010 census, I am very concerned
about whether the Bureau has the resources and commitment to
place adequate focus on traditionally undercounted communities.
I want to thank Chairman Clay for his attention and
commitment to reducing the undercount and increasing response
rates within minority communities. We are truly fortunate to
have such a vigilant chairman on our side.
As Chair of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus
and an appropriator on the Commerce, Justice and Science
Subcommittee I, myself, will continue to keep a close watch on
the priorities of and funding for programs that seek to reach
and outreach to Asian American, Pacific Islander and other
minority communities.
Outreach to Asian American and Pacific Islander communities
presents particular challenges with its tremendous diversity in
language, culture, income level, geographic distribution in
this country and trust in government.
I look forward to hearing testimony on the communications
campaign, the partnerships and outreach program and the Census
in Schools program that were each integral to reaching hard to
count populations in 2000.
Once again, thank you, Mr. Chairman, for ensuring that
funding is used appropriately and for your commitment to an
accurate count for all communities. I yield back.
Mr. Clay. Thank you so much for that opening statement.
Mr. Sires.
Mr. Sires. Thank you. I will just take a minute.
I went through the last census. I was a local mayor, and I
couldn't agree more with the Majority Whip. I think the input
of locals is extremely important.
I represented a community that was 76 percent below poverty
level, 93 percent Hispanic student body. Most of them did not
speak English. As the mayor, I had to be actively making sure
that everybody was counted, and those are the people that need
it the most.
I am here to learn, to see what I can do to help and make
sure that the funding is there because the people that need it
the most are the ones that are never counted.
Thank you.
Mr. Clay. Thank you so much.
Mrs. Maloney, you are recognized for an opening statement.
Mrs. Maloney. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman, and I
especially want to congratulate Leader Clyburn for being here
today. It shows the importance that the Democratic leadership
places on getting an accurate census, and it builds on his
record of being one of the leaders of supporting and making
sure that we get an accurate census.
Mr. Chairman, you are to be commended for scheduling this
vital oversight hearing. The timing could not be more critical.
It comes on the heels of a decision by the Department of
Commerce to cancel their long planned automation of the 2010
census data collection as well as press accounts this week of
growing concerns about the planning and management of the
decennial census by this administration.
Since the first American census in 1790, the challenge for
the career census professionals has always been to improve on
the most recent census. They strive to make the next census
even more accurate and to ensure to the best of their abilities
that we count every resident in America. Today, that challenge
is the most difficult they have ever confronted.
By all measures, the 2000 census was the most successful
and the most accurate in history. A great part of that success
in 2000 was to the first ever use of paid advertising. Indeed,
President Bush's good friend and former Secretary of Commerce,
Don Evans, testified before the Senate in May 2001 and made
exactly that point, ``Census 2000 was an operational success.
The Census Bureau met or exceeded its goals including meeting
the mandated deadlines for releasing data for use in
apportionment and redistricting. This success can be attributed
to the Congress' commitment to providing full funding for a
number of improvements including unprecedented outreach
programs to groups that historically had the greatest
undercounts.''
Further on in his testimony, Secretary Evans singled out
and gave the most credit for this achievement to the
advertising program, the Partnership Program, the Census in
Schools and improved census forms.
Without objection, Mr. Chairman, I would like to submit the
entire testimony of Secretary Evans into the record, and I
believe it represents an important benchmark for us to measure
against the current planning.
Mr. Clay. So ordered.
[The information referred to follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mrs. Maloney. Thank you.
Amazingly, in our hearings and in press accounts, we are
learning instead of building upon the successful operations,
this Commerce Department is trying to scale them back. You have
shrunk the Census in Schools programs, delayed by a year the
start of the Partnership Program, and in real dollars you are
spending less on paid media to a population that has grown and
is even more diverse than the population in 2000.
I have to say, Director Murdock, this makes absolutely no
sense. Just when your decennial plan is in a crisis, when the
GAO and the MITRE Corp. and other independent reviews are
saying you face a critical challenge to increase response rates
and reduce the universe of households you must visit, you are
shrinking the very programs proven to increase cooperation with
the census.
Through 22 decennial headcounts in our history, the career
professionals at the Census Bureau have a set new Olympic
record for accuracy in all but one. As they prepare for the
2010 census, it seems their coaching staff has let them, and it
is failing to give them the tools they need to succeed. You,
instead, are asking them to do much more with fewer resources.
Our population is much larger than 10 years, more diverse,
living in more complex housing arrangements, relying upon
incredibly more varied media, with polls showing historically
low levels of trust in their government and leaders.
Mr. Chairman, I think it is very important that we use this
hearing today to formally get on the record the true scope and
scale of the advertising, partnership and promotion efforts
being planned in 2010 and how those plans compare with actual
spending in 2000. I hope we can wade deep into the details of
how much is being spent to help cure the undercount that every
census experiences and how much is being spent on those
communities that are historically the hardest to count.
Again, I thank you for your extraordinary leadership, Mr.
Chairman, and my compliments to the ranking member too, but
especially to our Leader Clyburn and thank you very much for
being here.
[The prepared statement of Hon. Carolyn B. Maloney
follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Clay. Thank you so much, Mrs. Maloney.
Mr. Gonzalez is recognized for an opening statement.
Mr. Gonzalez. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and, of
course, Ranking Member Turner, members of the subcommittee and
our esteemed Majority Whip, Mr. Clyburn.
Good afternoon and thank you for the opportunity to
participate in today's hearing on the 2010 census' integrated
communications campaign. I am here today representing the
Congressional Hispanic Caucus even though I saw Mr. Baca here a
minute ago, who is chairman of the Caucus.
I welcome one and all as far as the witnesses, and I hope
that we have a very productive hearing which I believe we will.
When I first arrived to the House of Representatives in
1998, I was tasked with leading the Congressional Hispanic
Caucus' 2000 census effort. At that time, my colleagues and I
were heavily involved in working with the Census Bureau and
stakeholders with the express goal of achieving an accurate
census as possible.
The Partnership and Marketing Program, as it was known
then, was the first of its kind. It achieved its main goal,
engaging multiple community partners to get the word out about
the census and increase response rates. Though we still ended
up with a minority undercount, it was less than it could have
been. I still think of that particular count as a success.
I still hold hope that we can be successful today. However,
all the commentary in the press recently telling us that the
2010 census effort is in shambles and that dramatic changes are
needed at the Department of Commerce and Census Bureau
management if we expect to execute a timely and accurate census
certainly gives us pause, and I hope that we can allay some of
those fears and maybe even misconceptions.
I expect today's hearing focusing on the communications
campaign for the upcoming 2010 census should help provide us
some answers and surely a clearer picture.
In anticipation of today's hearing, the Hispanic Caucus
contacted the advertising firm responsible for the Hispanic
portion of the 2010 census communication plan. While they are
still in the planning stages and state they possess the
resources to perform their portion of the campaign, I am
disturbed by reports noting that funding for the 2010 census
communication plan might be insufficient to carry out on the
scale that we saw in 2000.
We are pleased that the Bureau has seen fit to bring this
team onboard, and we are certain they will do a good job.
However, if these statements are true, I fail to see how the
Bureau expects to achieve the same level of success this time
as we had here in the last 2000 census. I would note that now
is not the time for the census to handicap its partners in such
an important endeavor.
Additionally, I am concerned with the decision to scale
back the Census in Schools Program, fully eliminating any
outreach to students in grades 7 through 12. I know I speak for
my colleagues when I say that I would like to see what data the
Bureau has to support the decision to curtail a program that
actually worked the last time.
I hope the witnesses today will be able to explain whether
we should expect to see an effort along the same scale as we
had in the 2000 census, the same breadth, the same scope or
should we expect a reduced effort by the Census Bureau to reach
out to our communities represented here today.
I look forward to hearing from all of the witnesses this
afternoon to answer these concerns and to share their insight
on how we credibly move forward despite some of the bumps the
Agency has experienced up until now, and I yield back, Mr.
Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Hon. Charles A. Gonzalez
follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Clay. Thank you, Mr. Gonzalez, and we look forward to
your participation in this process especially with all of your
experience with the census.
Ms. Clarke, you are recognized for an opening statement.
Ms. Clarke. I just wanted to take this opportunity to thank
the distinguished chairman, William Lacy Clay, and the ranking
member, Michael Turner, as well as Majority Whip Clyburn and I
see the various Chairs of the caucuses of color here on the
Hill as well as my colleagues for their participation and
inviting me for this extremely important dialog brought before
the subcommittee.
I also thank you witnesses for taking the time out of your
busy schedules to testify today.
Currently, it appears that we must urgently address the
fact that the U.S. Census Bureau has customarily undercounted
countless people of color. When we look at, for example, the
2000 census, it failed to count an estimated 600,000 African
Americans.
I want to put that into the context of today if indeed that
number is correct. When you look at what is happening in terms
of mortgage foreclosures and homes closing and for communities
like mine in Brooklyn, NY, the increased and heightened
immigration enforcement and the fear that has begun to permeate
mixed communities of immigrants and citizens, that makes your
task even more important.
The U.S. Census Bureau is important to many communities of
color because, as we know, the Federal Government uses these
numbers to allocate funding for community programs and services
such as education programs, housing, community development,
healthcare services for the elderly and job training.
State, local and tribal governments use census information
for planning and allocating funds for new school construction,
libraries and locations for police and fire departments.
Community organizations use census information to develop
social services programs, community action projects, senior
lunch programs, childcare centers. The list goes on and on, the
infrastructure of our civil society.
I am concerned about the shortfall of funding required to
make this effort successful. I would like to say at the end of
the day that we are not doing an exercise in futility.
Certainly, the variables that we see before us right now lead
us to a conclusion that we are not prepared financially and
otherwise to put forth our best effort.
So, today, I look forward to hearing all of the witnesses'
testimony so that we can come up with recommendations that can
be legislatively enacted before the 2010 census.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and I yield back the
balance of my time.
Mr. Clay. Thank you so much, Ms. Clarke.
Are there any other Members who would like to make an
opening statement?
Ms. Jackson-Lee.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. Mr. Chairman, let me offer my greatest
appreciation to you and the ranking member and the collective
body of intellect and commitment and dedication to the cause of
improving the lives of all Americans.
The census is a lifeblood of this Nation, and might I take
particular personal privilege to acknowledge Doctor--I am
calling him Doctor--but the Honorable Steve Murdock, having
rooted himself in Texas with a great deal of collaboration with
a number of my constituents and certainly one of our
distinguished Senators, Senator Rodney Ellis and Senator Royce
West, two distinguished State Senators.
And might I acknowledge as well the witness on panel two
but particularly the president of a distinguished sorority, Dr.
Barbara A. McKinzie of Alpha Kappa Alpha, for her presence here
today in commemoration of this outstanding celebration to take
place this week.
Quickly, I want to acknowledge the fact that we do not
serve if we cannot count, and it is important for the Census
Bureau to recognize that it must be based upon the rooted
people in communities. Familiarity does not breed content when
you are knocking on the doors of neighbors and asking them to
be counted.
I want to associate myself with my friend and colleague,
Congresswoman Clarke. Having experienced the abusiveness of ICE
raids proliferating across America in substitute of
comprehensive immigration reform, I know that populations of
African Americans, Hispanics and Asians will be frightened from
the very presence of a government entity coming to their door.
So we must find a way to balance the needs of this country to
establish who it is.
Last, let me say that although I congratulate our Majority
Whip for the funding that we already see in census, let me ask
Mr. Murdock to be forthright and truthful on the needs of
resources. You cannot advertise on a thimble amount of money.
You cannot outreach on a thimble amount of money. You cannot
get those individuals who are willing to work on a thimble
amount of money.
And so, we want to hear from you, to speak up, so that we
can be in the fight together.
I think there should be policy changes, Mr. Chairman, and I
would like to see that students are counted where they live. I
would like to see people incarcerated counted where they live
with their grandmama.
But in any event, let me conclude and thank the chairman. I
look forward to the witnesses' testimony. Our goal is to
empower America, to empower America by knowledge, by the count
and by people being taken care of.
I yield back my time.
Mr. Clay. Thank you so much, Ms. Jackson-Lee.
Just for everyone to know, we will recess at the end of the
opening statements and then reconvene after the votes.
Ms. Lee of California.
Ms. Lee. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I know we only
have a few minutes before votes. So I will be very brief, but
let me just thank you and our Majority Whip for these hearings
and for being ahead of the curve and, hopefully, be able to get
some answers today.
This is a very challenging census, we all know. Issues such
as the foreclosures crisis, the ICE raids, formerly
incarcerated individuals, all of those issues provide an even
greater challenge this time.
Also, I hope we can figure out what happened to the
additional $200 million plus that was appropriated and that
there is a plan to utilize those resources in an effective way
to make sure that all of our undercounted communities are
counted.
I came in 1998, so this is my second census here in the
Congress. Congresswoman Carrie Meek led us last time in a very
important effort which was very robust, and I know this time
under your leadership, Mr. Clay, we will make sure that each
and every individual is counted.
Thank you again.
Mr. Clay. Thank you so much, Ms. Lee, and we look forward
to your participation in this process.
I now will recognize the Chair of the CBC, Ms. Carolyn
Kilpatrick of Michigan and thank you so much for participating
in the hearing.
Ms. Kilpatrick. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just want to
commend you and the subcommittee for having this hearing.
This is probably the most important census for all of the
reasons my colleagues have already mentioned, and I am honored
to be a part of it and will be with you between meetings all
afternoon.
Thank you.
Mr. Clay. Thank you so much.
The subcommittee will stand in recess and reconvene at the
end of these votes. I would estimate about a half an hour.
Thank you.
[Recess.]
Mr. Clay. The subcommittee will come to order. We will
resume the hearing.
When we left, we were on opening statements. If there are
no opening statements--Ms. Watson, would you care to make an
opening?
Take your time. Get comfortable. Have a seat.
Representative Watson is recognized for her opening
statement.
Ms. Watson. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate this hearing where
we will examine the Census Bureau's plan to use the 2010
integrated communications campaign to help ensure that hard to
count communities are not disproportionately undercounted.
It is very, very important as we go into 2010 that we
follow the guidelines in this integrated program. It is very
comprehensive, and it would strike a nationwide campaign that
will use advertising, media relations, specific events and
other aspects of marketing and communication to reach diverse
audiences.
We are so concerned. I represent a district in California,
the largest State and the first State in the Union to become a
majority of minorities. Within my own district, I have a large
number of Armenians, Greeks, Pacific Islanders, Hispanics. I
have all of Koreatown.
What usually happens is that people who are in the country
got to where their loved ones and friends are living with the
fear that comes along with ICE and the raids and all. You don't
get an accurate count.
So what I usually do is I call in the regional census
director and explain to them how to get a more accurate count.
You know go to the playgrounds on a Sunday after church. Go to
the parking lots. Families like to get out with their children.
So what we are doing is keeping an eye on how we get our people
counted.
We are concerned about the budget which is $212 million,
and we were informed that only $27 million will go to track
Blacks, Hispanics and so on. So we want to be sure that the
economically disadvantaged, which is the hardest to count
group, and nearly 50 percent of the population in this category
is Black and one-third speaks a language other than English.
And so, the ethnic enclaves, this is the second highest
hard to count group: 62 percent are foreign born, 34 percent
are linguistically isolated and 54 percent speak Spanish, 20
percent speak a language other than English.
Now our concern is that the preparation for the 2010 census
and what their plans are to reduce the undercount. Additional
concerns are related to the cost overruns within other census
operations and will they impact on funding for the
communications campaign.
Also, we are concerned about the DraftFCB officials, that
officials have expressed a need for $68 million more to conduct
a communications campaign that is comparable to the 2000
campaign. Despite anticipated enumeration challenges within
hard to count communities, the proposed budget for minority
outreach within the campaign has been significantly decreased.
So, Mr. Chairman and our presenters this evening, I am
looking very forward to hearing what you have to present to us
and have you answer questions about our concerns.
I come from an urban district. I mentioned the mix there,
and I mentioned the fact--I think I did--that we usually have a
10 percent undercount. That has been historically the case. The
33rd District, my district in Los Angeles, has 50 percent of
its population that speaks a language other than English. So we
have to take that into account.
We are going to be watching closely, but I again will call
in the regional director and help give that person guidance as
to how to do a better count.
With that, I will give back and thank you very much for the
time, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Clay. Thank you so much, Ms. Watson, and we appreciate
your vigilance on this issue of the census and your diversity
of your district.
If there are no other further opening statements, we will
now take testimony from the witnesses.
It is the policy of this committee to swear in all
witnesses before they testify. Would you please stand and raise
your right hands?
[Witnesses sworn.]
Mr. Clay. Let the record reflect that the witnesses
answered in the affirmative.
I ask each witness now give a brief summary of their
testimony. Please limit your summary to 5 minutes, and your
complete written statement will be included in the hearing
record.
Dr. Murdock, thank you for being here. You may start it
off.
STATEMENTS OF STEVEN H. MURDOCK, DIRECTOR, BUREAU OF THE
CENSUS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE; AND JEFF TARAKAJIAN,
EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, CLIENT SERVICES, DRAFTFCB
STATEMENT OF STEVEN H. MURDOCK
Mr. Murdock. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, members of the
committee, thank you for the opportunity to talk to you about
the Census Bureau's integrated communications plan for the 2010
census.
The 2010 census communications campaign builds on the
success of the census 2000 partnership and marketing campaign
which helped to reverse a two-decade decline in the national
response rate. The objectives of the 2010 program, as in 2000,
are to increase mail response, reduce the differential
undercount and improve overall accuracy and improve public
cooperation with enumerators.
In your letter of invitation, you mentioned the
communications contract, the Partnership Program and Census in
Schools. Each of these is an important component of the overall
communications plan for the 2010 census. None of them can be
fully successful on their own.
The communications campaign will be integrated with the
Census Bureau's decennial census operations, the Partnership
Program, Census in Schools, national and local media and public
relations activities to ensure that consistent messages are
delivered and reinforced at every stage of the process. Success
of each component is vital to achieving a complete and accurate
count.
In September 2007, the Census Bureau awarded its 2010
communications contract to DraftFCB. DraftFCB is a full service
marketing communications agency that will team with other
companies that specialize in reaching minority audiences.
There are two components to the media outreach effort.
Using the expertise of DraftFCB, the Census Bureau will mount a
national media campaign in every broadcast medium to promote
our messaging for 2010. We will advertise on network television
and radio, sporting events like the NFL, local and cable
television, ethnic programming and the Internet.
The second key component of the media campaign will focus
on specific minority populations. Ethnic media advertising will
complement the national campaign, bringing the message to hard
to count populations.
Each of DraftFCB's contractors has proven experience
reaching their target communities, and their efforts will be
instrumental in addressing the differential undercount.
The Partnership Program is another key component of our
communications program. Our partners who have great credibility
in their communities will vouch for the importance of
completing the 2010 census to people in inner cities, on Indian
reservations and rural America and other areas. This will be
particularly important in areas isolated by language and/or
geography.
Our Partnership materials will be available in multiple
languages, and they will be customizable so that partners can
tailor the message to their specific communities.
Unlike census 2000, when promotional materials were only
available through a Census Bureau partnership specialist, 2010
materials will be easily accessed through the Internet or as
printed copy. We also provide needed resources to committed
partner organizations, through the Partnership Support Program
as we did in 2000.
The Census in Schools Programs is another key component of
the integrated communications plan. The program of 2010 will
focus on educating children on the importance of participating
in the census. The goal is to develop strategies, materials and
messages to reach parents through their children. The current
plan provides for a program directed at hard to count areas for
grades K through 6.
DraftFCB is in the process of awarding a competitive
contract to an experienced educational marketing firm to help
implement a strategy with the Census Bureau.
Another initiative, a language program, will also focus on
the hard to reach populations. For the first time, we will mail
about 13 million bilingual Spanish-English questionnaires
targeted to areas with concentrations of Hispanic population.
Questionnaires will be available in five languages in addition
to English, and we will provide language assistance guides in
more than 50 languages.
The 2010 census campaign integrates all elements to provide
better branding of the 2010 census among all segments of the
population, improved delivery of promotional materials for
regional and national partnership efforts, a concerted time-
specific delivery plan and provide clear and accurate
messaging.
The communications contract has a total life cycle budget
of $212 million. This is in addition to funds provided for our
regional and national partnership programs. We are currently
working with DraftFCB on the budget associated with the various
components of our integrated communications plan.
Importantly, budgets for the Partnership Program and the
communications contract have not been compromised or reduced to
meet the budgetary requirements of the FDCA contract. Unlike
any of the Census Bureau other major 2010 contracts, the
communications contract must be flexible. Our ability to react
quickly to the fast-changing media environments in 2010 will be
a key to an effective and wide-reaching outreach campaign.
The integrated communications plan is being developed with
active input from our stakeholders around the country and
throughout the Census Bureau.
We consider the plan and the budget to be a blueprint that
will evolve to optimize our resources. We will review and
adjust the program throughout the census to ensure that our
resources are applied where they are needed most.
In closing, let me stress that the communications program
is of vital importance to the Census Bureau and to me. We are
counting on Congress, our advisory committees and our
partnership organizations to work with us to identify
improvements and to ensure the program meets the needs of
communities they know best.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify. I will be happy
to answer any questions you may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Murdock follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Clay. Thank you so much, Dr. Murdock, and thank you for
your leadership at the Census Bureau.
Also, a witness on this panel is Jeff Tarakajian, executive
vice president of Client Services for DraftFCB, the contractor
for the 2010 integrated communications campaign.
Mr. Tarakajian, you may proceed for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF JEFF TARAKAJIAN
Mr. Tarakajian. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the
subcommittee. DraftFCB and our subcontractor partners thank you
for the opportunity to talk to you today about the integrated
communications plan for the 2010 census.
Today, I am accompanied by Laura Marella, vice chairman of
GlobalHue Latino, our Hispanic partner; Mostapha Saout,
president of Allied Media; Kevin Williams, senior VP/group
director at GlobalHue; and Peter DeNunzio, president of
DraftFCB New York.
During the last 8 months, our subcontractors and ourselves
have spent considerable time and focus learning about the 2000
campaign, the mood of the Nation and its potential impact on
2010 as well as the needs and recommendations of key
stakeholders for the 2010 effort.
In that quest for learning, our subcontractor partners and
ourselves have visited with the census regional offices. We
have heard the insights and recommendations of the various
advisory committees and, importantly, we have conducted primary
research and analyzed reams of existing studies.
Learning will be ongoing and continue to guide everything
we do to build a successful 2010 census overall and to reduce
the undercount. In fact, learning will guide the campaign
throughout its life cycle, allowing for the first time real-
time adjustments to the effort to maximize response.
But, right now, we have a plan that is a work in progress.
It is a blueprint. Its structure is a solid foundation of mass
media to motivate mass participation with substantial overlays
targeted to race and ethnic populations, focused on the hard to
count. But, importantly, it is an integrated approach that
follows best practices in our industry and incorporates
recommendations from the very successful 2000 campaign.
We have a time line that tracks through the key stages
where we develop creative materials and media plans for all
audiences, evaluate the research among its intended audience
the materials that will appear in the marketplace and provide
ample occasions and time for stakeholder review and input.
The process is iterative, and it is cumulative. Right now,
it is on schedule, and it is on budget.
We invite oversight and input because it will make the
campaign better. But, as a result of creating and implementing
countless similar marketing and communications campaigns, we
also know what we must do and when we must do it. It has all
been planned.
With the census, we also know there is no second chance. No
delays are possible. So we will deliver a campaign that is on
time, on budget as well as on point.
While we can't show you yet how the materials will look or
what the specific plans that each audience will be comprised of
or even how much will be spent on each audience, we can give
you an idea of the experience a real person will have from the
integrated campaign as he goes through his daily life.
Meet Derran. He is a 27-year-old single Black mobile which
is a traditionally undercounted audience. He lives in
Philadelphia.
The 2010 census will be his very first. It is a low
priority in his life. He grew up in an environment that was
cynical about government. He will be reached by the mass media
campaign and the Black audience campaign.
Very importantly, as we get to know him, we will discover
that beginning in 2009 he will begin to see messages about the
census, for example, in his barbershop when they start talking
about census jobs, on Facebook where he reconnects with a buddy
of his, through historically Black colleges and newspapers, at
the Linc where the Eagles play in Philadelphia, on a billboard
on the Schuylkill Expressway, at a Black History Month event in
Center City, during a March Madness telecast, at church and on
Grey's Anatomy, etc.
Beginning in 2009 and peaking in 2010 around the mailings,
messaging about the census will surround us, building
awareness, educating and encouraging participation.
We can also give you a glimpse of some other work we have
completed so far: interim materials for partnerships and
recruitment communications to reach people about census jobs in
their communities.
Our work has just begun. Our entire team looks forward to
the discussions, challenges, debates, the back and forths, the
late nights and weekends we will spend designing and
implementing what we want to be the most successful campaign
yet.
Thank you for the opportunity to speak about this most
important work that we are doing. I am very happy to answer any
questions you may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Tarakajian follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Clay. Thank you so much.
We will begin questioning, and I will defer to Ms. Watson
and any other Members, and then I will do the final round of
questioning.
Ms. Watson, do you have questions?
Ms. Watson. I understand that you are going to be
subcontracting. You have affiliates by regions throughout. How
will you monitor those?
As you said, Mr. Murdock, that you get one chance at this.
I guess both of you had said that. How do we monitor? How are
we sure that we can go back and be sure we can have some kind
of accuracy in the process?
I mean how are you going to work on a regional basis with
your subcontractors?
Mr. Murdock. Let me answer first, and then him answer from
his subcontractors.
We have a management program for every grant or contract we
have with people that are assigned to administer and to create
metrics and other factors to be used to assess how well our
contractors are doing.
For example, we have a certain. We have goals set up for
our contracts relative to small and disadvantaged businesses,
and they have a goal, and they receive greater awards if they
meet those goals relative to that kind of issue. But we have a
whole set of factors by which we assess how well they are doing
and what and therefore can take remedial actions when
necessary.
Ms. Watson. I guess, Karen Narasaki, OK. She is the
executive director of the Asian American Justice Center,
testified before the subcommittee last year that the Bureau
needed to improve its work on language translations, and she
noted that in 2000 the Bureau was late in making critical
decisions on translation materials and that there was no
centralized clearinghouse of translated materials. I have that
problem in my district.
To what do you attribute the problems and what has the
Bureau done to resolve them on this round?
Mr. Murdock. Well, in 2000, we had really very separate
programs, one that was a media and advertising program and then
our Partnership program, and the Census Bureau provided most of
the materials that went out in printed form.
The integrated part of this contract is to bring those
together so that materials are available when they are needed
by groups that may want to promote the census, by our
partnership specialists who need to pass those out to groups
that need them for promotion and need to help their members
understand the census.
So what has changed and changed significantly is that we
have an integrated program with all of the timing phased out
and set out so that we will be much more certain that we will
not have the problems we had in timing because we did have
problems.
We had problems with materials being way too, well,
actually too late in terms of meeting the needs that we had,
and that is one of the reasons we went to an integrated program
that integrated the advertising, the media part of this program
with the Partnership Program.
Ms. Watson. Are you assured that you will have like kind?
I find you are more effective when you go in to do the
outreach in non-English speaking communities, that you have
someone that speaks the language, looks like them, has some
recognition in the community. So are you monitoring to see that
the enumerators then match the demographics?
Mr. Murdock. Both in terms of hiring enumerators and
particularly as we talk about the Partnership Program, this
group of about 680 people that we will have across the country.
Their very purpose is to get involvement of local community
people, religious leaders, elected officials, others who people
know that can help to spread the message that it is safe to
respond to the census because we know very well anyone coming
from the outside has much less credibility to me or to anyone
than someone you have known and who can.
When that face that you know says this is something that
you should do, this is something important for our community,
it has a much greater meaning than someone who is not familiar
to the person, and that is really the basis of a lot of the
success of our Partnership Program.
Ms. Watson. I want to thank you, Mr. Murdock, for coming to
the CPC yesterday. As I mentioned to you, I have all of
Koreatown in my district in Los Angeles. It is the largest
Korean community in the country. And so, can you tell us about
the funding?
You mentioned the funding for African Americans and other
minorities, probably from African islands and so on. So how
much funding is being allocated, if you can share that with us,
to reach people in these Asian communities?
Mr. Murdock. Well, the final distribution of that is still
being worked out by the contractor FCB and the subcontractors.
Some of the initial work that we had showed about a $76 million
general media. I mean group-wide kind of advertising campaign,
meaning it was for the generalized population.
On top of that, because I think it is important to
understand that we are really talking about kind of a layering
of the messages, one is there is a general media campaign that
should appeal to populations of all different groups, and then
we do have specific subcontractors as my friend here on the
left indicated that try specifically to look at different
populations.
The most recent data I have seen, and this is not
definitive because it is still being finalized because our plan
for this program is just now being finalized. We had a draft
plan earlier. We asked for revisions of that, and now we are
getting a more definitive plan.
It showed about 27 million, for example, for Black and
Hispanic audiences, about 13 for Asian audiences, about 6 for
American Indian and Alaskan Native, about 2.8 million for
Puerto Rico, etc. We can provide that information to you.
Ms. Watson. Good. I was going to ask if we have or can have
another opportunity to hear about and be briefed on the final
draft and then have input.
Mr. Murdock. Certainly. Certainly.
Ms. Watson. The other suggestion I would like to make, and
this will be the last question or suggestion, is that
regionally you meet with some of the minority representatives,
have your regional people, so that we can have this whole
process more localized, and we will have input.
I think our churches could be very, very helpful. In the
Los Angeles area that I represent, we have the mega churches
with 30,000 membership, and one Sunday you could reach maybe as
many as 500,000 people in an announcement. So if you could have
your regional people meet with us, we could be very helpful to
you.
With that, I thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the time.
Mr. Clay. Thank you, Ms. Watson. Very good suggestions.
Mr. Murdock. We would welcome that involvement.
Mr. Clay. Very good.
Mr. Gonzalez, you are recognized for 5 minutes for
questioning.
Mr. Gonzalez. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Dr. Murdock, there are some areas that concern me in my
opening statement. I am not even going to get into some of
those because we have some limited time.
My concern is the diversion of funds. I think we are all
committed to adequately funding. There are some issues about
certain requests being made and how we get the money to you,
but I think that is all going to be resolved.
But looking to the future and what you are going to be
utilizing, implementing, I guess I want some assurance that
some of the things you may be looking at will not take funds
away from the efforts that Mr. Tarakajian is attempting to do
through the integrated communications program and so on.
Let's just start off with we talk about the Internet, using
the Internet. I know Mr. Tarakajian referenced it as a way of
communicating the existence and the awareness of the Internet
and not necessarily using the Internet as a method to respond
or report or fill out whatever is necessary in the way of
compliance with the request from the Census Bureau of our
citizens or non-citizens, whoever is out there.
So there is a distinction, is there not?
Mr. Murdock. Yes.
Mr. Gonzalez. Mr. Tarakajian is talking about really just a
means of communicating with the Internet, Facebook, MySpace,
whatever it is. Then I also want to talk about exactly what
that arrangement is and make a suggestion or two. But there has
been discussion about the use of the Internet, and I don't know
whether that has come out of the Senate or not.
What does that involve? What are we talking about and at
what stage of development or consideration do we find ourselves
today?
Mr. Murdock. Well, as part of our replan effort, we have
relooked at the option of providing the Internet as an option
for response. Let me make it very clear that we have not
finalized our analysis of that, and we are diverting no
decennial funds at this time toward that process.
The work that we are doing now is by our IT division which
is funded out of another part of the Census Bureau, and what we
are looking at is simply this as another alternative that we
can provide to people or potentially can provide. When we get
done with the analysis, we will be glad to come back and report
that.
Let me say something about what you said at the beginning.
There has been, since I came here at least, no diversion of
funds from this set of enterprises. I will be willing to commit
to all of you here that, to the best of my power, there will be
no diversion from these two programs.
As you know, Representative, I was in Texas for nearly 30
years working in this area. I very strongly believe in this
program. I saw the programs, the Partnership Program, etc. work
very effectively in Texas. I saw it work in the colonias of
south Texas and increase the response rates not to a perfect
level but to a level that was certainly much better than what
we had had in previous censuses.
So there are no plans, and I commit to you that I have no
plans for sure to take resources away from this program. I
think it is a very important program, very critical to the
census.
Mr. Gonzalez. I appreciate that there won't be the
diversion or whatever. It does add an additional layer of
funding. There is no doubt about that.
And so, I am just going as to cost-benefit analysis of
whatever you are going to be doing as you contemplate something
else, whether it is the Internet or whether it is a
sweepstakes. I am just concerned about those two.
Mr. Murdock. Let me make it very clear about those because
there has been a lot of misunderstanding about the both of
those. There has been work about incentive programs. Where
those are is we have provided to the Department of Commerce our
previous analysis that was done in previous censuses. They are
looking at this at the Department of Commerce.
We are diverting no resources at this time and have no
plans at this time to have anything related to incentives,
sweepstakes and all the other things that have sometimes been
covered in the papers.
The Internet will be provided if it is feasible, if it does
not mean the deterioration in things such as this program and
if we find out that it might in fact help us in some
circumstances if we have some kind of crisis and need to
provide another way for some people to respond to the census.
We are not diverting resources from any part of the decennial
and particularly not from this program to look at either of
these.
Mr. Gonzalez. I know it is a sensitive topic, but I think
that Majority Whip Clyburn referred to it. I think
Congresswoman Watson referred to it. That is if the real
objective here is greater participation, we know that in this
universe of responders that we have a certain segment or sector
that we really don't have much of a problem with.
It is really the effort and the concentration of moneys and
effort and everything else is really in two other categories
that Congresswoman Watson had already referenced: economically
disadvantaged and the ethnic enclave too.
I venture to guess that the advantaged homeowners which
have the lowest hard to count score, 6, and the highest mail
return rate, 83 percent, is probably that particular audience
that you would be reaching if in fact you invest any
substantial funds in the Internet. I mean that is the way the
real world works. I am just saying I would hate to get diverted
to it.
I love the Internet. We try to utilize it to the extent
that we can, but I just don't really feel that the amount of
attention or funds would be a diversion.
And let me go further as to the reason that we think it
could be counterproductive. It is just not the undercount. It
is the overcount, and Whip Clyburn made reference to that.
There are two ways that this thing works against the
communities of color: undercounted, also overcounted.
I think there is real danger on the Internet responses in
making it even harder for you guys to figure if there is
actually double and triple reporting.
Mr. Chairman, I know I have gone over my time, and I am
hoping that we might have an occasion after this round to maybe
have a couple of questions afterwards if you would.
Mr. Clay. We will have time for another round.
Mr. Murdock. Let me just assure, Representative Gonzalez,
that we are not going to proceed with anything that endangers
our ability to get a full and complete count.
You know there are two things we worry about. We worry
about the accuracy of the count, which is its completeness, and
the timeliness of the census. Nothing we are going to do is
going to endanger either of those.
We won't do something that makes the risk of getting a late
census or getting a less accurate census. We are just not going
to do that.
Thank you so much.
Mr. Gonzalez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Clay. Thank you, Mr. Gonzalez.
Representative Clarke, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. Clarke. Thank very much, Mr. Chair.
Dr. Murdock, I have a couple of questions, and let me just
start with my concern around a PR effort that would rely
heavily on the insight that Black audiences are highly
influenced by word of mouth. I don't know what types of focus
groups or studies you did to complete to support this
conclusion or what types of nontraditional media forms will be
used. So maybe you can give us some insight into that.
But what is your plan to reach Blacks in rural areas?
Mr. Murdock. Well, in many parts of the country, rural
areas are uniquely challenging because of the sparsity of
population and because of lots of other issues that are
sometimes involved.
Our Partnership Program is not just one that works in large
cities. It is one that works in rural areas as well. The intent
of that program is to go particularly to hard to count areas,
to become involved with the population, with organizations,
with churches, with community groups, with elected officials,
all with the intent of increasing awareness and involving local
people in the census.
One of the things that Representative Watson said that is
very, very true is that local involvement is critical. What we
try to do with our Partnership Program is not to have a partner
come in and take the census, not to have that person come in
and substitute for local people, but in fact to work with local
people, to empower the local people to get involved in the
census because that is the census works when people believe in
it and people get involved in it, and that is a local phenomena
as much as anything else.
Ms. Clarke. So, Dr. Murdock, in terms of a PR effort, are
you expecting that the influence of word of mouth, I guess the
repetition, would gain the type of affinity with filling out
the census?
I am just trying to get a sense because word of mouth can
work both ways, right?
Mr. Murdock. Right.
Ms. Clarke. OK. So?
Mr. Murdock. If you don't mind, let me ask Mr. Tarakajian
to go ahead and talk about the particular strategies they are
using.
Ms. Clarke. Sure. OK.
Mr. Tarakajian. Actually, the insight or the strategy about
word of mouth being important to the Black community came from
our GlobalHue partner as one of the insights that they brought
to the table about the Black community.
I believe that what they are talking about is that there
are certain segments of the population that are much more
influenced by person to person communications than by mass
media communications. The value of that person to person
communication where there is an affinity, a relationship
created is very critical. That is really the only way to get
certain segments of the population to overcome their fears and
to feel comfortable responding.
Ms. Clarke. How does that jibe with accuracy because
oftentimes word of mouth is inaccurate and, if that is used as
a strategy, is it your layering approach that you have talked
about in your presentation along with word of mouth?
Mr. Tarakajian. Yes.
Ms. Clarke. I am just concerned that we would see that as a
linchpin for getting people to sign up in the census
particularly in light of the climate that we live in with
regard to the invasiveness of government.
Mr. Tarakajian. Yes. Word of mouth is not the strategy of
the campaign. It is one tactic among many tactics that we will
use.
As I said, it is something that for certain segments of the
population is very important because mass media or third party
messages don't really motivate them because they don't
necessarily trust the third party. But a personal message that
is generated from someone that they trust carries much more
weight and carries much more meaning and motivation for them.
Ms. Clarke. Given the fact that 8 percent of the total
Black population is born outside of the United States, I notice
that Creole is the only foreign language in which messages will
be created for the Black community. Why aren't any continental
African languages included such as Swahili or a universal
language such as French?
Mr. Tarakajian. The language program is more robust really
than the languages that are going to appear in paid media.
There 14 languages that would be part of the paid media
campaign. There are another five languages that would be for
promotional materials.
But very importantly, in addition to that, all of the
partnership promotional materials will be created in what we
would call a template form so that all of the partners who are
watching out for the audiences that speak a language other than
those in the campaign will be able to take those templates and
translate them into whatever language is necessary. So, really
what we are doing is being able to open it up to virtually any
language that anybody needs for those kinds of materials.
Ms. Clarke. I just wanted to sort of bring, because my time
is winding down, to your attention that you are talking about
layered communities in terms of the challenge it is to get
information to them. We know already that for people in the
Black community, in particular, Black males, you have been
under-reporting. Imagine if that Black male spoke another
language, what the challenge would be in really getting to that
individual.
So I just wanted you to be aware of all of those nuances
and intricacies as you go about rolling out your PR strategy.
There is going to be some overlay, but you want to make sure
that it also hits its target.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Murdock. Let me just comment.
Mr. Clay. Yes, you may.
Mr. Murdock. In terms of the languages and in terms of the
total number of languages available, there will be over 50, and
Swahili is one of the languages for which there are language
guides.
So, in terms of the overall program, obviously we cannot
provide in every language that now prevails with the groups in
the United States. We are trying our best, and we are doing
over 50 different languages, and Swahili is one of them.
Mr. Clay. Representative Kilpatrick, you are recognized for
5 minutes.
Ms. Kilpatrick. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you again
for having us this afternoon.
Dr. Murdock, we talked a bit yesterday, and since then we
have met with the full Democratic Caucus. I submit to you, to a
person, all 233 of us are looking forward to working closely
with the Census Department to get an accurate census.
We believe it will be more difficult than ever before in
terms of the lives of Americans when things are happening and
that we want to be your partners as we get a correct count that
affects all of our districts, all of our dollars and serves the
United States of America.
Mr. Murdock. We appreciate that.
Ms. Kilpatrick. I serve on the House Appropriations
Committee. About two or 3 weeks ago, we passed a supplemental
in the House and the Senate, and the President has now signed
it. It gives the census an additional $210 million.
One of the problems we didn't get a chance to talk about
yesterday but the handheld $600 million computers that have
been tossed somewhere and now going to paper as we did 10 years
ago. It is unfortunate, first of all.
The contract that went to that company, I understand a
Florida company, some $600 plus million. You only had five or
six questions that they were supposed to input. Why were they
thrown out?
In their proposal, did they not say they could meet the
challenge? Were you not clear in what you were asking?
The $210 million, to my understanding, is going to help
with some enumeration, but this is a tech society. If they were
not able with the handhelds to connect to a mainframe to print
out what we needed, why was this company chosen?
Mr. Murdock. I think, ma'am, let me clarify a couple
things.
Ms. Kilpatrick. Please.
Mr. Murdock. First of all, we are using handhelds in the
address canvassing part of our program. What I think the
confusion was is that part of our process is after we have
received all of the mail responses, and then we have something
we call non-response followup, and that is when we start
knocking door to door.
We did a very careful analysis, a very sobering analysis
that suggested to us that where we were at that point in time,
the risks would be significant to stay with trying to do, use
handhelds in NRFU.
Ms. Kilpatrick. That is added expense?
Mr. Murdock. That is the non-response followup. So we are
using handhelds in the address canvassing. Address canvassing
is a very key part of the census.
Ms. Kilpatrick. We are not arguing. We are not arguing. I
know the process.
Mr. Murdock. OK.
Ms. Kilpatrick. I am 60. So I have been through at least
four of them, right. That is very important. Technology is new,
and it has been tested and tried for a long time.
The truth of the matter is Census spent $600 plus million.
Mr. Murdock. No.
Ms. Kilpatrick. No? Help me out. Don't tell me the process.
Tell me about the money.
Mr. Murdock. OK. We have spent funds on that project, but
the $600 million was for the total contract if it included the
NRFU part of the process. So we have not spent $600 million.
Ms. Kilpatrick. How much have you spent, sir?
Mr. Murdock. We have spent, I think, about $240 million,
something like that. We can check and get you an exact number.
Ms. Kilpatrick. $240 million on a machine we can't use?
Mr. Murdock. No. We can use the machine on the addressing
canvassing, ma'am. That is what I am trying. The address
canvassing is critical because the census is actually a census
of addresses from which we get households from which we
identify people.
This process will allow us to identify those addresses, to
input them electronically, to get GPS coordinates for those
programs that will allow us to make sure that we know exactly
where each location is.
Ms. Kilpatrick. OK. My time is short.
Mr. Murdock. We are using.
Ms. Kilpatrick. So the $240 that we spent, are they still
getting 260 more, the same company or is that the end of their
contract?
Mr. Murdock. We are in the process of replan. We will be
receiving from the contractor a proposal or cost proposal
tomorrow, and then we will. On the 15th, I am sorry. We will
then be negotiating with them for the additional parts of the
process that they will be doing.
Ms. Kilpatrick. More dollars?
Mr. Murdock. They are doing operational control systems.
Ms. Kilpatrick. You know you are talking over my head in
terms of the technical.
Mr. Murdock. I am sorry.
Ms. Kilpatrick. You know money, stay right there, in the
program.
Mr. Murdock. OK.
Ms. Kilpatrick. We will get to that too because we want to
be a part of it, but I am trying to understand. In a contract
that started out at $600 million, we have only spent $240, is
that right?
Mr. Murdock. At this point, yes.
Ms. Kilpatrick. It is my understanding that those computers
that we bought are not longer useful? If it is wrong, just say,
no, that is not right.
Mr. Murdock. No, that is not right.
Ms. Kilpatrick. OK. Then come on, you can say; 5 minutes
and we are catching planes. Thursday is a bad day for hearings,
but it was important for us to be here to try to begin the
conversation, and we want to continue. But we need the correct
information.
As we said yesterday, if you would supply it to us because
we don't believe everything we read in the paper either. But
unless we hear from the real source, and you are that source
here, Dr. Murdock, we have to go with what we hear. What we are
hearing is that we spent $610 million and that company is about
to get another billion and they didn't complete the first
assignment.
Mr. Murdock. That is not correct.
Ms. Kilpatrick. OK.
Mr. Murdock. We are negotiating the contract for their
remaining from now. That will be completed by August 15th. I
can't tell you exactly what that is, but it is not going to be
in the range of $1 billion more.
Ms. Kilpatrick. Did they fulfill the first obligation?
Mr. Murdock. Pardon?
Ms. Kilpatrick. Did they fulfill the first obligation?
Mr. Murdock. That process is still being done, and they are
working to complete. It was not supposed to be done at this
point in time. They are making progress on that.
Ms. Kilpatrick. So, they have been smeared unjustly, it
sounds like to me.
Mr. Murdock. Well, there were problems on both sides. As we
said in previous testimony, there were problems on our part in
terms of providing as clear requirements as we might have.
There were also difficulties in the performance of the
handhelds that they are addressing now, and we had problems
with handhelds that didn't operate correctly and didn't operate
in the way that we needed them to. That is being addressed.
Ms. Kilpatrick. Last question, was that a competitive bid
and were there other companies bidding for it?
Mr. Murdock. Absolutely. Absolutely, it was a competitive
bid.
Ms. Kilpatrick. We look forward to working with you.
Mr. Murdock. Thank you.
Ms. Kilpatrick. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Clay. Thank you so much, Madam Chair.
Dr. Murdock, DraftFCB officials claim they need an
additional $68 million to conduct a communications campaign
that is comparable to the 2000 campaign. They believe the
current budget of $207 million does not take into account
several factors including media inflation that is predicted to
be a minimum of 35 percent, the increasing degree of difficulty
caused by a more diverse population, continuing fragmentation
of the media marketplace and declining response rates.
Does the Bureau believe the $207 million is sufficient to
conduct a communications campaign that significantly reduces
the undercount and, if so, how? If not, why and how does the
Bureau plan to address these deficiencies?
Mr. Murdock. We believe that $212. Now understand when we
look at this full program, there is the communications part of
it, which is $212 million, and then there are partnership
programs that are not included in that $212 million.
We believe what we have is sufficient for where we are at
this point in the process, but let me tell you that this is an
evolving process. It is one that we are now just finalizing the
plans.
If in the course of the process we see that we need to look
at alternatives, we will be back and cooperating with Commerce,
with you as stakeholders and others. We will look at what we
need to do to obtain appropriate resources for this program.
Mr. Clay. Thank you for that response.
According to the Bureau's estimates, it undercounted
African Americans by 628,000, Hispanics by 248,000, Hawaiian or
Pacific Islanders by 13,000 and the American Indian and Native
Alaskans by 10,000. There are some in the statistical community
who believe the actual undercounts are much higher.
Please tell us the Bureau's specific plans for reducing the
undercount, given the fact that you will not have the handheld
computing devices to conduct non-response followup and you have
lowered your response rate.
Mr. Murdock. The handhelds are not really that significant
as you look at the response rate. That is we are going to be
doing a program that we did last time that gave us the most
successful census ever which was a paper-based non-response
followup. This is a data collection effort, and it is
necessarily substantially improved in terms of accuracy as a
result of the use of the handheld.
Mr. Clay. OK.
Mr. Tarakajian, has the Bureau or Commerce Department asked
DraftFCB to set aside funds for the sweepstakes?
Mr. Tarakajian. No.
Mr. Clay. No? They haven't approached you about it all and
you all have not set aside funds?
Mr. Tarakajian. No. They haven't asked us to, and we have
not done that.
Mr. Clay. And you don't plan on doing it?
Mr. Tarakajian. No.
Mr. Clay. OK. All right. I will recognize Ms. Jackson-Lee
for 5 minutes.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Let me ask Mr. Murdock, and this may have been asked
answered, but please don't hesitate to expand on your answer.
When we were in an earlier meeting, you spoke to us about
the partnership which I think has a great deal of value to it,
partnership specialists, but our recollection is that they were
thinly spread in the past census. And so, my question is do you
intend to expand that program extensively?
Where do you intend to hire from for those particular
individuals who will reach out to different partners? Do you
have a plan to recruit these partners from the under-served,
under-utilized areas?
Mr. Murdock. Well, let me begin by saying that we will have
about the same number as we had in 2000. That is about 680 to
690 persons.
They are recruited by our regions, in our regions.
Throughout those regions, what is attempted, we attempt to do
is find people from individual communities, from areas within
the region that represent different ethnic and other kinds of
groups, racial groups, and to get them hired to be part of the
Partnership program because we do know that what works best in
terms of getting responses is people from local areas that
people identify, that people come to trust and know that they
are part of their communities and they understand the context
from which they are responding to the census or any other
matters.
We recruit locally, and our regions, our regional directors
are charged with ensuring that we represent the groups in their
regions.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. Mr. Murdock, is that solely budget-
directed or is there a chain of command where the Secretary of
Commerce is aware of the efforts and has indicated that 680,
690 is what we need?
Mr. Murdock. No, that was not. That was decided in a
planning effort by the Census Bureau. It was not decided by the
Department of Commerce.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. Well, let me just suggest are you saying
that is the number for the Nation?
Mr. Murdock. For the Nation, yes, ma'am.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. Well, the GAO indicated that you were
thinly, that you were stretched pretty far in 2000. If we are
going to up the numbers of the undercount and you, yourself,
have indicated that these are effective tools, wouldn't it be
appropriate to represent to the Census Bureau to go back and
reconsider that number?
Here we are, 10 years later, and we have under 1,000 in
terms of community partners in a Nation that is 300 million
plus?
Mr. Murdock. Well, understand that we are not talking about
community partners. We are talking about specialists working to
do that.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. Absolutely.
Mr. Murdock. OK. I am sorry.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. Absolutely, and I appreciate what you are
saying. I absolutely know that.
If you are encouraging elected officials, non-profits and
interested persons to go out and find as many community
partners as possible, then those specialists who are
outreaching to them certainly, I believe, need to be an
increased number.
I would ask your consideration for that and tell me what
the procedure is. If the Census Bureau made that determination,
what is the basis of reconsidering and upping the numbers?
Mr. Murdock. What I said in just, I think, a moment before
you came in, ma'am was that this is a program which is simply
starting, which is simply beginning. We are in the planning
stages.
As we look at this program, as we look at it, if we see
that there are needs to take additional steps, we will work
Commerce. We will work with our partners. We will work with
Congress to find the appropriate resources, and that includes
the appropriate number of people.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. Well, Mr. Murdock, I am going to
officially request that you consider that. You, obviously, are
committed. We realize that. We think you need as much help as
possible.
Let me try to quickly go to I assume someone has tackled
this last name while I was not here, and so what is your last
name, sir?
Mr. Tarakajian. Tarakajian.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. Tarakajian. Thank you, Mr. Tarakajian.
Let me ask you, did you have a contract in 2000?
Mr. Tarakajian. No, we did not.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. Let me tell you that it was a major
debacle wrapped in insensitivity.
And so, my question to you is we have met some of the
subcontractors, but what special emphasis are you going to
utilize, one, to prioritize underserved areas but particularly
culturally distinctive areas?
Do you have in your mind, beyond your subcontractors, a
format for reaching the media outlets that are most relevant to
certain populations, whether it be Hispanic, African American
or Asian, and how important do you place that in your plan?
Mr. Tarakajian. A lot of the media outlets, I believe, that
you talk about are local media outlets as opposed to national
media outlets.
While right now, the plan is just that, it is a plan as
opposed to something that is etched in granite, almost 50
percent, 45 percent of the money of the budget that we have is
allocated to local media outlets as opposed to national media
outlets. So the infrastructure is there to go about creating
that.
We are doing outreach to small businesses as part of our
commitment on this plan, to make sure that we learn about and
that we give local media outlets, particularly the kinds that
you, I think, are referring to every opportunity to become part
of this contract. In addition, we are relying on our
subcontractors who have expertise in this area to help us to
find those local media outlets.
Then, fourth, the partnership effort is another source of
information to come back to us in terms of what some of those
outlets are and how they could be utilized for the benefit of
the census campaign.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. What is your overall budget?
Mr. Tarakajian. The overall budget that we began with was
$207 million. We were recently informed that it is
$212,100,000.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. Is that for the whole media outreach?
Mr. Tarakajian. That is for the entire campaign.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. Right, which includes the media and buying
time? Is that buying time too or is that separate?
Mr. Tarakajian. No. That includes buying time as well.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. Are you understanding that you just got an
increase?
Mr. Tarakajian. Yes, to $212.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. What does that take the number up to?
Mr. Tarakajian. Two hundred and twelve million, one hundred
thousand.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. Do you intend to raise the amount that is
being spent in the African American community?
Mr. Tarakajian. As a result of the increase, yes.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. I hope it is going to be increased beyond
the present number. To me, it looks like that number does not
have any relation to reality.
Mr. Tarakajian. We have asked our African American partner
to plan at a higher level based on the 212,100,000. In
addition, the moneys that you are referring to that are
currently being planned are only the moneys that are in the
media portion of the outreach to Blacks. There is money in
promotional materials which are partnership materials,
fulfillment, things of that nature that are also moneys that
will impact the Black audience.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. Well, let me thank the chairman for his
courtesies.
I would suggest that you start looking upwards of $40
million plus in terms of how you relate to communities that
heretofore have been unreached and had such high numbers of
undercount and work with minority papers, radio stations but
also contractors because I can assure you that they have the
craft down well in how to reach people in hard to reach places.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Mr. Clay. Thank you so much for that targeted questioning,
Ms. Jackson. I appreciate your participation in this hearing.
Mr. Gonzalez, you had one other question?
Mr. Gonzalez. Yes, sir, and thank you for your indulgence,
Mr. Chairman.
Any additional costs or any glitch or in the census has a
greater impact on the hard to count population, and I hope that
we can all agree on that. It is a bad situation that we start
off with, and anything that goes wrong has a disparate impact.
So I want to discuss fingerprinting and then some of the
potential negative consequences which may be a noble goal to
accomplish here on the fingerprinting. If you are going to
fingerprint all the individuals that are out there basically
hired and involved in the data collection, one, it is going to
be cost but, two, it is just going to be the logistics of doing
that.
The FBI is going to be charged with that. I can assure you
from my past experiences with other departments and agencies,
there is just no way it is going to be done without doing
something for the FBI to accommodate that kind of a task.
So I want to know where you are on the fingerprinting issue
and then any concerns that you have, one, as I said, as far as
the delay that could be. But even going beyond that, is there
some other impact as we hire individuals that we feel will be
more welcomed in certain neighborhoods that have an aversion to
anyone who is associated with the government?
Mr. Murdock. Let me explain where we are in fingerprinting
and why we are there. We have decided we have to do
fingerprinting, and here are the pros and cons.
The cons are clearly it is expensive. We are concerned as
you are that there will be people who will be concerned about
involvement with the census as a result of that process. It is
a process as well that is a difficult one for us but one that
we will do.
Where the FBI will come in is that after we complete the
fingerprints, they will do the assessment to see if there is
any record of problems with the individuals whose fingerprints
we have sent to them.
But here is the other side. The other side is that we have
to be very careful about the security and safety of American
people.
It is the law of the land. We sought with the agencies that
are responsible for this. OPM said you have to do
fingerprinting.
We went to the FBI, and the FBI last time gave us an
exemption because they could not process the forms. They tell
us this time they can process the forms. They told us ways that
we could get exemptions under certain circumstances, but they
ended their letter by saying, we highly recommend that you do
fingerprinting.
The difficulty we have and I have as the Census Bureau
Director is if I or my successor were to be in a situation
where there was an event. There is a very low probability. We
have had very low probabilities of any difficulties in the
past, and so it is another factor that makes it difficult to
make this decision.
But if there were an event at the beginning of the census
and you had to explain to the public, to the media, to others
that, first of all, you had not complied with the letter of the
law, that you had gone against the advice of the chief law
enforcement agency of the United States and other advice from
other appropriate parties, I think it would be disastrous for
the Census Bureau Director and others.
Now there are a variety of ways that could be addressed,
but it can't be. I don't see a way for us to address it as a
Federal agency, as a Federal entity unless we are given some
kind of exemption of some kind. We really don't have a choice,
I believe, as a responsible party.
Mr. Gonzalez. The other thing is, Director Murdock, the FBI
is going to be able to perform as they are promising on a
timely basis and it is not going to result in any delays. I
mean this would be disastrous.
The whole thing is that you are going to have to turn
around midstream on this thing when the FBI tells you they
can't meet certain deadlines. You have to have your people out
there. So then you are going to tell the American people, well,
we were going to do this to safeguard you, but circumstances
are such that we just can't. That troubles me.
So I think we do need to start off with what I think might
be, I hope, an accurate statement. Have we occasioned certain
problems in the past because we did not fingerprint
individuals?
Mr. Murdock. It is a very low incidence.
Mr. Gonzalez. I have heard two or three or four. Now how
many?
Mr. Murdock. We had about four cases in the last census,
very, very low. Three of the cases, they were dismissed or
acquitted. In one case, there was a plea bargain down to a
lesser offence. So, yes, it is a very low probability.
Mr. Gonzalez. These were individuals that had previous
criminal records of some sort that we missed and then they went
and allegedly committed a criminal offense of some sort?
Mr. Murdock. These are persons who we found nothing on them
when we did what we did in the past which was name check. Name
check, if it came up problematic, then we did fingerprinting
for those individuals.
But yes, I mean we fully agree. In terms of those three
factors are ones that would suggest you not do fingerprinting.
On the other hand, the liability, the potential harm for
the census if you were found to be operating, not obeying the
law of the land against the advice of the chief law enforcement
agency of the United States and against the advice of OPM, is
one that is a very serious administrative issue for a director.
Mr. Gonzalez. I understand. I mean it is hard for me or for
you to argue that basic proposition. I am just saying as a
practical matter, can you do it?
Second, again, you go into cost-benefit.
Three, is it really a false sense of security that you are
giving the American people? I think that it is, but that is
just an argument for later.
I am just saying if that is what we are going to do, let's
make sure that we fund it. No. 2, you have some deadlines now
that have been added as a result of this particular
consideration. And so, whatever help you need we are going to
be here for it, but I have a serious question about the
necessity.
Mr. Murdock. Well, we absolutely understand. We have looked
at this very thoroughly. In a perfect world, we would have
liked not to have had this requirement if you could ensure the
safety and security of the American people, if we could have
been in compliance with the law.
We certainly have issues and have concerns about some of
the elements that you have said. We have repeatedly asked the
question, can these forms be processed, and we are assured that
they are, that they can. We have to go, I think, on a good
faith effort that when an agency tells us they can do that,
they can do it.
Mr. Gonzalez. Don't be surprised.
I yield back.
Mr. Clay. Thank you so much, Mr. Gonzalez.
I want to thank this panel, Mr. Tarakajian and Dr. Murdock,
for your testimony today. You are dismissed.
We will call up the second panel now, and I will swear them
in.
We now hear from panel two and welcome to the three of you.
Thank you for being here.
Our first witness will be Dr. Roderick Harrison, director
of the DataBank at the Joint Center for Political and Economic
Studies. Welcome, Dr. Harrison.
The next witness will be Dr. Barbara A. McKinzie, Chair of
the 2010 Census Subcommittee of the National Pan-Hellenic
Council and international president of Alpha Kappa Alpha
Sorority, Inc., which I must note that Representative Watson is
a member of that organization as well as my wife, Ivie Clay.
Our final witness on the panel will be David Lange, general
manager of Scholastics Marketing Partners, Scholastic, Inc.
Welcome to all three of you all.
Ms. Watson. Mr. Chairman, a point of personal privilege.
Mr. Clay. Ms. Watson, please.
Ms. Watson. May I, again, introduce one of our
distinguished, esteemed witnesses, the Honorable, and I am
going to call her Honorable because she is our Grand Basileus,
the national president of the 300-member Alpha Kappa Alpha
Sorority which will be celebrating its 100th birthday here in
Washington, DC, beginning tomorrow night and running through
next week.
I am proud to say I am a member along with my erstwhile
colleague on my left, and she can probably make remarks too,
but Representative Jackson-Lee and myself are so proud to have
you here.
I just want to announce to everybody that all next week you
are going to see the color she has on, green, and pink. It will
look like a flower garden of green and pink because we are
expecting up to 25,000 members of the Pan-Hellenic Council, and
we are so proud to say that we were the first African American
Greek organization formed right here in Washington, DC, at
Howard University. So you will hear a lot from the pink and
green Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority which was the first, and this
Grand Basileus. So, welcome.
Our other witnesses are distinguished too, but I had to
point out that this is a point in history for us, our sorority,
and welcome.
Mr. Clay. Thank you so much, Ms. Watson.
Let me also point out that my mother-in-law and my wife,
and they tell me that my 14-year-old daughter will be AKA also.
[Laughter.]
Ms. Jackson-Lee.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. There is certainly no kinder chairman than
Mr. Clay at this moment.
Allow me as well to welcome Dr. McKinzie, our Grand
Basileus, our president of an organization that combines the
character-building and challenge for leadership as well as the
record of service.
As the planned program describes this coming week, for
those of you who will be here in Washington, it will be a
happening that you have never experienced before. Many look
forward, Mr. Chairman, to the inaugural parade, but let me
suggest to you that on a certain day this week all of
Washington will come to a standstill because the ladies
represented by Dr. McKinzie will take to Pennsylvania Avenue
like you have never seen it before.
Whatever votes may be occurring on that time, count Sheila
Jackson-Lee and Diane Watson and Eddie Bernice Johnson missing,
absent, because we will join the throngs of public servants and
leaders of high character with this great and wonderful
sorority that was founded, as my dear friend and colleague has
said, here in Washington, DC, with seven sisters. She is
nodding her head, seven sisters, and I think that is a symbolic
number.
I thank the chairman for allowing me to welcome you but
also to express to those in the audience and for the record
that we are grateful for your service and leadership but, more
importantly, for you to take the time out to explain to us
about the 2010 Census Committee.
I know the role that our sorority will play in making sure
the undercounted will never be undercounted again and that 2010
will be a new moment in America's history on ensuring the
counting and the securing of good health and quality of life
for all Americans.
I thank you, Mr. Chairman, for allowing me to acknowledge
Dr. Barbara McKinzie.
Mr. Clay. Thank you so much, Ms. Jackson-Lee.
Just as a point of interest, in 2010, my hometown will host
the sorority, in St. Louis, MO in 2010.
It is the policy of this committee to swear in all
witnesses. I would like to ask all witnesses to please stand
and raise your right hands.
[Witnesses sworn.]
Mr. Clay. Let the record reflect that the witnesses
answered in the affirmative.
We will begin with Dr. Harrison. You are recognized for 5
minutes.
STATEMENTS OF RODERICK HARRISON, DIRECTOR, DATABANK, JOINT
CENTER FOR POLITICAL AND ECONOMICS STUDIES; DR. BARBARA A.
MCKINZIE, CHAIR, 2010 CENSUS SUBCOMMITTEE, NATIONAL PAN-
HELLENIC COUNCIL; AND DAVID J. LANGE, GENERAL MANAGER,
SCHOLASTICS MARKETING PARTNERS, SCHOLASTIC, INC.
STATEMENT OF RODERICK HARRISON
Mr. Harrison. Thank you very much for the invitation to
attend this, and I will try to be very brief. I think much of
what I had in the written testimony has already been mentioned
more effectively by some of the Representatives in their
statements.
There also has been an undercount. We didn't really begin
to measure it until the 1940's when there were more people
showing up through the conscription system, the draft for World
War II that didn't get counted in the 1940 census. There seemed
to be, for example, about a 13 percent undercount of Blacks in
the draft age, male draft age population. So that is the
beginning of some of the modern efforts to measure the
undercount.
From 1940 on through the 2000 census, the principle method
for estimating the undercount has been demographic analysis.
That is comparing census numbers with population estimates
based on births, deaths, immigration.
In 1990, the Bureau developed a second method, a dual
estimation method based on a post-enumeration survey in which
170,000 households, housing units in about 5,400 census blocks
were sampled and matched the records of the people in these
samples back to their census returns. If they did not have a
census return to match it to, that meant that the count had
missed them.
So that is where we get the counts--it has been mentioned
in several things of the things--of the numbers of people that
the census missed.
The census also does double-count, triple-count, usually
double-count other people who turn in two forms, report
themselves, a relative reports them still in their household.
This is particularly true of college students and others. That
is the overcount.
The net undercount, then the overcount is subtracted.
The point was made very effectively by Representative
Clyburn. I would just underscore that although that balances
out arithmetically and arithmetically it is important that it
does balance out for purposes of apportionment, you cannot
balance the characteristics of people who are missed with the
characteristics of people who are double-counted. They are
usually very different.
So, even if you are getting something that is, ``good
enough for apportionment purposes,'' you are getting data that
is weaker than we could possibly want for understanding
characteristics, needs, etc. with these populations.
The good news is that the 2000 census came very close to
eliminating the undercount. The initial statistics that people
have been citing, missing about 1.6 percent of the population,
1.2 percent of the population down from 1.6, this was the
initial estimates on which the decision to not adjust was
based.
In fact, because demographic analysis suggested that the
undercount was much smaller and that perhaps there had been an
overcount, these analyses were redone through very complicated
things, and the Bureau's final numbers suggest an overcount of
the population in the 2000 census, an overcount of 1.9 million.
The revised undercount for Blacks was 1.8 percent down from 2.2
percent undercount, net undercount. The undercount for
Hispanics fell to 0.71, for American Indians on reservations, a
net overcount of 0.88, both of which are not significantly
different from zero.
So, as far as a statistician can get you, you are getting
as close to an elimination of the undercount except for the
Black population in 2000 as you can possibly get.
Now the estimates that are used to measure are frankly you
don't want to look into the sausage factory too closely. Again,
I think the key point is the number might look good, but it is
balancing overcounts and undercounts which does not address
some of the concerns here.
So I think the question really is why was the 2000 census
so successful relative to others? What do you need to do again
that might, may or may not be happening now to do it?
Some of the things that should be happening right now: the
address lists, the use of the handhelds to collect addresses.
Half of the undercount is missed housing units. So working with
local officials to correctly identify units and the other thing
that partners have to be concerned with is a lot of the missed
units are converted garages, a subdivided apartment, illegal,
that have not been registered in the permit.
So part of the message, if there is a message, you can
trust the census. It is not going to get into your immigration
status, your status on programs. Just as important is
convincing people who may be renting out a garage that in fact
they need to get the form to them.
So working with local officials on completing the address
lists. Getting as complete a list of housing units as possible.
Sending that massive army, 100,000 additional enumerators
were sent to hard to enumerate areas in census 2000. You are
talking about you have your surge in Iraq. You, essentially,
need your surge in here.
Then the partnerships, the evidence is that the
partnerships were particularly successful for the Black
population, less successful for language populations. I think
that is in part some of the complexities in not just getting
out the count but explaining to people who they should report.
There is going to need to be a lot of training of the partners
in that.
There were 140,000 partners in 2000.
Mr. Clay. Dr. Harrison, let me stop you there. You have
gone over your 5 minutes, and we will get back to you in the
question period. But thank you.
Mr. Harrison. Yes.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Harrison follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Clay. Dr. McKinzie, you may proceed.
STATEMENT OF BARBARA A. MCKINZIE
Ms. McKinzie. Thank you, Chairman Clay, other distinguished
members of the panel.
It is a pleasure to be able to share thoughts with the
members of this elite group about the leaders and members of
the National Pan-Hellenic Council regarding the 2010 Census
Partnership Program.
The National Pan-Hellenic Council was founded here in
Washington, DC, in 1930. It consists of nine major fraternities
and sororities, predominantly African American.
We have nearly 2,000,000 members and more than 6,000
chapters. Many African American leaders are among our members,
and we thank the acknowledgment of two of our personal members.
But our long-held spirited tradition of public service led
us to participate in 2000 census and calls our participation in
the 2010 census.
In the past, our communities have been difficult to fully
count because of fear, apathy and other comments that have
already been made, and I won't be repetitive. Even today,
though, amidst a national housing crisis, some African
Americans feel their needs will never be met in America, and we
have concern regarding the accuracy of that count due to the
impact of this current crisis.
When these skeptics receive, though, positive feedback from
neighbors and leaders and friends that they know, they are far
more likely to fully participate. This was the contribution
that we were able to make in 2000 census, and it is our
commitment to do so in 2010.
We were deeply involved in 2000 in the Partnership Program.
We gave it a high priority. When it was over, we looked back to
identify what had worked best and what we learned from what we
had done.
Three things I would like to highlight: We learned that we
provided the census with trusted access to African American
communities throughout the Nation and throughout our
leadership, through our nearly 2 million college-trained
educated members.
We also learned that our time-tested and proven
infrastructure of chapters and members proved to be invaluable
not only in the initial count but in the recount. Many of our
members went all out to use their networks to support this
effort.
We also took time to identify aspects of the program that
we thought could be improved from what we learned in 2000: We
learned that we needed to start most things much earlier than
we had. There was a need for increased program funding. We
needed to diminish duplicative efforts particularly as it
related to partners who might have similar synergies and could
strategically and tactically do things together. We also knew
that we needed to increase the Pan-Hellenic involvement of
member organizations and devise more ways to efficiently use
the full range of proven information technology.
As we began work on the 2010 census, there are three
principles that the Bureau has adopted that should be fully
implemented, we believe, in this partnership program: One, the
2010 census integrated communications campaign urges all of us
to cultivate a large and diverse group of trusted voices within
the African American community and act through specific
outreach efforts.
Another is that this group has said, to assure full
participation in the census, the effort must be community
focused, high spirited and positively influenced by word of
mouth communication.
Finally, the Partnership Program itself has noted that
partner organizations have the unique ability to serve as
advocates.
We went further in identifying the best practices and
issues that we felt we could share with you in the form of
recommendations, principles that the Bureau has articulated to
guide the full enumeration of the 2010 census. The following
recommendations we present: We need to better coordinate the
efforts of all partnership organizations across the spectrum if
we are going to be truly effective.
We need a national 2010 census engagement project for both
the National Pan-Hellenic Council organizations and others to
increase our effectiveness in ensuring an accurate count, in
particular, of African Americans. That project could support a
more structured Pan-Hellenic Council involvement, more
concentrated efforts, better resource management for
organizations and the Bureau, more effective assistance with
other 2010 initiatives such as the non-response followup,
recruitment of census staff, access to minority small
businesses, work with elementary and secondary schools,
involvement of minority-oriented advertising agencies, more
intense utilization of National Pan-Hellenic Council networks
and, more importantly, at the end of this process, better
metrics to monitor major aspects of the effort as it is
underway.
Beyond these improvements, the Census Bureau must more
broadly and deeply involve community-based organizations and
leaders to be successful in 2010.
We heard earlier the efforts that are planned. What we
didn't hear is the execution. We need to work together on these
issues to ensure a successful census in 2010 including a full
count of African Americans.
With that, we would like to thank you for the opportunity,
Mr. Chairman and other distinguished panels, to share our
thoughts.
[The prepared statement of Ms. McKinzie follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Clay. Thank you so much, Dr. McKinzie.
Mr. Lange, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF DAVID J. LANGE
Mr. Lange. Chairman Clay and members of the subcommittee, I
am the general manager of Scholastic in School Solutions at
Scholastic, Inc. and, perhaps more importantly, I was the
project director for the prototype of Census in Schools for the
1998 census dress rehearsal and for the subsequent rollout of
Census in Schools for 2000.
On behalf of Scholastic, I thank the subcommittee for
inviting me to testify today, and we greatly appreciate the
subcommittee's ongoing interest in the Census in Schools
program.
Founded in 1920, Scholastic is a global children's
publishing, education and media company dedicated to helping
children around the world to read and learn. Scholastic is
committed to helping teachers by producing quality
instructional materials that reach 97 percent of schools across
the Nation. Additionally, our Web site hosts over 2 million
unique teacher visitors each month.
For the 1998 census dress rehearsal, Scholastic was engaged
to help develop and implement a prototype program in three test
sites that would both enlist our Nation's schools in promoting
participation in the census and provide quality educational
materials to teachers.
The Census in Schools Program was conceived to support
census 2000's proposed promotional outreach to communities with
traditionally low response rates and hard to count populations
and to reduce children as a significant area of undercount.
Initially, 30 percent of elementary school teachers and high
school math and social studies teachers nationwide were
conducted in order to reach the target populations.
As the program evolved and obtained supplemental funding,
its objectives and scope expanded to include all 50 States, the
District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, island territories as well
as tribal and Bureau of Indian Affairs schools. In addition,
what was initially envisioned as a program for K-12 schools was
expanded to include Head Start, pre-K programs and adult
education programs for English language learners.
As the scope of the program expanded, over 110 unique
components were produced. Principals, parent-teacher
organizations and teachers in nearly every school received CIS
materials that included information for families in six
languages.
The nucleus of the program consisted of three sets of
teaching kits spanning grades K through 12. Each kit contained
a giant map, a teaching guide with lesson plans reflecting
national curriculum standards. Teachers also received a class
set of student take-home materials that conveyed to parents the
importance of completing the census form.
Originally, the plan was to distribute 200,000 kits.
Ultimately, though, 1.6 million teaching kits were distributed
by Scholastic.
Census in Schools was an important part of the overall
effectiveness of the census 2000 campaign. Where trend
projections indicated a 55 percent response rate for the census
2000 form, the actual response rate was 67 percent. This was
the first ever increase in the response rate, yielding
financial savings by reducing the need to send human
enumerators to non-responding households.
Submitted for the record are three survey reports that
demonstrate the effectiveness of the Census in Schools Program.
Highlights from these surveys report that in the 1998 South
Carolina dress rehearsal, 51 percent of parents learned about
the census from either talking with their school age child or
information their child brought home from school.
Overall, in post-program evaluations, 64 percent of all
teachers who heard about Census in Schools received Census in
Schools materials, 65 percent would use those additional census
teaching materials if they were made available, and 63 percent
agreed that the student take-home materials were an effective
communications tool.
Of equal importance is the value that the community
partners placed on these materials. Excluding the sample census
form itself, the Census in Schools materials were ranked as the
most helpful informational tool that the 140,000 community
partners used to reach targeted populations.
Let me repeat that if I may. Excluding the sample census
form itself, the Census in Schools materials were ranked as the
most helpful informational tool that the 140,000 community
partners used to reach targeted populations.
Looking ahead to 2010, you should first know that
Scholastic has been in discussions with DraftFCB and has
offered both core and expanded proposals for the Census in
Schools. We are recommending that the program harness
advancements in technology and draw upon Scholastic's and the
Bureau's experiences from Census in Schools 2000 in order to
implement an even more efficient, cost-effective and far-
reaching program.
Based on our experience, Scholastic believes any successful
bidder for the 2010 Census in Schools Program would wish to
consider the following: First, a scalable and flexible plan
that combines Census in Schools 2000 experience with current
technologies in teaching environments; second, a combined use
of print and digital mediums for promotions, educational tools
and outreach to the home; and, finally, a capacity to allow
more teachers to easily identify and use census materials that
match their students' needs and align with national standards.
In closing, the 2000 Census in Schools Program succeeded in
promoting the importance of participating in the census and in
providing quality educational materials at no cost to schools.
Mr. Chairman, members of the subcommittee, I thank you for
this opportunity to testify, and I would be pleased to answer
your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Lange follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Clay. Thank you so much, Mr. Lange, for that
informative testimony.
Let me go to Mr. Gonzalez for questions, 5 minutes.
Mr. Gonzalez. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Let me ask Dr. Harrison. You know there was a GAO report
that came out and one of the concerns. I am trying to figure
out how this, the lack of or the ability to maybe conduct a
dress rehearsal to the extent, to the degree that it has in the
past would impact the communications campaign. Do you have an
opinion on that?
Mr. Harrison. How the inability to conduct a rehearsal
might affect?
Mr. Gonzalez. Right. In the GAO study, it just basically
says that the Bureau also will institute new strategies through
second mailings and new approaches to remove late mail returns
but has only tested some aspects of these operations and will
be unable to test them in a dress rehearsal, making it
difficult to estimate their impact on operations in 2010.
Then in Mr. Lange's written testimony, he makes reference
to a dress rehearsal in 2000.
I am just wondering. What I think what the Bureau is facing
is maybe an inability to conduct a dress rehearsal to the
extent that it did in the past. Does that impact this
communications plan that we have been discussing and is the
subject of the hearing today?
Mr. Harrison. I think that any time that you try to do
something like this campaign, reach people, convince people to
participate, the dialog that will accomplish that has to be
reached by trial and error. One of the strengths of partnership
is people who have been in communication with populations.
So I would suspect that you would learn something in a
dress rehearsal that would help you develop a more effective
national campaign once you get there. So, other things being
equal, yes, I think you can expect that people might learn
early in the campaign, things that they might have learned from
a dress rehearsal if the communications were part of it.
Mr. Gonzalez. I will take this up with Dr. Murdock in what
we are going to do to maybe address some of the shortcomings as
a result of the inability of the dress rehearsal, again, to the
degree we have in the past.
Mr. Lange, the Census in the Schools, I remember this with
Dr. Prewitt 10 years ago, and I thought it was pretty
effective.
She is actually pointing out something right now in the
testimony that I may have missed, and I apologize. Is it scaled
down, the Census in the Schools?
I think there was reference that what has been eliminated
would be grades 7 through 12. Am I correct in that?
Mr. Lange. Well, we have proposed two phases in our
recommendations to DraftFCB: a core phase at $4 million and an
additional expanded phase and, in the core phase, that 7 and 12
is not included in that.
Mr. Gonzalez. Now why?
Mr. Lange. Financial limitations, budget limitations.
Mr. Gonzalez. So we made the financial investment 10 years
ago, but we are not going to make the same financial investment
to cover grades K through 12 this go-round?
Mr. Lange. In the core program, that would be correct. In
the expanded proposal, it would definitely be included.
Mr. Gonzalez. The difference between core and the expanded
is?
Let's just talk dollars. You have a substantial amount,
obviously, in the core because that is your main activity. In
the expanded, I would say it is probably less extensive effort.
Mr. Lange. The core program is a very focused program and
effective program that is designed to reach the top
communities, if you will, that require HTC outreach, and it
would go to 35,000 K through 6 schools in terms of print media
or media in hand that would help them. It is available to all K
through 6 schools on the Internet in a digital form.
By expanding from $4 million to, say, upwards of $12
million, you would be able to broaden the program quite
significantly to include all K-12 schools with more materials
in hand and more robust Census in Schools resources for all
schools that it would reach.
Mr. Gonzalez. In the hard to count populations--I am trying
to figure this out--it would go K through 6 or whatever it is.
We will capture a certain amount of the kids from these
particular households, but it is not that those are over-
represented in those grades of these particular hard to count
households.
I am trying to make sense of it somehow here. We say, well,
we have to identify certain grades in which these particular
households may be over-represented by their children's
enrollment. It is going to be K through 6.
That is not accurate, is it?
Mr. Lange. It is not going to be exclusive to K through 6.
Mr. Gonzalez. Right. I mean these populations, the hard to
count populations, their children are spread out through K
through 12. They are not all concentrated at K through 6.
Mr. Lange. That is correct. That is correct.
Mr. Gonzalez. Thank you. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Clay. Thank you, Mr. Gonzalez.
Ms. Watson, you are recognized.
Ms. Watson. I will keep my time until after Ms. Jackson-
Lee.
Mr. Clay. Sure.
Ms. Jackson-Lee, proceed.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. Again, my appreciation for the courtesies
of this committee, and this is a fascinating challenge.
Dr. Harrison, I would like to explore some policy questions
with you, and I will start first. I think my colleague and
friend, Congressman Jefferson, was detained, but many of us
know the travesty that occurred in 2005, Hurricane Katrina,
that saw the largest evacuation, I believe, that we have
witnessed in the history of this Nation short of the voluntary
``go west, young man'' and ``young woman'' I assume in the
1800's.
So, as we look toward the census and we know that one State
has been depleted of almost a million persons, many of whom
consider themselves still placed in that State, what kind of
policy should we be looking at in order to be fair to a State
like Louisiana that has many of its constituents still viewing
themselves as displaced and still viewing themselves as
residents of Louisiana? That is one question.
A second question is what in your mind do you think the
concept was, and there must be some high order to it, of
counting Johnnie Mae's grandson, and I don't want to stereotype
us, in so and so's prison as having resided in that prison when
Johnnie Mae is still counting or Mrs. Jones or Mr. Johnson is
still counting that person as a resident in their home?
Most often, that home is in an underserved, needy area, and
so that count is diminished because those numbers are counted
in some way, far away rural community. You question whether the
resources that come back to the rural community anywhere equate
to the need inasmuch as there are individuals incarcerated and
being paid for.
My last policy question to you would be the issue of
students who likewise are counted in the area that they are in?
Maybe there is more of an explanation there, but again I wonder
about the areas of which many of them come from.
Mr. Harrison. These are penetrating questions. There is a
legal answer, and there is a social policy answer, and I am
afraid that the two are opposite.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. Help me out because I may want to redo the
legal answer.
Mr. Harrison. You would need to ask a lawyer, but the
Article I of the Constitution.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. That you cited.
Mr. Harrison. Pardon? Yes, that mandates the census,
Article I, Section II mandates that seats in the House of
Representatives should be determined and ``apportioned among
the several States according to their respective numbers,''
which essentially implies residency in the State.
This, I think, has been interpreted to mean that if you are
displaced as a victim, as displaced by Katrina or some of the
recent flooding in the Mississippi River, if you are a prisoner
residing now in prison in a different State and if you are a
student going to school in a different State, you would be a
resident of the State in which you are residing, even though I
think most social planners and for most of the social purposes
for which we are disbursing funds, Federal funds, etc., what we
should be interested in is how many prisoners will be returning
to their State of origin, their locality of origin, how many
students might be returning to there. Their needs, students at
a university, are very different than the needs as a resident
once they complete their studies, etc.
So I think that some of what, that this is mandated by a
Constitution that is over 200 years old and that clearly did
not anticipate some of these things.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. If I may, because I want to move to Dr.
McKinzie, but I like the way you framed it. Let me just ask for
a quick yes or no. Is it something you think is worthy of the
Congress' reconsideration, short of a constitutional amendment?
I mean there are ways of looking at the Constitution and
modifying the interpretation by statute, by case law. Is it
worth considering?
Mr. Harrison. I think the Congress could give serious
consideration in funding formulas to say that we want the count
not to be by the resident rules that govern apportionment, but
we want the count to be by the place of origin, the home State
of the student, of the prisoner, etc. so that some funding,
particularly programs targeted to those populations. There
might well be room that the courts would agree with to have
clauses that would specify the State of origin rather than the
current State of residency.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. If the gentleman would indulge me, I thank
you, Dr. Harrison. Mr. Lange, I am not discounting you, but if
I could just quickly ask Dr. McKinzie, and I will ask you for a
quick yes or no as well.
Dr. McKinzie, what I like most in your testimony was what
we need and what we didn't do. You remember my question earlier
to Mr. Murdock about the partnership specialists, 680 for a
country that is large.
What you are suggesting is that the 2010 committee is ready
to go and, if you expand all of the various partners, then you
need resources. I assume those specialists are helpful in
getting you materials.
What is your assessment of the mind set of our census this
time around? Are they getting it about needing more resources,
getting it out to you quickly, having these special partners
and do we, as a Congress, need to make sure that we get the
engine behind the thinking of the Census Bureau?
It seems like they are repeating where they went, where we
were in 2000. We are right back where we were before.
And, Mr. Lange, if you would just followup quickly by just
indicating whether you are getting the attention you need for
your school effort through the Census Bureau.
Dr. McKinzie.
Ms. McKinzie. The short answer is that they are committed,
but they have started very late. There is not enough funding,
and they are taking, in an analogy, a shotgun approach when it
needs to be very precise and deep.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. Mr. Lange, if the chairman indulges me for
your final answer?
Mr. Lange. The answer is yes, we have had very in-depth
discussions with DraftFCB. I need to point out that we have not
been selected. We are still in the competitive bidding process.
So they have been very receptive to our information, and they
have provided us with a lot of information as well.
So I think there is very good dialog there.
Ms. Jackson-Lee. You are in the selection process, and I
know you hesitate to comment.
But, in any event, let me thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just
want to indicate that I am unhappy as to where we are. This is
a very important hearing that you are having and however I can
be of help in terms of turning on the light about what is
needed, I would be happy to do so.
Maybe 2 years out, we might have some legislation on some
of the policy questions that I asked Dr. Harrison.
So I yield back, and I thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your
leadership.
Mr. Clay. Thank you, Ms. Jackson-Lee. I certainly want to
explore the possibility of reclassifying both students and
prisoners, and we will have further discussions on that. Thank
you.
Ms. Watson.
Ms. Watson. I want to thank all the panelists.
As the hour draws a little late here, I would like to
address my questioning to Dr. McKinzie because we are
personally involved and the Pan-Hellenic Council represents all
the African American Greek organizations. I have read your
summary. What unique features can the Pan-Hellenic bring to the
2010?
I could read through. I have, and I know what they are, but
I would like the rest of our audience hear how we can be so
effective because we are unique.
Ms. McKinzie. Well, one, we are volunteers, but what is
unique, I mean our greatest asset is our infrastructure. Six
thousand chapters around the world in rural and urban
communities with members ready to execute a very precise plan
is an asset that we bring to this partnership because we also
have a passion about an accurate count, and that really is a
very unique asset that we do bring.
And so, the advertising is good, but what works for us is
long-term planning so that we can make sure we are activating
90 percent or more of that 6,000-chapter network to count and
recount until we know everything has been counted. That is what
we think we have that is very unique, that the current plan
doesn't seem to work not because it is not planned well, but
there is just not enough time.
For example, the department represents. We are having
conferences this summer. As you noted, ours is here. There are
the other nine are having them also. While the Bureau will be
at our conferences, they will be there in the way of what we
would call advertising.
What I would have liked to have seen in ours, given 25,000
members here, is rolling out very specific tasks that could be
done beginning this fall before next spring, that would ensure
and identify issues that would allow us to make a count work.
So while we are getting the awareness out there. But it is
in our community then, after that, it is the so what?
Ms. Watson. I get the sense that we have not started early
enough, getting that awareness out.
I think about the homeless population in my own city. In an
evening's time, it could be anywhere between eighty and ninety
thousand people homeless. They don't know about the census.
They don't have an address, and we did address that by letting
them register at a shelter, a homeless shelter.
But what does it mean to them, and so are we working on
interpreting why an accurate count can really impact on them in
a positive way? Are we doing any of that, Dr. McKinzie?
Ms. McKinzie. That would require awareness, education and a
plan.
An example with the Bureau, if it is determined in an urban
area that our approach is A which include homeless populations,
etc., but in rural areas it may be B. What we have as a unique
group is that once we roll out an urban plan and a rural plan
and once our volunteers have executed it, they could also do
the same thing other places around the globe.
That is that infrastructure potential that I speak to, and
we have not been able to effectively move our Partnership
Program from what we did in 2000 to how do we get better at
this in 2010.
Ms. Watson. What is kind of disappointing to me is that the
budget has not increased for this effort where our population--
and I am being very personal in looking at my own State and my
own district--we grow by 2,000 per day.
Also, people are moving out to other places as well. Our
State is on fire right now. We are a desert for the most part,
and we have a huge shortfall of budget. But still, the people
that are there need to be counted.
I don't think that the budget set aside for this outreach,
integrated outreach into minority communities is recognizing
the change in demographics in the last 10 years. I think that
is unfortunate.
And so, I think your organization composed of men and women
with college educations and a commitment to service can speak
loudly. In between now and the time we begin the process, I
would like maybe you to go to the press through your various
organizations and let them know what is needed in our
respective communities, and I think you can do that.
I know very often we use our sorority and fraternity houses
as a place for training and for providing materials. I think
through that network that you have, we can speak to that guy
who is sleeping on the streets and doesn't really understand
why it is important to be counted and the lady who is in the
apartment and she comes to the door and says there are only two
of us that live here and really 12 are hotbedding it. You know
something about that.
I always tell the enumerators. I said, go up over the
liquor stores. I said, see who is living over the cleaners and
also come out on Sundays and holidays where people get out of
these small apartments and play with their children. You can
get some sense about the numbers.
So I think we play a very crucial role in determining how
many individuals are in the United States regardless of whether
they are legally here or not legally here. We set our budgets
on populations.
I think that our organization, our combined Pan-Hellenic
can do a tremendous job in helping our census of 2010 and to
continue to be unique in what we can provide.
I want to thank Dr. Lange and Dr. Harrison for being here
and I want to thank my chairman. If you don't mind, I have a
responsibility, and I have to ease out to get there. So thank
you so much.
Mr. Clay. I do understand and thank you so much.
Dr. Harrison, as you know, the Bureau has experienced
several setbacks in its efforts to reengineer the 2010 census,
the biggest being problems with the technology, the field data
collection system.
In your professional opinion, what are some of the
operational changes the Bureau must make in order to get on a
consistent path to reducing the undercount particularly of
those demographic groups that are undercounted each census?
Mr. Harrison. One thing we can learn from the 2000 census,
the Bureau was--up until January 1999, the Supreme Court ruled
that it could not adjust for the undercount--was planning to
do, to conduct a census in which it would adjust for the
undercount. When it was not permitted to do that, the Bureau
had less time than it currently has to completely redesign the
2000 census and achieve the results, the improvements that we
saw in 2000.
I think it will take. Dr. Prewitt, the Director for the
2000 census, I think I just have to say did a remarkable job. I
think you need leadership. You need management and, as Dr.
McKinzie said, I think you need a great deal more intensive
focus right now.
The campaign is, if we use a football analogy, is the air
game. The ground game is what the Bureau needs to pay attention
to. The ground game is getting the enumerators in place,
identifying the places where you are going to target more
enumerators, the ``be counted'' kinds of campaigns, all of
these things which will be practiced in the dress rehearsal.
But that is where I would urge the committee and others
concerned with this to pay very detailed attention to the
Bureau's plans for the address list, non-response followup,
ground game because that is where they have to be.
Mr. Clay. Thank you so much for that response.
Dr. McKinzie, your recommendations for action are a great
starting point to getting the Partnership Program up and
running. It is my hope that the Bureau will take them to heart.
I am certainly sure they heard them today and they heard the
other concerns of the people on this dais as well as this panel
of witnesses.
Again, thank you so much for being here.
Mr. Lange, in your statement, you said over 90 percent of
teachers connect with Scholastic on a regular basis, but you
know that a survey found only 56 percent of teachers had heard
of the Census in the Schools Program. Can you explain the
discrepancies and what are Scholastic's plans to ensure that
every teacher including those that do not connect with you know
about the Census in the Schools program?
Mr. Lange. Well, I would first say that the evolution in
digital technology has greatly improved our ability to connect
with teachers and that we have over two million unique teacher
visitors to the site that we did not have in census 2000.
I would also say that the campaign that we initially
conducted in census 2000 was more of a direct marketing
campaign and specific targeted outreach. It was not directed to
be a mass campaign, if you will, to reach all at the beginning.
It did migrate to that toward the end of the program as the
program matured and became more robust, and more ambitious
goals and objectives were put to it.
I believe that in the upcoming 2010 in our recommendations
there, that we will be able to resolve that greatly, given what
the resources we now have to draw on.
Mr. Clay. Wonderful. On behalf of myself and my colleagues,
I would like to thank all of our witnesses who participated in
this hearing today.
It is my hope that the Census Bureau will exercise due
diligence in its effort to count each and every person in this
country and in Puerto Rico and the island areas on April 1,
2010. Please let Congress know how to partner with the Bureau
to ensure an accurate count.
With that, I will conclude the hearing and again say, thank
you all for your participation. Hearing adjourned. Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 5:56 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
[The prepared statements of Hon. Joe Baca and Hon. Charles
B. Rangel and additional information submitted for the hearing
record follow:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]