Decennial Census of the Population of Americans; Proposed Residence Criteria and Proposed Regulations for Demographic Questions
Key claim: The Census Bureau is proposing federal rules that would lock in how it decides where each person lives for the once-a-decade count and limit demographic questions such as race on census forms, arguing the count should follow usual residence and allegiance and not be shaped by personal characteristics it calls immaterial.
Abstract
(Proposed Rule · Commerce Department, Census Bureau) The Census Bureau is proposing to add two new parts to the Code of Federal Regulations governing the decennial census of population and housing. First, the Census Bureau is proposing to add a part outlining the residence criteria used for identifying each person’s “usual residence,” as needed to determine whether and where to count them in the census of the population throughout the United States. Second, the Census Bureau is proposing to add a part establishing standards and restrictions for the inclusion of certain demographic questions on the decennial census short-form questionnaire and any other questionnaire used for the enumeration of the population. The Census Bureau is considering these two additions to better prioritize and fulfill its Constitutional mandate to count for apportionment the “whole number of persons in each State” based on the concept of “usual residence”–a process that factors in an element of allegiance but otherwise should be colorblind and should not be distorted in any way by questions about immaterial personal characteristics, such as race. Although these two parts are somewhat related and complementary, each is being proposed independently based on its own merits. These proposals are intended to ensure fidelity to the Constitution, improve and protect the core decennial census data, and promote efficiency.
Why this matters
The decennial census drives congressional apportionment, redistricting, and the demographic data used to enforce voting-rights and anti-discrimination laws. Codifying a usual-residence-plus-allegiance rule could shift who is counted where (affecting students, incarcerated people, military, and noncitizens), while limiting race and similar questions would reduce the statistical basis civil-rights agencies and litigants rely on to identify disparate impacts.