1. Baker v Carr, the Census, and the Political and Statistical Geography of the U.S.: The Origin and Impact of Public Law 94-171 Margo Anderson Department of History University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee November 4, 2011 Cleveland, OH

2. Building the American State 2

3. 3

4. Article 1, Section 2, Paragraph 3 Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons. 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.

5. Importance of the Census and Apportionment Article The United States was the first nation in the history of the world to take a regular population census and use it to allocate seats in a national assembly according to population. 5

6. Importance of the Census and Apportionment Article The U.S. has had one of the most demographically dynamic and diverse populations in the history of the world. The combination of the census as mechanism to adjust power and resources each decade, in conjunction with the demographic dynamism and diversity, made the census and the statistical system truly central to the functioning of the society and state 6

7. Importance of the Census and Apportionment Article Dynamism is measured by patterns of population growth and change Diversity involves geographic diversity, group diversity, and different rates of change for different parts of the country, and among the groups. Hence three levels – Numerical growth – Geographic diversity – Racial and ethnic diversity 7

8. Numerical Growth

9. From 3.9 million to ~309 million: Growth 13 states have become 50 states. House of Representatives grew from 65 to 435 members. The average congressional district after the 2010 Census will be larger than the total population of any of the original 13 states in 1790. Growth has been differential: some states and local areas lose while others gain. 9

10. 2010

12. Admitting States to the Union 12

13. Growth in the Size of the House of Representatives 13

14. Differential Population Growth: New York State Population and House Delegation, 1790-2010 14

15. Changes in House Seats: 2010 15

16. Geographic Diversity

17. Geographic Diversity: The First Gerrymander, 1812 17

18. Geographic Diversity: Westward Expansion 18

19. 2010 Center of Population

20. Racial and Ethnic Diversity

21. http://census.gov/clo/www/redistricting.html http:/www.census.gov http://www.census.gov/prod/2001pubs/c2kbr01-4.pdf http://www.census.gov/population/cen2000/atlas/white_a.pdf Click to see Table Click to see Redistricting Info (PL-94-171) Click to see Census Bureau Web Home Page Click to see Census 2000 Brief

22. http://www.census.gov/clo/www/redistricting.html http://www.census.gov/ http://www.census.gov/prod/2001pubs/c2kbr01-5.pdf http://www.census.gov/population/cen2000/atlas/black_a.pdf Click to see Table Click to see Redistricting Info (PL-94-171) Click to see Census Bureau Web Home Page Click to see Census 2000 Brief

23. http://www.census.gov/clo/www/redistricting.html http://www.census.gov/ http://www.census.gov/population/cen2000/atlas/his_lat.pdfClick to see Table Click to see Redistricting Info (PL-94-171) Click to see Census Bureau Web Home Page http://www.census.gov/prod/2001pubs/c2kbr01-3.pdf Click to see Census 2000 Brief

24. Growth in the Size of the House of Representatives 24

25. The Corrupt Bargain of the 1920s: No Reapportionment Congress decided in 1910 to stop increasing the size of the House each decade The 1920 Census apportionment was a zero sum game Congress failed to pass a reapportionment law Rural interests claimed the results were wrong “Scientists” could not agree on an apportionment method

26. Solution Prospective automatic reapportionment after 1930 census Removal of the compact, contiguous and equally sized district requirement…. Political power reapportioned among the states, but malapportionment legal within states. Example: In 1930s, NYS districts varied in size by factor of 7.8.

27. Reapportionment Revolution 1960s: Supreme Court decisions mandate ‘one person, one vote’ Voting Rights Act requires political structures to guarantee minority voting interests. 1970s…..Implementation….turning to the census….

28. What data is needed? Accurate tabulations Small area tabulations Tabulations tailored to needs of political jurisdictions, e.g., election precincts Tabulations that are free and easy to use. Tabulations that are timely, so districts can be drawn soon after the census results are announced.

29. Data Available after 1970 census Block level tabulations and maps for 60% of the country’s population, but only 2% of the land area For the rest of the country, the MEDList (Master Enumeration District List) and census maps. In other words, “collection geography,” not “tabulation geography.”

30. Creating New Data Tabulations After the 1970 census experience, Congress and organizations, e.g., the National Council of State Legislatures Reapportionment Task Force, proposed legislation to improve data availability. PL94-171 enacted in December 1975. – States could work with the Census Bureau to customize data needs – Data would be published a year after the census date, e.g., April 1.

31. PL94-171 Implementation: 1980 Census Experience 23 states participated in the program. Block level tabulations and maps provided where available Enumeration district data and maps provided where block data did not exist. Materials delivered on paper, computer tape and microfiche Variables: total population; 5 race groups; Hispanic/Latino.

32. Census Blocks in 1980

33. PL94-171 Implementation: 1990 Census Experience Census Bureau built the TIGER/MAF system for the nation Data distribution on electronic media GIS Variables: total population; voting age population; race groups; Hispanic/Latino Block level data for the entire nation: 7 million blocks.

34. Asking Again: What data is needed? Accurate tabulations Small area tabulations Tabulations tailored to needs of political jurisdictions, e.g., election precincts Tabulations that are free and easy to use. Tabulations that are timely

35. It’s all about numbers… By 1990, the Census Bureau had met most of the challenges of the reapportionment decisions: – Small area tabulations – Tabulations tailored to needs of political jurisdictions, e.g., election precincts – Tabulations that are free and easy to use. – Tabulations that are timely

36. 36 Census Geography: 2000

38. It’s all about numbers… But …one requirement was still a problem, and arguably PL94-171 implementation made it worse: – Accurate tabulations Block level tabulations are prone to error because of their small size Which brings us to the other implementation issue: – Census undercount

39. The Other Census Counting Issue: Undercount Measured at national level since 1940 Differential by race and region:

40. The Other Census Counting Issue: Undercount Correctable with a post enumeration survey (sampling) with dual systems estimation. Politicized: – Republicans opposed adjustment. – Democrats favored adjustment.

41. The Undercount Controversies Cities and states sued the Commerce Department from the 1970s to the 1990s House of Representatives sued the Commerce Department in 1998 Legal Resolution: Department of Commerce v. United States House (1999): – Census statute (Title XIII) prevented the use of sampling for apportioning seats among the states – Census statute permitted correction (adjustment) of counts for redistricting, estimates, and other uses.

42. Current Status 2000 census results were not adjusted – it could not be shown that correction would improve the accuracy of the tabulations at the block level New error structures were discovered, e.g.: – “…A small net coverage error, however, masked large numbers of gross errors of omission and erroneous inclusions” of housing units

43. Current Status 2000 census evaluation panel concluded: – “the 2000 census overcounted (emphasis in original) the total population” by 1.3 million people and “differences in net undercount rates between such groups as minorities and others and owners and renters remain.”

44. Current Status 2000 census evaluation panel concluded: “/c/ensus counts at the block level, – whether adjusted or unadjusted – are subject to high levels of error and hence should be used only when aggregated to larger geographic areas.” “Congress should consider moving the deadline to provide block-level census data for legislative redisticting to allow more time for evaluation of the completeness of population coverage and quality of the basic demographic items before they are released.”

45. 2010 Census Coverage Evaluation Program Post Enumeration Survey with dual systems estimation Demographic Analysis Evaluation at high levels of geography, primarily states No program for carrying down error measurement to small levels of geography

47. Evaluation of 2010 Census Census evaluations will be released in 2012 We will complete the 2010 decennial redistricting round before we know the level of bias and inaccuracy in the census data used. It remains to be seen if that fact will lead to further litigation or legislation later in the decade.

48. For more information, go to cqpress.com Thank you. margo@uwm.edu