Was the Accuracy of an Address Worth Bill Sparkman's Life?

I know the reasons and legality behind taking the United States Census every 10 years. The United States Constitution provides for taking the decennial count of each American to determine congressional districts, and, thus, determining the number of members in the House of Representatives. Modern census counts have also been beneficial in transportation planning, evaluating needs in housing and urban development, assisting state and local government planning, and are even a rich resource for many businesses and not-for-profit organizations.

However, the recent gruesome discovery of Bill Sparkman's body hanging from a tree in a Kentucky cemetery is an unfortunately grim reminder of what can happen when people go snooping in places where they may not be welcome.

I personally know someone who worked as an enumerator for the census bureau last year. The hours were long, and she was often going to houses in remote areas - alone. Census workers are not authorized to carry firearms. They are not even allowed to carry pepper spray for protection. If afraid, they can call local law enforcement to be a "presence" in the area, but law enforcement personnel cannot accompany them to a house.

But, the Census Department is on deadline, and the safety of the workers does not appear to be its first concern.

While Census workers are trained, is it adequate given the current state of the country? People are on edge due to a variety of factors - that is evident by the recent meltdowns that have occurred everywhere from the tennis court to Congress. There is also a wariness of government, and its need to interfere in every aspect of our lives from debates on marriage, evolution, and prayer to health care. And, then, of course, there are just those people who are doing things that they don't want witnessed.

Are the statistics gathered valuable enough to warrant the loss of even one life?

Most of the census data gathering up to now has only involved simple address canvassing. According to a recent press conference given by Census Bureau Director Dr. Robert M. Groves, this is a process where every individual home in America was to be visited by a census field worker to verify the existence of the home and enter a correct mailing address into the Census Bureau's Master Address File database.

Seeing that every home in America was to be visited, the likelihood that many census field workers will knock on the door of at least one house that is home to a criminal or some form of criminal activity seems to be unusually high.

Once the actual fact gathering begins, however, my uneducated opinion would be that census field workers will definitely be hitting the homes of drug users, dealers, and other unsavory characters. They just seem to fit the mold of those who would not answer and mail in their census forms. And, it's the homes of unreturned questionnaires that will be receiving the personal visits.

While I applaud the Census Bureau's decision to send a secondary "reminder" questionnaire to each home that does not return the original request, I'm not so sure that this measure alone will be enough to keep enumerators safe. Remember, these are not career government employees, nor are most experienced in handling dangerous circumstances or people. These part-time, temporary employees are usually students or retirees looking to supplement their incomes. When local hiring was done for enumerators in my area, many taking the test were real estate agents being pinched by the slow housing market.

The census is a very expensive undertaking. A sure-fire way to help the nation's treasury would be to implore people to return their questionnaires - thus eliminating the need for anyone to show up on your doorstep.

Perhaps a financial incentive for returning the questionnaires would increase the rate of return and eliminate the need to physically send workers out to homes. The premium could be partially offset with money saved from employing fewer enumerators.

Or, perhaps, ignore the unreturned questionnaires. What's the worst that could happen? We might have to live with one or two fewer congressmen collecting government paychecks and benefits.

I could live with either of these situations if it meant keeping another innocent person from an untimely, senseless death.