Ernest Istook @ Heritage’s Foundry blog has a good post stating concerns about Obama’s new Census Czar and his methods. Seems that Robert Groves supports “statistical sampling” even though the administration (officially, at least) does not. This practice attempts to make “adjustments” for under-counted people by creating fictitious profiles and assigning them a zip code, gender, race, and so on. And then it counts them, just as if they were being counted by a census worker.
The argument in favor of the method is that poor minorities and illegal immigrants are usually under-counted so census results are skewed. The argument against is that assumptions and formulas can be wrong. And that data can be manipulated.
Though I think this needs watching, it is good to note that the Supreme Court ruled (in 1999) that the census has to be an actual count, so there is current protection under the law on this issue. Any attempt to incorporate statistical sampling into the census could be legally challenged. And I assume would be.
Istook’s closing lines are winners:
As Joseph Stalin said, “Those who cast the votes decide nothing. Those who count the votes decide everything.”
And so could those who count the voters.