Congresswoman Carolyn B. Maloney
Home Page Click For Constituent Services My Work in Congress Press and News Additional Resources Contact Me Search

My Work in Congress, U.S. Census Issues

The Constitution and the Census

Are Statistical Methods Allowed?


As Congress continues to consider the Census Bureau's plans to use modern technology and statistical methods in the 2000 census, the constitutionality of these methods often becomes a key point of debate. It is important to note that the recent Supreme Court ruling, on the use of statistical methods in conducting the census, was decided on the statute and did not reach the question of sampling's constitutionality. While this dispute is more over political advantage than constitutional language, the argument that any method of taking the census other than a household-by-household count is unconstitutional needs to be addressed. Opponents of statistical methods contend that the words "actual enumeration" in Article I, section 2, of the Constitution require a physical headcount of the population. The weight of legal opinion, however, supports the Census Bureau's conclusion that the Constitution permits the use of statistical methods to improve the accuracy of a good-faith effort to count people directly.

  • The second sentence of Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution is: "The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct." The clear purpose of this sentence is to require that a census be taken promptly and regularly, not to explain how to conduct an "actual Enumeration." Further, it clearly suggests that the Framers did not contemplate any particular census methodology in calling for an "actual enumeration," but instead left that determination to the Congress. The words "actual Enumeration" were used to distinguish an apportionment based on a census, from the process of conjecture and political compromise used for the initial apportionment that preceded the first census.
  • Separate opinions issued by the Department of Justice under Presidents Carter, Bush and Clinton all concluded that the Constitution permits the use of statistical methods as part of the census.
  • Stuart M. Gerson, Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division, in the Bush Administration, concluded in a July 1991 memorandum to the Commerce Department's General Counsel that the origin of the term "enumeration" in the Constitution "is more likely found in the accuracy of census taking rather than in the selection of any particular method." "Nothing...indicates any additional intent on the part of the Framers to restrict for all time...the manner in which the census is conducted," Gerson wrote.
  • Opponents of modern statistical methods have expressed concern that they are subject to political manipulation. However, in the memorandum cited above, Stuart Gerson noted that a headcount also "might be subject to political manipulation in the form of a congressional refusal to appropriate sufficient funds [for census programs aimed at reducing the undercount of minorities]...or by an overly restrictive local review procedure."
  • While the recent Supreme Court decision on sampling did not reach the Constitutional issue (i.e., whether sampling for congressional apportionment is permitted under the Constitution), four Justices, in a concurring opinion, suggested that sampling may be unconstitutional. Four other Justices, in a dissenting opinion, expressed their view that sampling is constitutional, and one Justice (O'Conner) expressed no opinion on the issue of constitutionality.
  • However, in 1996 the same nine Justices held in a unanimous decision that the Constitution grants Congress "virtually unlimited discretion" in how to conduct the census, clearly suggesting that the Constitution itself does not contemplate one method over another.
 
Other Resources

The Latest News
Moving Closer to an Extension of Terrorism Risk Insurance (11/16/2005)
Bush Plan to Take Back Injured 9/11 Responders Funds Close to Succeeding (11/15/2005)
New GAO Report Confirms Politics Trumped Science in FDA Decision on 'Plan B' (11/14/2005)
Rep. Maloney Salutes America's Veterans at NYC Veterans' Day Parade (11/11/2005)
Final Push in Washington to Stop Take-Back of 9/11 Responder Assistance (11/10/2005)
Maloney: New Yorkers Give 'Thumbs Up' to Second Avenue Subway, Now it's Federal Government's Turn (11/09/2005)
Bipartisan Action to Stop FDA from Postponing Morning-After Pill Decision (11/03/2005)
New York Reps: Closing Manhattan or Brooklyn VA Hospitals Would Be 'A Tragic Mistake' (10/27/2005)
A Step Toward Salvaging the $125 Million for Injured 9/11 Workers (10/27/2005)
Dodging the Birth Control Question (10/26/2005)

Features
Visit HouseDemocrats.gov

Washington Office
Congresswoman Maloney
2331 Rayburn HOB
Washington, DC 20515-3214
202-225-7944 phone
202-225-4709 fax

Manhattan Office
Congresswoman Maloney
1651 3rd Avenue
(Between 92nd and 93rd)
Suite 311

New York, NY 10128-3679

212-860-0606 phone

212-860-0704 fax

Queens Office
Congresswoman Maloney
28-11 Astoria Blvd.
Astoria, NY 11102-1933
718-932-1804 phone
718-932-1805 fax

This is an official Web site of the United States House of Representatives     Privacy Policy