Does the Census Make Sense?

For all of its problems and petty squabbling the United States Congress is one of the fairest systems of legislative representation in the world. As citizens of a republic, Americans are represented by officials who are chosen by free elections.

Every 10 years, the U.S. Census Bureau takes a headcount of every person in the country and the data collected helps to determine the number of representatives needed in the legislature for each region.

The 2010 U.S. Census is well under way and drastically over budget. Fox News reported this week that, "Taxpayers are footing the bill of $14.7 billion for 10 years of Census counting. That price tag supports 500 local offices and a peak staff of 1.4 million workers."

It should be noted that some 15,000 of those workers were trained but worked less than a day - at a price of $5.5 million (source, The New York Times). Early in the process, during the "address canvassing" stage, the project was already 25 percent over budget, or approximately $444 million.

Another obstacle to the success and efficiency of the census process is in the overall response. For the 2010 count, the U.S. Census Bureau has launched an unprecedented advertising campaign on radio, television, print and the Internet. The hope is to educate the public about the census and get more people to respond.

Despite arguments to the contrary there is little doubt as to the constitutional obligation for a headcount of the population. Article 1, Section 2, of the United States Constitution includes the phrase:

The debate usually centers on whether each head actually has to be counted. Some people have suggested using a process of statistical sampling, rather than counting each individual. Most proponents of the sampling option note the massive expense savings it would provide, but critics insist that Article 2 of the 14^th Amendment makes sampling unconstitutional.

The article uses the words, "counting the whole number of persons in each State." To most people, a whole number is the exact number. If so, then getting that figure requires a person-by-person count. If it's so costly and no one can agree on exactly how it should be done, then why do it at all?

The census is important. In addition to helping to establish the right number of representatives in the legislature, the information gathered also helps to determine how to spend more than $400 billion dollars of federal funding annually.

Directing the right amount of money into services and infrastructure can determine the growth and sustainability of an entire region. Public works, hospitals, schools, bridges, tunnels, job training facilities and emergency services all depend on this type of financial support.

Wouldn't it just be cheaper, then, to spend the money used to conduct the census on these services? Maybe, but there would be no fair way to determine who gets what without knowing the composition of the populations in need.

Clearly, the census process is expensive, both in money and manpower, but without it valuable tax dollars could be misappropriated. So, how can the procedure be performed more cost effectively and accurately?

Good question. So far, few legislators have gotten past the sampling vs. counting debate, let alone having offered any better ideas. Arguably, the general public could help the situation just by being more accommodating.

Costs increase every time a census worker has to canvas an area twice or when someone mails in a form with fake information. Those who are suspicious of the government regarding the use of the data and others who are simply uncooperative are just adding to the problem.

If you are one of those people, you are just wasting your own money. Whether you agree with it or not, there will be a census so why not just go along with it? You have nothing to lose, but your community may have everything to gain.

Contact columnist Gery L. Deer at www.gerydeer.com