As established in the Constitution, every 10 years the government conducts a count of all persons in the United States. For the 2000 census, the Census Bureau proposed using random sampling rather than attempting to count all households. The proposed sample approach would have contacted 90% of the households in a census tract consisting of roughly 1,700 individuals. The bureau would then check the accuracy of the sample by surveying 750,000 households throughout the nation and adjusting the final total accordingly. The sampling approach responded to complaints about the flawed 1990 census, which cost $2.6 billion (a 400% increase over the cost of the 1980 census) and failed to account for 10 million people while double-counting 6 million others, according to a study by the National Academy of Sciences.
The 2010 census did not employ statistical sampling. In addition, while the census has always counted all individuals, citizens and non-citizens alike, it has not always asked about citizenship. Some members of Congress introduced legislation to require that citizenship be a question on the 2010 census, and that illegal immigrants be excluded from the census count.
What do you think? As we assess the success of the 2010 census and look to the future of censuses, who should the census count, and how should they be counted? What arguments would you make for and against the use of sampling or questions about citizenship? (These are just questions for thought, you do not have to answer them here in your discussion)
Both questions are really less about how to count as whom to count. The proposed sampling method would have produced a more accurate count of inner-city Hispanics and African Americans- the most difficult to count. Hispanics and African Americans are more likely to be homeless or living in poverty in urban areas. Using a sampling method would arrive at a more accurate count of these groups and would likely have resulted in a greater representation for Hispanics and African Americans in state legislatures and the U.S. House of Representatives. A more complete count of minorities could also mean that the Republican Party would lose a few seats in the House to Democrats, which is one reason Republicans generally opposed the sampling approach while Democrats favored it.
The Constitutionality of sampling is disputed, as the Constitution calls for an "actual enumeration" of the people. Democrats are quick to point out that under three Presidents- Jimmy Carter, George Bush, and Bill Clinton- the Justice Department concluded that sampling is legal. Samping as a method of determining poplation for congressional apportionment is not allowed under current law, while methods similar to sampling in order t fill in data missing from the "actual enumeration" has been upheld in the Supreme Court.
Citizenship has been a question asked in the past in the census (1812-1960) but noncitizens have always been counted. Slaves counted as three-fifths of a person in the Constitution for apportionament purposes, and the 14th Amendments refers to the "whole number of persons" being counted without regards to citenzship. But counting illegal immigrants runs counter to our notions of political representation and is understandable unpopular. If illegal marriages were excluded it could take away seats from states like California and Texas.
1. Why do you think sampling may result in highers counts of minorities?
2. Do you think it's possible to decide questions about representation without considered partisan ideas?
3. Should illegal immigrants and persons under the age 18 be counted for purposes of apportioning seats in Congress or for counts of persons for distribution of federal monies to state and local governments?
1.well, it depends on the people who are chosen to represnt the the whole country, if the samplings goal was to see what the minorities, are then yes.
ReplyDelete2.No, because you would need both ideas. The more ideas, more accurate represntation.
3. For counts of persons for distribution of federal monies to state and local governmentsit will help get the funding for education
- Lillian Smyth
1B
Angelica Witherspoon 1B
ReplyDeleteI believe that random sampling may result in higher counts of the minorities because during the counting the minority groups could be counted twice. Since minority groups have populated the United States just as much as non-minority groups, there is a higher probability that minorities will be counted twice.
2.No, I do not think that it is possible to decide questions about representation without considering "partisan ideas" If government officials want government to run efficiently and effectively they have to include the views of all citizens. Our government is ran by the citizens within the country, so if questions are needed to choose representation then multiple views and ideas must be taken into consideration.
3. Since laws set by the country affect persons under the age of 18 and even illegal immigrants then I believe that these persons should be counted for. Since we all have to abide by rules of the country, and since anything that government does affects ALL of us then everyone should be counted no matter the age or legality.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete1. I do believe sampling may result in highers counts of minorities, because using a sampling method would arrive at a more accurate count of these groups.
Delete2. I don't think think it's possible to decide questions about representation without considered partisan ideas, the more ideas you have the more the more accurate the polls will be. You can't base the majority vote on kid one idea.
3. Yes, illegal immigrants and persons under the age 18 should be counted for purposes of apportioning seats in Congress or for counts of persons for distribution of federal monies to state and local governments because the choices made affect them too.
1) I do believe sampling may result in higher counts of minorities. Every time the census comes around, many people, not just minorities, fail to participate. Minorities are often underprivileged and therefore less educated. The less educated and less likely to participate in such governmental actions as the census, so minorities go uncounted. By sampling populations minority groups would have to participate, thus raising the numbers.
ReplyDelete2)While I do think it POSSIBLE to decide questions about representation without considering partisan ideas, I do not think it wise. Without considering partisan ideas, you ignore the views of citizens, which are those being represented.
3) Illegal immigrants and persons under 18 should be counted for purposes of apportioning seats in Congers or for counts of persons for distribution of federal monies to state and local governments. Although illegal immigrants are not citizens, those states with high counts of illegals can gain representation by counting them, so I do not see why not. The immigrants use resources and contribute to the country, so why not count them. As for persons under 18, I myself am under 18 I i feel that my generation should be represented and receive funding so I believe we should be counted.
-Angelina Alejo 1B
1. Maybe the sampling had caught a lot of minorities, for example they sampled in Chinatown so they got a lot of Asians.
ReplyDelete2. I think everyone has their right but if there suspected, maybe they will be questioned.
3. I believe so, maybe if they are trying to better themselves. A good education will help them out. I think if anyone is willing to work for education or job to better themselves they deserve a chance.
Sam Tith 1B
1. I think sampling could result in higher counts of minorities because it is random. The purpose of sampling is so that there can be a higher count of minorities. They don’t select the same groups of people because they want everyone’s opinion, and it is clear that peoples of different race, ethnicity and religion will differ in opinion.
ReplyDelete2. I think that it is possible to decide questions about representation without taking into consideration partisan ideas. However, I don’t think that it would be accurate and the polls would be skewed due to basing the decisions on limited ideas. So, in a way they could conduct it that way if they wanted to but it would not be beneficial.
3. I think that anyone in the United States should be counted for regardless. Anything that they say or do not say will affect the country and their lives in some way.
Francis Perez 1B
ReplyDelete1.Sampling may result in higher counts of minorities because the person doing the sampling isn't choosing specific people. Since there are so many minorities in the US, there would be a higher chance of them being picked and counted.
2. I believe that is possible to decide questions about presentation without considered partisan ideas but the decision or answer wont be accurate and wont reflect the people's opinions.
3. I think that everyone, including illegal immigrants and people under the age of 18 should be counted. I looked it up and illegal immigrants have to pay taxes just like us, so why would they have to pay the government yet not count for representatives for their state or for distribution of federal monies to their state and local government. The same goes for people under the age of 18. They live there and even though they don't pay taxes, they are still consume the same food and supplies as tax paying citizens.
jarrod archambo
ReplyDelete1. When using sampling to count for the whole country instead of counting on every individual, you will see higher minority rates than usual due to the fact that when sampling you base the process on ratio. X amount of minorities for every Y amount of the majority, plus most sampling would be done within a major city where minorities flourish.
2. You can ask questions about representation without including partisan ideas but the information will be inconclusive because there would be no categories to place the info in.
3. I say neither, because illegals and the youth do not have a say in the government so therefor they shouldn't be used in how to apportion seats in Congress. Secondly, only the youth should be counted for government funding to the states not the illegals, because if we give money to help the illegals that's just the same as you feeding one feral cat in the neighborhood, soon you will be feeding all of them, then YOU GO BROKE.
1. sampling may result in highers counts of minorities because a sample is a group of people that are chosen to be a representation of a whole. If minorities don't fill out a census, its obvious the results would be higher if they were chosen instead of filling out a piece of paper.
ReplyDelete2.yes, a partisan is a strong supporter of a party, cause, or person.they're view will always be biased. Representation shouldn't be controlled by a militant idea. Let alone questions about representation
3.illegal immigrants should be counted for, but should have no existance in the apportion of seats in congress or the ammount of money a state recieves. Nothing should be done for any illegal citizen. That's why they're an illegal citizen. If we give them money then we shouldn't even have borders anymore and let anybody they want to come to america.
Jacob clark 1/B
Hi.
ReplyDelete1. I believe that it would result in high count of minorities because the united states isn't known as the melting pot just because we HAD a blending of cultures. Its because we haven't changed! Every day more and more people from all around the world are coming here. So the census will just let the government approximately how many people no matter from what nationality are here.
2. I believe that it is possible, but like everyone is saying it wouldn't be as accurate.
3.I believe that everyone should be counted because even though they don't have the same Liberties or rights as Citizens of age. they are still people living in this country using our resources. For example if there is a town that has 400 people and only 100 are legal. the government is only going to provide certain accommodations for those 100 but it will be the whole 400 that are using those resources. so it would only be fair to everyone if everyone was counted.
QUEEN JENNA
ReplyDeleteAs I read this (like 8 times) it just didn't seem like it made any sense? Why would you sample 1700 individuals if you are just going to turn around and get a more precise answer by censusing 750,000 families? Wouldn't that just be adding expenses? And if we are already counting illegal immigrants, then why should it matter if they put whether or not they are legal? How are they able to access these immigrants if they are illegal? Their information wouldn't be in the system, right? Would illegal immigrants honestly put down they are illegal? And if they do put down they are illegal, then why are we counting them if we have obvious knowledge of them being illegal and could send them back to their country? Why would counting more minority groups lose Republican seats in the House? This just gave me a lot more questions then I am able to answer. But I'll take a whack at the questions....
1.I think sampling would count a higher amount of minority groups because although it may be "random" you can choose where you want your people randomly chosen from. For instance, if I went to Nordstrom and randomly chose people and asked them their yearly income, the average would be pretty high because you wouldn't see many people making 7 bucks an hour trying to make a living from McDonald's trying to shop there. So if they wanted to try and get a higher count of minority groups they can manipulated so.
2. I agree with Angelina on this one. It is very possible to decide questions about representation without partisan ideas as a factor, but its not very smart. How can you know what your people want if you don't hear from them what they want?
3. Well obviously it has been stated that illegal immigrants are as of right now being counted in the census, but I do think that people under the age of 18 should be counted in the census. We may not be of age yet, but I better be counted with all the money they are taking out of my paycheck every two weeks, they can count me in that they better count me in a census!
1) Sampling may results in counts of higher minorities because it is just a random survey where you don't actually pick the people or category of people that you are going to survey. Additionally,minorities make up the majority of today's citizen, for every five citizens two or three might be minority. That's more than 50% and by using sampling there is no way to exclude a certain type of people.
ReplyDelete2)I do think that it's possible to consider representation without partisan ideas, for this wouldn't be the first thing a government did against its citizens volitions. However, this would go against American beliefs as a Democratic country. For the governments shall work for the people as mentioned in the constitution. To do otherwise would be unconstitutional.
3)Yes illegal immigrants as well as people under 18 should be counted fairly and equally for seats reapportionment and federal grants. Although, they might be illegal immigrants they pay taxes one way or another. they certainly have to buy food, clothes and shelter. That right there is where the governments get their taxes. If the government does not discriminate as who should pay their taxes, then why should it discriminate as to who is counted in the census. To continue, people under 18 should also be counted for they are the future of this country. If they are not counted a state might get no federal aid for schools,parks,lunches,and special classes. The less uneducated the generation is the more tragic their future might be. Moreover, the young generation is what pays social security, so the government might need to know how many young adults there are in order to estimate how to distribute its social security checks.
Mike Jeune
because only the minorities actually take the time to do it.
ReplyDeleteyes it is possible. No they are illegal. they don't matter. go back to their own country if they want those opportunities and if you're under 18 you also don't truly matter.
Sebastian A
I've been rather sick lately, so I've neglected my homework duties... Hopefully this still counts, as I'm just remembering to do it, though I should probably be resting. I'm trying Ms. Boggess.
ReplyDelete1. Minorities are usually oversampled intentionally because they are minorities. The purpose of oversampling is to rectify misrepresentations by adjusting your data to accurately reflect real-world numbers. Typically, we oversample minorities so that they are properly represented in whatever we are collecting data for.
2. Partisan ideals are often emotionally charged and at times biased beliefs that stringently adhere to the views of a particular party, so of course we can dismiss these ideals when it comes to questions about representation. Though this would obviously grind against the ideology our country was founded upon. Your beliefs being fervent do not inherently instill wrongness in them, but I would rather critical thinking and facts lay the basis for what you assert.
3. I agree with Jarrod. Illegals and those under 18 should not reapportion seats in Congress, neither can vote, thus making them mostly absent of a legitimate political voice. Oddly enough we young folks do indeed command Congressional allocation, though I’m sure there is a justification for this. However, it goes without saying that our youth should be counted for government funding.
I bare a large burden of pity for immigrants, lives’ in their home countries are often deplorable, becoming a citizen can be an arduous process, and they come to the U.S seeking refugee. Many are born into dread at random and seek nothing but a more happy existence. Sadly, they leech our finances relentlessly; through a plethora of social services, grants, or their lack of tax paying.
The government can’t quite carry their strenuous burden without draining its citizens.
Austin O'Connell 1B
ReplyDelete1) Because all miniorites cannot be accounted for the census burro rounds up on what they believe to be the amount of them in the US.
2) Is it possible yes? Is it right ? No, it is wrong to ignore the peoples vote on any matter.
3) They should be counted for both, if they have in this country legally via visa or anything else. They are considered a us citizen and should have all the rights of the rest of us have!
Jorean Bradley of class 1B
ReplyDelete1. What with all the illegal and legal immigrants flooding in, they're starting to increase in number per census.
2. Yeah. However, it isn't exactly the right way to do it. You're giving the people the option to vote for a reason. If this is a democracy, then it should act like it.
3. I'd have no problem with it. But they're illegal, so they might have to go through a few political processes to be considered...Worthy for it.
Hi, I didn't really understand this discussion but here is my response
ReplyDelete1. I believe that random sampling would give a more accurate count of minorities making it possible to get help them, because if it were up to them to go somewhere and fill out a form most of them would not do it, this kind of reminds me of the situation with voting how some people were not voting. I think that if they're not educated well, they would not participate in the census, also illegal immigrants would probably stay away in fear of being deported, therefore they would not be counted in the census. I think random sampling is the best way to go
2.No, I think that all ideas should be considered.
3.Yes, illegal immigrants and persons under the age 18 be counted for purposes of apportioning seats in Congress or for counts of persons for distribution of federal monies to state and local governments. That way there would be more funding going towards things like education. Also if they pay taxes like everyone else and are actually doing things right I don't see a problem with why they can't be counted.
1. I think sampling would cause a higher count of minorities (more accurate count) because minority groups do not have the time or money to take off work to worry about filling out a census form so if the person did random-digit dialing for instance and talked to the people they could just get them to answer a few questions really quick and then be on their way.
ReplyDelete2. No because without considering everyone's ideas then you won't have an accurate representation.
3.Yes because they are still people in the states and the laws and money and everything else still effects them even if they are illegal or under age.