Results of the 2010 Census

[jimrtex]

What about Legislative districts?  How sure a winner would a suit against the current existing State House and State Senate being used in 2012 be (assuming there is more than a 10% deviation between those districts as of the 2010 census, which there will be)?  You may have tried to answer that question but it got lost by me among everything else.  (I'm sure many people experience that with my posts. ) If the districts were thrown out in 2012 on population grounds (a suit lauched too soon before that might be determined to be not ripe for review), coming up with a practicable solution that would abide by Maine's Constitution as much as possible while passing federal muster would be very difficult, much moreso than for Congress where you could extend the filing deadline if necessary for the first district candidates to collect more signatures from the smaller district depending on when the ruling went down (a suitable map could probably be drawn that would only shift territory from the first district to the second).

Is Maine required to use the federal census for purposes of drawing its legislative district boundaries?   No.

May Maine elect legislators in 2008 or 2010 from districts that were drawn on the basis of the 2000 census, and that quite likely have greater population deviation than is generally regarded by the Supreme Court as lawful.  I suspect that Maine can legally do so.  So what is different about 2012?  Why are districts drawn based on 10-year old data OK, and not districts using 12-year old data.

Is it because that we couldn't easily prove in 2008 that there was an excessive deviation?  What happens if the ACS is determined to be reliable enough for districting?  Must districting then be done before every election?  The city of Houston, Texas does redistrict every two years, so it is not totally impractical.

Or if deviation in excess of 5% violates equal protection, why can't Maine be required to conduct more frequent censuses?  Why couldn't someone in early 2001 sue to overturn the November 2000 elections that were conducted on boundaries that could be shown to have excessive variation in population?

I don't think there is a clear cut case against Maine in the case of legislative district boundaries being drawn for the 2014 election, rather than the 2012 election.

[Cubby]

Personally, with current data needs being what they are, in a world like ours where changes occur more quickly, I don't think it would be a bad idea to go to a 5 year census, or something along those lines.

I wish we did a 5 year census like Canada does. But even at 10 years, all the libertarians and conservatives whine about how "intrusive" the questions are. Back in 2000 there was press coverage of lots of people saying they weren't going to fill out the long form of the census, which led directly to the American Community Survey. So there wouldn't be much support for it.

(I may be wrong about this) but we'd need a constitutional amendment to do a 5-year census since Article One of the Constitution specifically states the Census should be conducted every ten years.

[12th Doctor]

I wish we did a 5 year census like Canada does. But even at 10 years, all the libertarians and conservatives whine about how "intrusive" the questions are. Back in 2000 there was press coverage of lots of people saying they weren't going to fill out the long form of the census, which led directly to the American Community Survey. So there wouldn't be much support for it.

Well, of course.  It's only one more step from there to implanting tracking beacons into people and following them around with black helicopters.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Technically that would be correct.  A sly argument would be that the constitution only mandates that there must be a census every 10 years.  It doesn't say that there can't be censuses taken in between that time.

[Cubby]

I may be wrong about this) but we'd need a constitutional amendment to do a 5-year census since Article One of the Constitution specifically states the Census should be conducted every ten years.

Technically that would be correct.  A sly argument would be that the constitution only mandates that there must be a census every 10 years.  It doesn't say that there can't be censuses taken in between that time.

They should use that line of reasoning. But one can never underestimate the fear/hatred of the Government between the Appalachians and the Sierra Nevada.

[Kevinstat]

I'd start with the US Code mandating election from districts.  It supersedes 2 USC §2a (c), which has a grandfather provision for States that have had no change in representation, permitting them to continue to use existing districts until redistricting was done.

How can anything other than a constitutional amendment (or a new or previously unrevealed Supreme Court interpretation of the U.S. Constitution including its amendments) supersede the U.S. Constitution?  Perhaps you didn't mean what you wrote above exactly the way you wrote it.  Or perhaps 2 USC §2a (c) merely makes it clear that there is not a Constitutional requirement for states to redraw congressional districts when there is no change in representation, but doesn't make it unconstitutional for federal law (which trumps state constitutions and laws) to require such a redrawing of congressional districts.  That would make sense.

I'm saying that one section of US Code, 2 USC §2c,  takes precedence over another section of US Code, 2 USC §2a (c).

Oh, I had thought "USC" meant "United States Constitution.  My bad!

Thanks for all the information, Jimrtex.  I guess I might have to point out how we violate federal law on congressional districts and if we're going to fix that we might as well move our legislative redistricting up as well (hopefully the Senate chair of the relevent committee (Maine's main legislative committees are joint committees) won't inderectly accuse me of going off-topic again).  I'd also probably bring up how good New Jersey is in any public hearing on the issue.  I'd first need a Legislator to request a constitutional amendment (for legislative redistricting) and a companion bill (for congressional redistricting) to move our reapportionment to before the "2" year elections.

[Tender Branson]

So, let me see if I have this correct?

The results will start coming in on April 1, 2010 with state numbers coming in April, May, and June with the new CD's and EV's being effective for the 2012 Presidential Cycle.

So, I guess I should see my Census form in the mail in early January 2010, correct?

No.  The Census is based on April 1, 2010.

In 2000, census forms were mailed starting on March 13.  Some early operations in the Alaska interior started as early as January.

The Census bureau reported that 61% of households had sent their completed form in by April 11.  Ultimately this would reach 66%,  Near the end of April, census workers started contacting the 42 million households that had not been heard from.  This stage was reported as completed at the end of June.  They then begin on their quality control, which could include followups on forms that made no sense.

The State counts and apportionment were issued at the very end of 2000.  No breakdowns on individual counties, cities, blocks, etc. were released until March 2001, at which time legislatures could begin redistricting.

Legally, any redistricting that was not done in time for 2010 could be legally challenged as a violation of one man/one vote.  Conceivably there could be challenges in States like Louisiana, Mississippi, Kentucky, and Virginia that hold odd year legislative elections in 2011.  But they could probably argue that they didn't have time to redistrict in time for the districts to be reviewed by the DOJ, the courts, voting precincts adjusted, candidates filing, and primaries.  So they will probably won't be in effect until 2013.  In other states, and congressional districts will be for 2012.  But Maine waits until 2014.

Interesting theoretical question (maybe you know the answer):

If the Census forms are mailed out starting in March, are you allowed to send them back before April 1, or do they have to be postmarked April 1 and later to count in the Census ?

I´m asking, because the official Day of Count is April 1, and let's say you send your form back on March 27, yet your child is born March 28, does your child that was born a day later count in the Census ?

Probably not, because the Census Bureau will never know that the child was born a day later and therefore it won't count. Or does the Census Bureau have any method to include these cases ?

The question is, if not already implemented, are the April 1 postmarked forms even better for the accuracy of the Census ? Because in a 2 week timespan, about 100.000 babies would be left out, if parents send their forms back to the Bureau right away.

But more adults would be left out if the forms had to be postmarked April 1 and later, because if you get the form in Mid-March you can easily forget to send it back 2 weeks later.

So, it's more or less a no-win situation ...

[jimrtex]

No.  The Census is based on April 1, 2010.

In 2000, census forms were mailed starting on March 13.  Some early operations in the Alaska interior started as early as January.

The Census bureau reported that 61% of households had sent their completed form in by April 11.  Ultimately this would reach 66%,  Near the end of April, census workers started contacting the 42 million households that had not been heard from.  This stage was reported as completed at the end of June.  They then begin on their quality control, which could include followups on forms that made no sense.

Interesting theoretical question (maybe you know the answer):

If the Census forms are mailed out starting in March, are you allowed to send them back before April 1, or do they have to be postmarked April 1 and later to count in the Census ?

I´m asking, because the official Day of Count is April 1, and let's say you send your form back on March 27, yet your child is born March 28, does your child that was born a day later count in the Census ?

Probably not, because the Census Bureau will never know that the child was born a day later and therefore it won't count. Or does the Census Bureau have any method to include these cases ?

The question is, if not already implemented, are the April 1 postmarked forms even better for the accuracy of the Census ? Because in a 2 week timespan, about 100.000 babies would be left out, if parents send their forms back to the Bureau right away.

But more adults would be left out if the forms had to be postmarked April 1 and later, because if you get the form in Mid-March you can easily forget to send it back 2 weeks later.

So, it's more or less a no-win situation ...

I found the 2000 census forms, but didn't find a separate set of instructions.  It could be that they decided that people don't read instructions, and tried to include everything on the form itself.

The forms all say April 1 (eg how many people were living at this location on April 1, 2000; rather than how many people will be living at this location on April 1, 2000), but that could be simply to make the wording more direct.

I looked through the press releases from 2000.  And there was one on March 27, that said that they had a 42% return rate by that date.  It also suggested that those who had not already returned their form might set aside "Census Day" to complet the form.

The USA releases the census forms 70 years after the fact (these are available for genealogical research).  In times past, the census was taken my enumerators, who went door to door.  Those were started on the census date, and presumably back-dated (eg my grandparents lived on a farm that was one of the last enumerated in 1920, which was a couple of months after the census date).

[Tender Branson]

No.  The Census is based on April 1, 2010.

In 2000, census forms were mailed starting on March 13.  Some early operations in the Alaska interior started as early as January.

The Census bureau reported that 61% of households had sent their completed form in by April 11.  Ultimately this would reach 66%,  Near the end of April, census workers started contacting the 42 million households that had not been heard from.  This stage was reported as completed at the end of June.  They then begin on their quality control, which could include followups on forms that made no sense.

Interesting theoretical question (maybe you know the answer):

If the Census forms are mailed out starting in March, are you allowed to send them back before April 1, or do they have to be postmarked April 1 and later to count in the Census ?

I´m asking, because the official Day of Count is April 1, and let's say you send your form back on March 27, yet your child is born March 28, does your child that was born a day later count in the Census ?

Probably not, because the Census Bureau will never know that the child was born a day later and therefore it won't count. Or does the Census Bureau have any method to include these cases ?

The question is, if not already implemented, are the April 1 postmarked forms even better for the accuracy of the Census ? Because in a 2 week timespan, about 100.000 babies would be left out, if parents send their forms back to the Bureau right away.

But more adults would be left out if the forms had to be postmarked April 1 and later, because if you get the form in Mid-March you can easily forget to send it back 2 weeks later.

So, it's more or less a no-win situation ...

I found the 2000 census forms, but didn't find a separate set of instructions.  It could be that they decided that people don't read instructions, and tried to include everything on the form itself.

The forms all say April 1 (eg how many people were living at this location on April 1, 2000; rather than how many people will be living at this location on April 1, 2000), but that could be simply to make the wording more direct.

I looked through the press releases from 2000.  And there was one on March 27, that said that they had a 42% return rate by that date.  It also suggested that those who had not already returned their form might set aside "Census Day" to complet the form.

The USA releases the census forms 70 years after the fact (these are available for genealogical research).  In times past, the census was taken my enumerators, who went door to door.  Those were started on the census date, and presumably back-dated (eg my grandparents lived on a farm that was one of the last enumerated in 1920, which was a couple of months after the census date).

I think it's better this way, allthough not technically correct. Because as I said above, the Census would probably miss lots of people if the forms are sent out in Mid-March but would need an April 1 (or later) postmark. Many people would just put the form aside and forget to fill it out.

Is the Census Bureau able to visit hospitals and track births from Mid-March to April 1 ? They also visit prisons, nursing homes etc.

But there's also the chance that these babies are double-counted ...

[jimrtex]

I just sent a query to the Census Bureau.  I'll let you know what they say.

I think the most common source of double counting is college students who are counted at college, and also reported at their parent's home.

[Tender Branson]

I just sent a query to the Census Bureau.  I'll let you know what they say.

I think the most common source of double counting is college students who are counted at college, and also reported at their parent's home.

As far as I know, you have to fill out your name on the Census form. If the data is later entered into a database, you could check for identical names that have an identical birth date and then make a background check to avoid double counting. The person you contact will normally tell you then if the college or the home address is the right one.

[Joe Biden 2020]

Here is another question. 

Say, I move to Topeka, Kansas right around April 1, 2010.  Will they send the Census form to my Oklahoma address or my Kansas address, or both?  Would I be held responsible for both forms?  I assume I would put down where I am living on April 1, 2010 whether that's Midwest City, Oklahoma or Topeka, Kansas, but I was just wondering how they would know where I live, especially if I file my change of address with the USPS on, say, March 31.

[muon2]

Here is another question. 

Say, I move to Topeka, Kansas right around April 1, 2010.  Will they send the Census form to my Oklahoma address or my Kansas address, or both?  Would I be held responsible for both forms?  I assume I would put down where I am living on April 1, 2010 whether that's Midwest City, Oklahoma or Topeka, Kansas, but I was just wondering how they would know where I live, especially if I file my change of address with the USPS on, say, March 31.

The Census employs an army of enumerators to follow up on forms that they believe were not completed. If a form did not come in from either the OK or KS address, an enumerator would have that added to their followup list.