Census, no president has ever tried to manipulate the census count in this way. In fact, just two years ago, the Census Bureau reaffirmed its commitment to do the exact opposite of what the president is now trying to do. The bureau committed to counting every person, regardless of citizenship or legal status, under the rules of congress set in the census act of 1790. The president s decision to release this illegal memo, now appears designed to inflict maximum damage to the accuracy of the ongoing 2020 census. In just two weeks, the Census Bureau will start visiting the homes of millions of people who have not, yet, responded to the census. The president s latest attack on immigrants could sow fear and confusion in communities across the country. And could lead many people to decide not to participate. This will hurt communities that are already undercounted, underrepresented, and underfunded. Addressing the chaos caused by the president s memo will drain valuable resources from the Census Bureau, which is already struggling to administer the 2020 census, in the middle of an unprecedented pandemic. And it will further divide our country, at a time when we need unity. Of course, this is not the first time that President Trump has attempted to politicize the census. For more than two years, he tried to add a Citizenship Question, even though the Census Bureaus own studies showed it would depress Response Rates, in many communities. When this committee investigated secretary ross and other administration, officials denied they were trying to exclude immigrants from congressional apportionment. And, instead, claimed, falsely, that the department of justice needed citizenship data to enforce the Voting Rights act. The Supreme Court saw through their explanation. Calling it, quote, contrived, end quote. And blocking the addition of the Citizenship Question. And when secretary ross and attorney general barr refused to turn over documents about the real reason for the Citizenship Question, the house held them both in contempt. Now, the president is trying, again, to weaponize the census, to hurt immigrants, and help republicans. As a nation, we depend on the census to be nonpartisan, fair, and accurate. As i told director dillingham the last time he appeared before us, our constitution requires it, our communities rely on it, and our democracy depends on it. We are here today, at this emergency hearing, because the Trump Administration is threatening this cornerstone of our democracy. We will hear from four former Census Bureau directors, who oversaw the census during their botheir both republican and democratic administrations. They will share their views on the president s unprecedented attempts to manipulate the census count. And why it is important to count every person in the United States. Then, we will hear directly from the current Census Bureau director, dr. Dillingham. I expect dr. Dillingham to give an honest assessment of how the president s memo could impact the accuracy of the census, and what the bureau is doing to address this risk. I thank all of our witnesses for participating today. And i look forward to your testimony. I now recognize the distinguished, Ranking Member, mr. Comer, for an opening statement. Chairman maloney, i appreciate you calling this hearing today, on the 2020 census. Let me begin by saying, unequivocally, the 2020 census is counting every resident in the United States, regardless of citizenship status. Any assertions to the contrary are scare tactics, which have the consequence of reducing participation in the census. The census is you understaunder. I want to encourage every american to complete their census form. Starting in august, census enumerators will be fanning out across the country to count nonresponding households. I encourage everyone to engage with the enumerator if they come to your door but if you are concerned about an enumerator coming to your door, you can complete your census online now at my 2020 census. Gov. I truly wish the hearing today were an oversight hearing of the 2020 census. Because covid19 has created a lot of operational challenges for the census. Unfo unfortunately, this committee has conducted no oversight of these impacts. Once again, democrats are focusing their evidents fforts political issues, not the basic, Good Government oversight this committee is charged with conducting. Last week, President Trump took a very important step to ensuring the sanctity of our nations elections and equal representation, under the constitution. The president directed the secretary of commerce to report an apportionment count for the house of representatives, which excludes nonlegal residents in the United States, including Illegal Immigrants. All americans should care about who is being included in the apportionment count. Including Illegal Immigrants in the count for representation in congress only dilutes the representation of all americans who vote in elections, and makes a mockery of our basic principle of one person, one vote. The president s action restores the concept of representational government, envisioned by the constitution. In a country so closely divided as the United States, Illegal Immigrants and noncitizens have a material effect on representation. Representation should matter to everyone. Its a simple question of fairness. Predictably, the democrats liberal Interest Groups have already filed lawsuits against the president. Like the sound and fury surrounding the Citizenship Question, the legal questions about the president s action are likely toe wind up at the Supreme Court. This hearing today is the democrats first shot across the bow of chief Justice Roberts and the other Supreme Court justices. The intimidation of the Supreme Court begins today. I urge us all to focus on the task at hand. The completion of the 2020 census count, now underway. With that, i yield back. Thank you. Now, i would like to introduce our witnesses. Our first panel is composed of former census directors. We are grateful to have their expertise. Our first witness today is mr. Vincent baraba, who served as the census director from 1973 to 1976 and, again, from 79 to 1981. Then, we will hear from Kenneth Pruitt who served as the census director from 1998 to 2001. Next, we will hear and go to robert m. Groves, who served as the census director from 2009 to 2012. And finally, we will go to john h. Thompson, who served as the census director from 2013 to 2017. The witnesses will be muted so we can swear them in. Unmuted so that we can swear them in. Witnesses, please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you god . I do. I do. Let the record show that the witnesses answered in the affirmative. Thank you. Without objection, your written statements will be made part of the record. And with that, mr. Baraba, you are now recognized for your testimony. Thank you. The thomas form hated in 1928 stated that if men define situations as real, they are real in their consequences. In essence, the potential that when incorrect situations are perceived by people as real, they are real in their consequences. Real problem with the president s current action is that by reintroducing his illegal desire of only counting citizens, many approaches hes taken to ensure he achieves his real objective. That is to make sure less people will be counted in states with large minority populations. If this occurs, those areas will have their representation in congress and other ledgislative districts reduced, as well. And they will receive fewer governmentapproved allocations, based on this census counting. However, the harm of filling out the form by noncitizens is not correct because it is against the law. Any Census Bureau employee to disclose or publish any census or survey information that identifies an individual and business. This is true even or interagency communications. The fbi and other Government Entities do not have the legal right to access this information. Violating the confidentiality of respondent is a federal crime, including a federal prison sentence of up to five years, a fine of up to 250,000, or both. In fact, when these protections have been challenged, theyve been upheld in the courts. I will now provide an example of how the Census Bureau and other agencies Work Together to follow title xiii. On august 13th, 1980, late that afternoon, florida fbi agents arrived at the District Office in Colorado Springs armed with a search warrant, authorizing them to seize the census documents. Concluding completed questionnaires. Of alleged questionnaire falsification and payroll fraud. I was immediately informed of the situation and contacted the director of the fbi. After a brief flurry of telephone calls to employees in colorado, we agreed to that could be reached by the disputed questionnaire remain in the custody of the Census Bureau. Also, admittedly, the documents are placed in a secure room, protected by two locks. With one key held by the fbi. And the other, held by a local census official. Under this arrangement, only sworn census employees were allowed to enter the room but an fbi agent had to be present. An agent outside the room to monitor activity of census personnel. Census bureau brought in experienced Census Bureau enumerators from outside the denver areas to reinterview respondents in the area where the fraud had taken place. Census Bureau Officials a report that did not reveal any confidential information. As the chairwoman mentioned, i served as Census Bureau director for president s of both political parties. 1980, i had the honor of providing secretary of commerce with the Census Bureau statement showing the population of the states and the number of representatives to which each state is entitled. I was, also, proud of the fact that our outreach program, which was lowincome and minority population, led to an estimated count of nearly 97 of our population. 1980 census was also a clear demonstration of the nonpartisan manner which a census should be conducted. 1980 census was designed and planned during a republican presidency, and successfully implemented, as designed and planned, during the democratic presidency. It will be up to cone guegress the press to make sure. And that is true motivation. The census belongs to the people, not the president. The entire population of persons in the United States should participate, willingly, in the 2020 census. A moment to reaffirm our founders that everyone be counted. Thank you. Thank you, so much, for your testimony and your service. We will now hear from dr. John eastman, professor henry salvatori, professor of law. And center for constitutional jurisprudence dale e. Valor school of law and senior fellow clairemont institute. Doct dr. Eastman. Should we go to another one . We seem to have some technical problems. Were going to go to the next speaker after dr. Eastman and come back to him because there seems to be a a problproblem wi connecting with him. Thank you. We will now turn to dr. Pruitt. Mr. Pruitt, you are now recognized. Thank you, very much, madam chairwoman. We know this this discussion h will include concern about the and putting the noncitizens and or the illegals into the apportionment count. I just have to say three things act that. First, weve done it. The census has never done it. Second, they cant do it by asking questions. Youre not going to knock on the door and say, are you . Are you not . And, third, the administrative records are inadequate to do it. So, even if it was a good idea, we dont yet know we dont yet know that we can do it. That the Census Bureau can do it. And with that as my starting point, i want to go on and say some things about the larger census, as as as the Ranking Member invited us to do. We we all know that were about 62 with respect to nonresponse with respect to selfreporting. But that leaves, you know, more than a third of the population uncounted. And i have to really stress this point. Nonresponse followup, hard to count. Very difficult census territory, as we all know. And we are not in control. The we is the Census Bureau, the we is the congress, the we is the white house. Covid is in control of whether we will be able to, that is, the Census Bureau, will be able to do this count successfully, before the end of the year, which theyre now on that on that schedule. And we know about 15 of the American Population has already told us, in polls, that they do not intend to cooperate with the census. And so, id like to make two, three, quick points. How do i define success . The bureau will know, as no other unit of government can, if the numbers will accurately apportion and fairly distribute funds for a decade. It knows that the census count is the denominator of every Vital Statistics we rely on. Whether the number whether its the number of consumer products. Whether its differential rate of infection across the population subgroups on the pandemic, and so forth. Every number that we use for ten years is anchored to the quality of the census. Secondly, the bureau knows that these statistical facts can, easily, damage. And the flawed numbers that will be produced, that will inflict on society, will create serious damage to this society. And its not its not pretty. Ten years and Homeless Veterans because we mislocate mislocate their sorry hospitals. Ten years of Tropical Storm Disaster Relief that is too little, too late, because traffic congestion, poor planning by local School Districts because they have flawed estimates of how many first graders are going to show up. Ten years of misled chamber of commerce because predictions of population growth and characteristics are off base. We know that will be the consequences of of a census that does not count, as best it can. Quite quite separate from whos in the apportionment count, we have to start with a good census. The third thing i would say about this is the bureau will not want to inflict the damage that flawed numbers will produce. The Census Bureau is too honorable, too scientific, too proud of its professional standards, to faithful to its constitutional duties. The bureau will struggle with the enormous burden of whether to release substandard results. I urge the congress to share the burden. I would ask the congress to, please, appoint, using the National Academy of sciences or some other apolitical, trusted institution of its choosing, to produce predetermined, quality metrics, that can assess if the final 2020 numbers reasonably match what the bureau knows that they should be. And the bureau has very good estimates from acs, from the demographic analysis, very good estimates of how many people across the states, all the way down to the censustrack levels. And so, if we can have this special group of experts to sort of create the metrics, by which we will judge if we have an adequate census, to do what its supposed to do. And if not, what steps should the country take . Thank you. Were going to return to dr. Eastman, if we have solved the difficulties of reaching him. Dr. Eastman . Lets try lets try this again. Can you hear me now . Yes, we can. Very good. Thank you. Chairman maloney, Ranking Member comer, other members of the committee, thank you for inviting me to participate in this important hearing. I, actually, think President Trumps directive is, not only good policy but, perfectly constitutional. And i want to address, real quickly, something mr. Pruitt said. I think theres a confusion here between the two purposes that we use the census for. One is for apportionment, set out by article i, section 2 of the constitution. The other, exercised in congress to expend its power is to do a whole myriad of other things, like allocate resources, determine where we need schools and va hospitals, and what have you. President trumps order addresses the apportionment part of that. It doesnt have anything to do with the broader purpose of a total count on the census. And i think the political theory underlying the reason we have in the apportionment clause is extremely important. And so, let me begin with that. We get our political theory from the declaration of independence. It sets out universal principles, all men are created equal. That we are endowed, by our creator, with certain unalienable rights. But we apply those principles in a particular context. The declaration starts off talking abo talki talking about one people separating themselves from another. The consent of the people to be governed, not on the consent of people elsewhere. But consent of the particular people that are setting up a government. Now, those principles that represented the government theory find themselves into the text of the constitution. Right from the very beginning, it says we, the people of the United States. It doesnt say we the people of the world or any foreign nationals who happen to be practice present when we tawhen we take a census. Says representatives are chosen by the people. That same people, referring back to the people of the United States. Now, the people in their states. And then, in clause three, it says the people again. And they are choose their representatives, based on the total number of persons. That refers back to the their representatives. That refers back to the people in their several states. And proof of this is the clause excluding indians not taxed. That was a clause that was designed to recognize and to exempt, from the census count, those people who were in the states but not part of our body politic, who were not citizens. As the Supreme Court held in elk versus wilkins, indians are not taxed, excluded from the census, for the reason that they are not citizens. In other words, the whole political theory of the declaration, codified into the constitution, is that we are counting people for purposes of apportionment in order to reflect, accurately, representative strength. And divide, equally and fairly, the representation among the several states based on their numbers of people who are citizens, who are part of the body politic. Ill give an example. If the census in if the 1984 olympics was held in 1980 and it happened to coincide with census day, we wouldnt have added two or three congressional seats to california because there were a couple Million People visiting los angeles for the olympics. And this has always been our history. Diplomats, visitors, never been counted because theyre not part of the body politic. They dont adhere to the necessity of of of the theory of Representative Government. The Supreme Court has upheld this, as well. Its recognized in reynolds versus sim, for example, which was the equal protection, one person, one vote case. That its the equal number of citizens. They refer, repeatedly, to the language of citizens, rather than total population. Now, for most of our history, there wasnt much difference. The disparity between citizens and noncitizens was roughly similar, one district to another. So we didnt have to get into this question. But we now live in a circumstance where there are vast differences, state by state, between the number of citizens compared to the total population. And to continue to count total population for apportionment purposes is to give an undue to to states that have a large number of noncitizens living within their borders. Thats not consistent with the principles of Representative Government. Its unfair to those states that continue to only have citizens. And its particularly unfair when the number of noncitizens includes large numbers of people who are not here legally, at all. It creates a perverse incentive to encourage illegal immigration. Thank you, madam chairman, i look forward to your questions. Thank you. I now next is mr. Groves. And i understand that you have a hard stop at 11 00. You will be excused, with our thanks. And you may have questions for the record. Mr. Groves, you are now recognized. Thank you, chairwoman maloney and Ranking Member comer. Since 1790, each u. S. Census has sought to in the country. Some of the first words in the u. S. Constitution seem to illuminate the intent of the Founding Fathers on this score. Before the mandate, as laid out in article 1, section 2, the prior section, section 1, thats the qualifications of membership in the house of representatives. I quote, no person shall be representative who she not ha representative who shall not have attained 25 years and been a citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an inhabitant of that state in which he shall be chosen. So i note the explicit designation of the word citizenship for qualifications of members of the house. And the very next section, section 2, outlining the census, the word citizen is not used. Either in referring to the census or to the apportionment of the house of representatives. Instead, the phrase poll persons is used. This goal of complete enumeration of all persons in the country has been the basis of all censuses since that conducted by Thomas Jefferson in 1790. It has been the basis of reapportionment, decade after decade. Indeed, the census is the only event we have in this country, in which all persons participate. I am not a lawyer and, thus, will not comment on the legal basis of the recent memorandum. I will, instead, comment on the critical needs of the Census Bureau going forward, with an eye towards Quality Assurance and transparency. I have four points. One. The Census Bureau technical staff must be free to complete the 2020 census, at the maximum level of quality possible within the unprecedented constraints of the pandemic. As you know, the technical staff in the Census Bureau has requested to delay the delivery of various products. This request flows from the delay and the conduct of various stages of Data Collection. This delay, no doubt, has saved lives of enumerators, whose Public Service will make these efforts successful. I applaud the technical staff of the Census Bureau making this decision. The decision, however, forces a delay of delivery of 2020 products. I support this delay and urge congress to authorize it. Number two. All of us need to convey the message, again, very clearly, that the 2020 census must enumerate all persons resident in the u. S. Regardless of the outcome of the administrations memorandum. The census has the goal of enumerating all persons in the United States. We must double down on this message in the coming days. Number three. The Census Bureau should release all quality indicators of the measurement of citizens, required under the july 11th, 2019, executive order. Rarely, in the conduct of censuses throughout the world is the responsible agency asked to produce official estimates, critical to the society, without prior testing. The attempt to assemble from administrator record systems counts citizens at small, geographical areas is unprecedent unprecedented in the history of the bureau. With unprecedented efforts comes the obligation to inform the country of the strengths and weaknesses of the product. I urge congress to assure that evaluations of the accuracy of such statistics be presented, along with the estimates, themselves. Number four. The credibility of the 2020 census can be achieved, only by wide dissemination of quality indicators. I urge the Census Bureau, given the unique nature of this Data Collection, to publish intermediate indicators of quality of the 2020 census. These would include process indicators, comparisons with Population Estimates from demographic analysis in comparable, tabular form. And additional field data, for example, match rates of households. Credibility requires transparency. The sooner the country can see multiple indicators of the 2020 census quality, the sooner the use case for the census can be made. In conclusion, i am pleased to submit this written testimony. Look forward to testifying before the committee. Thank you. We will now conclude this panel with mr. Thompson. Mr. Thompson, you are now recognized. Good morning, chairwoman maloney, Ranking Member comer, and members of the committee. Thank you for this opportunity to testify benefit yofore your e regarding the july 1st, 2020, memorandum from secretary of commerce of excluding illegal aliens following the 2020 census. I am extremely concerned that will affect the quality and accuracy of the 2020 census. The remainder of my testimony will focus on five areas that i believe are critical for your leadership and the department of commerce and Census Bureau to consider. First, effects on the response for the hardtocount populations. I believe the memorandum has a high potential to reduce the likelihood of census participation for the hardtocount populations, including noncitizens and imgrangts. Immigrants. A significant of the census plan, is getting out a message that the 2020 census is important to local communities. And that respondent information is kept completely private, and not shared with any outside entity, including law and immigration enforcement. I am very concerned that the release of this memorandum will increase the fears of many in the hardtocount community, that their data will not be safe. The end result will most likely be increased nonparticipation and increased undercounts of these populations. Two. Effects of not accepting the Census Bureau recommendation to extend the 2020 scensus deadlines. The Census Bureau, through the department of commerce, has requested that congress extend the deadlines for providing apportionment counts and redistricting data, by four months. It is critical that these deadlines be extended. The effective conduct of the operation to enumerate those households that do not selfrespond, nonresponse followup or nrfu, is necessary to achieve a fair and accurate for all populations. I am concerned the deadlines will force the bureau to make adjustments. These adjustments will most likely include reducing the number of nrfu visits and increasing methods to a much greater percentage of Housing Units than in previous censuses. The consequential actions of this would tend to undercount populations, and overrepresent other populations. Three. The risk of introducing serious errors into the 2020 census apportionment counts, before the quality and accuracy of the 2020 census, is understood. For the 2020 census, little is known, at this point, regarding quality, accuracy. And most importantly, the number of undocumented persons that will actually be enumerated. I am very concerned that a much lower number of undocumented persons will be counted in the 2020 census relative to previous censuses due to increased fear that their information will not be secure. At the same time, a significant portion of residents could be overcounted. It will take very careful analysis to understand the properties of the 2020 census and to determine how many if any undocumented persons are included in the enumeration. This analysis will not be available with the apportionment counts are released. Therefore, using the existing estimates of the undocumented population to reduce the census numbers who have unknown and possibly serious adverse effects on the resulting apportionment. Four, there must be transparency in how the estimates of the undocumented population are constructed. The 2020 census is a foundation of our democracy and there must be assurances that any actions that would affect the census are based on objective methodologies, a longheld principle of the Census Bureau is openness and transparency. Five, the importance of not even given the appearance of political interference with the conduct and tabulation of the 2020 census. Perceptions that the results of the 2020 census have been manipulated for political purposes will greatly erode public and stakeholder confidence, not only in the 2020 census, but in our democracy. When i was directing the 2000 census as a career executive under the leadership of Census Bureau director dr. Kenneth pruitt, we went to great length top ensure stakeholders that datadriven decisions were being made. I would strongly urge the current Census Bureau and department of commerce senior officials to follow these principles for the 2020 census. In conclusion, thank you for this opportunity and i look forward to answering any questions that you may have. Thank you. The chair now recognizes herself for five minutes for questions. I would like, first, to thank all of you for joining us today. It is powerful to hear from four former census directors who have been appointed by president s from both parties. Collectively you have served richard nixon, gerald ford, jimmy carter, bill clinton, george w. Bush, barack obama and donald trump. On july 21st, the president issued a memo directing the secretary of commerce to provide him with the information necessary to exclude undocumented immigrants from the census count. Many people are opined already that the president s memorandum is unlawful and unconstitutional. I have studied it closely and believe it violates the clear language of the constitution and existing federal laws but i want to ask each of you the same question for a yes or no answer. In your opinion, and based on your knowledge and experience, does the president s july 21st memo seeking to exclude undocumented immigrants from the Apportionment Base appear to violate existing federal law and enduring views of the constitution, yes or no . Mr. Barabba. Yes. Dr. Eastman. No. Mr. Pruitt. Yes. Mr. Groves. Yes. Mr. Thompson. Yes. Second question, based on your knowledge and experience, does the constitution require the census to count every person living in the United States at the time of the census, including undocumented immigrants. Mr. Barabba, yes or no . Yes. Dr. Eastman. No. Mr. Pruitt. Yes. Mr. Gloves. Yes. Mr. Thompson. Yes. A third question, based on your knowledge and experience, do you agree that the federal law requires the president to send congress an apportionment count based on the census count of the total population of the u. S. Including undocumented immigrants. Mr. Barabba, yes or no . Yes. Dr. Eastman. No. Mr. Pruitt. Yes. Mr. Groves. Yes. Mr. Thompson. Yes. And lastly, is it correct that all previous censuses and apportionment accounts in the history of the United States have included both citizens and noncitizens including undocumented immigrants. Mr. Barabba, yes or no . Yes. Dr. Eastman, yes or no. No. Mr. Pruitt. Yes. Mr. Groves. Yes. Mr. Thompson. Yes. Thank you. I think that all of these answers speak for themselves. The president may not pick and choose who is included in the census count or the Apportionment Base. The constitution federal law and the historic practice of the Census Bureau dating back more than two centuries all require the census count and the Apportionment Base to include every person in the United States regardless of their immigration status. I now yield to the distinguished Ranking Member for five minutes for questions. Dr. East man, thank you for testifying today. Let me be crystal clear. I strongly support the president s order. I want to start with a few basic questions. What is the constitutional justification for the president s apportionment decision . Briefly. Well, the constitution says to count all persons in the several states. That refers to the people of the several states. That refers to the people of the United States. As the indians not tax exclusion clause makes clear it was designed to cover citizens. Those are the people that we are choosing representatives to represent. It doesnt include people who are here visiting and certainly not people who are here visiting unlawfully. Why is it not a good apportionment count . Total population was roughly approximate to citizen population. Thats no longer the case. And the political theory and the text and the reference to the people that is contained in the constitution suggests that we now take account of the fact that we have great disparities district to district on the number of citizens versus the total population. Will you briefly explain the principle of one person, one vote. The idea of one person, one vote set out by the Supreme Court is tied to the idea of Representative Government. That we should each have an equal vote in who our representative who were going to choose as our representative. Were not talking about other people in the world having a say in who we choose as our representatives. Its one person, and that means one citizen, one vote because those are the people that are choosing who is going to represent them in this particular place and this particular government. Its not a world government. Its a government of the people of the United States. So for the issue at hand, can you explain how counting Illegal Immigrants for purposes of apportionment dilutes the political power of citizens in states with fewer Illegal Immigrants. Take two states like california, 2. 5 million estimate illegal grinimmigrants. And you are diluting the votes of citizens in other places that have not encouraged such illegal immigration into their states. If our Representative Government is going to be based on citizens, then diluting the vote of citizens to overweight the apportionment and the number of seats, its not just seats in congress. Its votes in the Electoral College for president as well. And this is not partisan. California and florida and texas would all lose seats if the president s order is upheld. Some on the democrat side, some on the republican side. This goes more to the basic notion of Representative Government and who it is our elected representatives are supposed to be representing. Its citizens here, its not people from elsewhere in the world. So does accounting legal immigrants for the purposes of the Apportionment Base distort the principle of one person one vote . It does. And it dilutes the votes of legitimate citizen voters present within their borders. My last question, how does the president s memorandum on apportionment restore equal representation in apportionment in the house of representatives . It gets back to the apportionment that i think our constitution envisions and that is that one people who are choosing our representatives, were going to apportion that people, according to state and allot the number of congressional seats based on that, not however many people we can cram into the state leading into the census to bolster up our numbers. Its citizens who are choosing representatives, its citizens those representatives are representing, and therefore the apportionment ought to be tied to citizenship. Doctor, youve done an excellent job explaining this issue that i think an overwhelming majority of americans support. I appreciate your testimony and look forward to further questions. Madam chair, i yield the balance of my time. The chair now recognizes representative norton. Thank you, madam chair. This is an important hearing and i appreciate this hearing. I would like to approach this my question from a constitutional basis as i practice constitutional law before i was elected to congress. The Trump Administrations attempt to exclude undocumented immigrants from the citizen count appears to me to be plainly unconstitutional. The language of the constitution is pretty clear, article i, section 2 says the apportionment of representatives shall be based on, quote, the actually enumeration of and here are the words, the whole number of persons, persons. Im underlining that. The 14th amendment says representatives shall be apportioned, again, im quoting, among the several states according to their respective numbers counting the whole number, here again is that word, of persons in each state. Persons. I dont see citizens. And i dont see any other words such as voters. So i really dont need to have taught constitutional law the way i did. You dont need a law degree or a dictionary to go through the exercise that i have just gone through. Whole number of persons in each state, every single person. Since most of you have been directors of the Census Bureau, for the record i would like your answers to the following. Does in your understanding the term whole number of persons in each state include undocumented immigrants living in the United States . Mr. Barbara . Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. I would like to ask each of you based on your experience, your actual experience, a related question. During your tenure as director of the Census Bureau, did you have any doubt that the constitution requires a census count to include undocumented immigrants living in the United States . No, i did not have any doubts. Mr. Pruitt . No. Mr. Groves. No doubts. Mr. Thompson. No doubts. If the Trump Administration had any doubts, it might go to the census own website. Here is a question from that website, bureaus website entitled fighting 2020 census rumors, setting the record straight. Are noncitizens counted in the census . Answer, yes. Everyone counts. The 2020 census counts everyone living in the country including noncitizens. I put this on the record because anything this hearing conclusions we come to should be cased on just such documented evidence. The administration might also have looked at a letter sent to congress from the Justice Department in 1989 when george h. W. Bush was president and attorney general bill barr was the head of the Departments Office of Legal Counsel. That letter affirms the department the Justice Departments conclusion, that both the enumeration clause and the 14th amendment require and here im quoting them, the inhabitants of states who are illegal actions aliens to be included in the census. Mr. Thompson, as the most recent census director on this panel, could you briefly explain why you believe it is important that the census include everyone, every living person, in the United States, not just citizens of voters . Certainly. So the Census Bureau is charged with very difficult task and that is counting everyone in the United States. The Census Bureau has no Enforcement Powers whatsoever. Theyre a Statistical Agency. So they wouldnt even have the ability to try to ascertain someones legal status or not legal status. I might add, if they try to do that, then they would produce counts that were seriously flawed. Thank you very much. Thank you, madam chair. I yield back. The chair now recognizes representative gosar. Thank you very much. Dr. Eastman in your testimony you wrote in june of last year, the consent of the government. Representative is based on such consent and this notion was confirmed in the 14th amendment which excluded indians not taxed because they were not part of the political body. You include then that citizenship is at the core of representation. However, in todays discussion, were again addressing the question of whether we can allocate representation based on the known presence of millions of individuals who are not citizens. Question to you, do you feel that President Trumps memorandum calling for an apportionment count that tals only the number of citizens and legal rensidents in a state is n line with the 14th amendment . I do. Not only is it in line with it, i think its compelled by it. It require that is we apportion our representatives based on who is going to be governed not on people who are here illegally or people who are temporarily visiting or indians not taxed. I think the Supreme Courts decision is very clear. The reason that clause is there, indians are not tax excluded from the count is because theyre not citizens. The indians not taxed right now are Illegal Immigrants who are visiting the country who are not part of our body politic. It has a lot to do with application of our laws to the governed as well as trying to make sure that we are beholding to the country, would it not . It does. Look, the very notion of consent of the governed is that a particular people decide on the kind of government theyre going to have and who the representatives in that government are going to be to governor them in order to best secure the rights that they have from nature and natures god. Its not designed to give other people a voice. Why have we spent the last three years concerned about russian interference in our election if we think anybody from the world over ought to have a say in the choosing and the allotment of our representatives . The fact of the matter is, its the body politic, the particular people who choose our representatives to governor ourselves and to apply laws to other people while theyre visiting here but theyre not the governing body. Theyre not the political regime. Doctor, you actually heard the discussion from the gentlewoman from the district of columbia. She says that specifically that citizens are not enumerated. Can you address that . It says counting the whole number of persons. But it says their representatives and the their refers back to the people in the states, in the several states. The people refers back to the very opening language of the constitution. We the people of the United States. Allotted according to the people in the states and its those persons that were going to count. We have never in our history counted every single individual who happens to be within the state at the time of the census. Weve not counted visitors. Weve not counted indians not taxed, weve got counted diplomats. The principle of reason why we dont count such folks is theyre not part of the person. Theyre not persons that form part of the people of the United States. You cant read that one word in isolation as she did. Its part of the larger language of article i, section 2, as well as the preamble and its part of the principles that are set out in the declaration of independence tied back to the notion of consent of the governed. Thank you. Finally, i would like to express my concern with the actions of this body over the past several years. Partisan leadership has forced this committee to consider this simple question of having a person identify themselves as citizen on numerous times. However, we have only had a few hearings on the topic of issues like hard to count populations an issue for my district and im sure districts of several other members of this committee. This misdistraction has forced this committee to deal with how we ask one question to nonamericans more so than how we ensure americans in these hardtocount populations can participant in the census. Even though the majority states its intentions to count every person. American tax dollars send us to washington, d. C. To oversee the consensus yet partisan leadership has neglected this true intention which concerns members like myself who are focused on ensuring their constituents get the proper representation and protection from their federal government. Maybe we ought to entertain, if were going to give another stimulus, we need to ask that they fulfill filling out their census. If you want to get everybody es vote, maybe thats an inventive that we could go by. I yield back. The chair now recognizes representative lynch. We now recognize representative cooper. Thank you so much chairwoman maloney and also i would like to honor delegate norton. Your line of questioning has exposed the fact that for those not keeping score back home, that virtually every living director of the census supports your view that the support has taken a unilateral and outrageous version of the 14th amendment which is probably unconstitutional. You would think that a country as old and as distinguished as america would be able to count its own citizens and follow the precedent established by every living census director to count not only citizens, but others such as undocumented people in each district. Wouldnt have been hired unless they added some value to the process. So i would like to hear from mr. Pruitt and the others about the effect of this premature and early termination of the census specialist on the accuracy of the count. Let me speak first. Yesterday i talked to the individual who is responsible for the area in which i live. She was very concerned that she would be or her contract would be eliminated before the activity is completed. Shes reached out to many, Many Organizations throughout the area and keeping in contact with them is important to the absolute completion of the census, particularly in areas that we have in our district in our area like salinas and other areas which have significant minority populations. Let me this is bob groves. Let me just comment. If theres one piece of evidence that we have with great assurance, its that local Community Leaders that have the trust of Diverse Communities in their areas are key to the original response, the selfresponses, as well as the nonresponse followup stage. We know this from several decades of work, any interference in their performance will affect the quality of the census and we should avoid it whenever possible. Is it going too far to say this is go ahead. Just one more, we have a vast pro bono labor force out there trying to help us do this census. This was launched in the 2000 census and it never existed before. Its responsible for the fact that we have a selfresponse and a nonresponse of the people who dont respond. Its attributable to that crowd of people and theyre in the thousands. Theyre school teachers, union leaders, theyre cahamber of Commerce Leaders in the thousands to help us do this census and they think their job is to count everyone. What can communities do to prevent the termination of these Partnership Specialists or to if need be substitute the work of these specialists in that crucial month of october . Mr. Thompson . The congress can do something and that is to make sure that the period is extended. So as my former colleagues have all said, a really important component of getting a complete count is getting is getting a message out on the local level that the census is very important to your community and very importantly that the census is completely confidential which is not a message that can go out from washington. We started these programs in the 2000 census and we saw some dramatic decreases in the undercounts of various hardtocount populations. So for the month of october, its critical that local communities, local leaders keep getting those messages out about why the consensus is important to their community and that it is completely confidential, the census doesnt share information with anyone. I thank the chair. I see that my time is expired. The gentleman yields back. The chair recognizes congressman jordan. Congresswoman foxx. Thank you, madam chair. Dr. Eastman, the president s memorandum notes the interpretation of the 14th amendment is subject to judgment. Leaving up to each census, the Census Bureau releases a detail rule on determining residency for each census count. Do you agree that the standard for residency is subject to judgment . I do. And weve routinely altered that. Weve included people who are longterm residents in the state but not shortterm residents. Weve included people who are no longer residents in the state but are abroad because of work or military service or what have you. And every census those parameters so do you believe its appropriate for criteria to change to exclude illegal aliens . I do. Mr. Thompson, when you were director, you drafted the current residency rules for the 2020 census, is that correct . Yes, it is, congresswoman. So its fair to say that you support counting every person residing in the United States legal or illegal, is that correct . Thats correct. Okay. When you were director did you support changing the rules for military residency . I did. And so let me understand this. There are Many Americans who reside overseas including military personnel, yet theyre enumerated as if they were residing in the United States. But they arent residents because theyre not present on april 1, 2020. So using your logic, military personnel deployed abroad should be excluded, is that correct . No, maam. We we did a lot of review of the previous census residents rules. We put them in the federal register for comment. And based on a lot of input, we made the decision that we should count the overseas military in the United States. Okay. Well, that is absolutely the way it should bezd but because we recognize these individuals are normal u. S. Residents but were asked to serve abroad and will return when theyre Short Service is over, theyre serving the country and deserve to be counted and represented. But their representation is diluted by illegal aliens being counted even though they have broken our laws to come here. Mr. Thompson, another question for you, the 2020 census residency criteria changed how Prison Inmates are counted. For typical 2020 census, Prison Inmates are enumerated at their prison which is technically their residence on census day. Is this correct . Thats correct. And thats where theyve been counted in most censuses. Okay. Well, its very controversial because some people believe that they should be counted at their residents preincarceration because thats their normal residents, not the prison. Some people argue youre diluting the representation of inmates by counting them at their prison sites. So you believe, though, that Prison Inmates representation is diluted. Do you believe its diluted because of how the census enumerates their location . So the final decisions on where to count the prisoners was made after i left government service. But i support the Census Bureaus decision to count the prisoners where theyre incarcerated. So you believe the fair representation of Prison Inmates, why do you support the by supporting the counting of illegal aliens . Throughout my experience at the Census Bureau, which included 27 years as a career employee and then four years as a political appointee as director, i operate under the guidance that the census was to count everyone in the United States regardless of status. Thank you, madam chair. I yield back. Thank you. We now recognize congressman lynch. Can you hear me . We can hear you. Great. Thank you, madam chair, for holding this very important and timely hearing and i want to thank all of our witnesses as well. I would like to ask a question of our witnesses. I notice that back in april you each signed a public letter supporting the bureaus request to delay this process and i think mr. Pruitt, you were quoted in one of the articles that i read, you said that the truth is that the only thing in charge of this census right now is the virus, not the bureau, not the president. And the virus will be in charge until it isnt. Mr. Pruitt, would it be correct to say that the coronavirus presents an enormous challenge to the Consensus Bureau a huge challenge, unprecedented. Yeah. Now, the reason that im assuming that the reason that you requested the delay was to give the bureau more time. This is the largest and most complex census ever conducted in this country and then you add and thats in normal times. And then you add in the pandemic and the limitation while the enumerators and people being hunkered down. I guess im assuming that you all wrote that letter based on it being in the best interest of the country, is that correct . Yes, sir. Yes, sir. Yes, sir. Yes, sir. Now this most recently memorandum that the president submitted last week directing the Census Bureau to take a whole different approach to this census, in the middle of the census, it seems to me that this memorandum of questionable legality, really, will require the bureau to dedicate considerable resources and a huge workaround in light of the new memorandum. Would that be a correct assumption here . Yes. It would. Yeah. Yes. And so youve got this whole shift in resources, this redeployment and a whole Different Program thats been put in as of last week, directing the Census Bureau to change their plans and yet monday the Census Bureau also posted on its website that despite this huge demand on resources that arose last week with the president s memorandum, the Census Bureau says that its working towards this plan to complete the field Data Collection by october 31st, 2020. Do you think it is feasible to dedicate all of those resources to the object of the new memorandum and yet not have the accuracy of the census impacted . Right now the census, i believe, sir, is at risk of being inadequate to do the tasks is charged to do. At serious risk. And i would like to take as much of the burden off of them as we can, thats operational burden, timing burden, and so forth. I was extremely disappointed when it turned out that they were not going to get the fourmonth extension going on into 2021 which we were counting on and they were planning around that and then suddenly theres a reversal on that decision. In my sense, the chances of having a census Accurate Enough to use is unclear, very much unclear. Whether well even have a census. Thats why the debate about the illegals or undocumented is beside the point if were not even going to have a census that we can take to the American People and thats what im worried about. Thank you very much, mr. Pruitt. My time is expired and i yield back. Thank you. Thank you. I now recognize representative palmer. Thank you, madam chair. I have a couple of reports, one of which is from the Pew Research Center about the nature of people who are here illegally. About 40 of the people who are here illegally are here wont even be here for the next census. Given that, the transient status makes it even more problematic to includenct1 unauthorized, noncitizens, people who are here illegally and here temporarily to be counted for apportionment, dr. Eastman . Yes, i agree. And i think it applies to legal temporary immigrants as well, people on temporary work visas or student visas. The point being is that these are not people who will be here to participate in our government in any form or fashion. I would like to also point out that 60 of the unauthorized immigrants, the people who are residing here illegally, reside in just 20 metros. By violating federal law by establishingdzj could cause haro those that are not. Depending on the illegal immigrant population those that encourage illegal immigration stand to gain a lot of seats in the house of representatives said votes in the Electoral College to the detriment of other states. Doesnt that create an incentive for certain states and places to declare themselves sanctuary to certain places to declare for w themselves sanctuaries, to give benefits, to give protection from prosecution for whatever h crimes they might commit to increase the number of people in those areas, to give them this e advantage . Isnt that a ady in rational thing to do if youre already acting in contradiction to federal law . Its rational in the short term, representative palmer, an not so much in the long term. C but alabama is likely to lose ar seat in congress and anes electoral vote for president. Speaking of rational, i try to be rational. I try to be linear in my thinking. I start and follow evidence to where it might lead. Your points early on about the right to selfgovernment resides with the citizens, not with noncitizens whether theyre herl legally or illegally. And we dont allow foreign citizens to run for office, do we . No, we dont. Okay. We dont allow people who are here from Foreign Countries here legally or illegally to make Campaign Contributions to u. S. Candidates, do we . No, we do not. And presumably we dont allow people who are here from Foreign Countries, whether theyre here legally or illegally, to vote in our elections, do we . Its illegal for them to vote. Although weve got evidence that large numbers have voted. Thats why i say presumably. Let me ask each of the other panelists, are those laws fair . Mr. Pruitt, are those laws fair . Should we allow foreign citizens to run for office or to vote in our elections . Its a yes or no. Let me just its a yes or no. Should we allow foreign citizens to run for office, should we allow foreign citizens to make Campaign Contributions, should we another them to vote in elections whether theyre here legally or illegally . I agree with the law. Okay. Thats a great legal answer. Mr. Thompson, yes or no . I agree with the laws of the United States thats you agree that we shouldnt allow that. Dr. Eastman, i think i know your answer. Give me a quick answer. Yes or no . Yes, absolutely. If thats the case, why in the world would we think its it should be legal to allow people who are here illegally or legally to be counted for apportionment to influence our government when close to 40 of them wont be here for the next census . Can you answer that . It doesnt make sense. It doesnt make sense and i dont think its consistent with the theory and the text of the constitution, either. I thank the gentleman. I yield back. I would like to enter these documents into the official record. See what these documents are. Yes, maam. Theyre documents from the Pew Research Center and one of them is from the Migration Population Institute located here in washington, d. C. Without objection. I thank the chairwoman. I yield back. I recognize representative conley. Thank you, madam chairwoman, and thank you for your long leadership trying to preserve an accurate census. Your leadership has meant a great deal and has served our country well. Thank you. Ive been listening to this discussion. Dr. Eastman would be apparently very happy with the decision of roger tommy and the Supreme Court that ruled on dred scott because in that decision, they decided that no africanamerican, free or slave, was a citizen of the United States, deserves of any of the privileges of white people. That was the language of the ruling. No blacks would have been counted in the census. And we would have had millions of americans declared noncitizens under dr. Eastmans logic, not counted in a census and we would have had no picture of america, especially at the southern part of america in terms of the actual demographics, just how powerful the numbers were of africanamericans. According to the constitution who were singled out to be counted as three of a person for the purpose of a census which inflated the numbers of southern representation in the congress at the time. Immigrants throughout American History have been subject to this kind of smear and innuendo. Theyre all criminals, theyre all trying to cheat. States are using them to inflate their numbers. There were movements in the 19th century, the nonothing party, to ban them, to deny them the vote. Irish immigrants, there was a big movement in new york to deny irish immigrants the right to vote because they were illiterate, they worshiped a foreign religion, they werent really americans. This kind of nativism and bigotry frankly has no place in the carrying out of the census. The language of the constitution for a crowd that talks about originalism, the language is clear, it says persons. It doesnt say citizens. It says persons. It wants to get a feel, how many people are here at a given time. How many people are residing in the United States of america. Not what their future intentions are. Not what their status is. Are they residing here . For the purpose of understanding the population of the United States at any given time. And thats how the census has been carried out. Let me ask mr. Pruitt and all of the former directors could answer this as well. Have we ever adopted, to your knowledge, in the carrying out of the census in modern times, a selective process of not enumerating certain individuals because of their status . No, sir. No, sir. Not to my knowledge. Mr. Groves . Mr. Groves . Mr. Thompson . No. And why do you think we need to have a count of the people, the persons residing in the United States . Why is that important . Why is dr. Eastman right. Lets only tell citizens, fullblooded american citizens and nobody else . My quick answer on that is they theyre paying taxes if they put gasoline in their car. Theyre paying property taxes if they live some place. Theyre functioning as People Living in the country. And more than that, you have a really difficult, difficult situation to uncount them. I dont think the other members of the committee have paid enough attention to my first point. We do not know, the Census Bureau does not know how to do what the president is asking them today and its going to hurt the census and therefore were at risk of not having a census in 2020. And, mr. Thompson, is it the case that, for example, throughout American History this is what weve done. We counted immigrants, whether they were citizens or not, in the 19th century, at the turn of the 20th century, as well as currently, isnt that the case . That is the case. Yeah. So what dr. Eastman is propounding sounds reasonable except it would fly in the face of over 200 years of practice and American History and in my view, would flaunt the actual words of the constitution of the United States. Thank you. I yield back. Thank you. The chair now recognizes representative roy. Before i start, which of the experts remain available i believe mr. Groves had an appointment at 11 00 and had to leave. Mr. Barra ba, thompson and pruitt. If i recall correctly, there was a case in which Justice Thomas in 2001 in dissent clarified that theres a split in the circuits and a split in the law, ninth circuit versus the fourth and the fifth, as to what the courts position would be on the question at hand, on apportionment and what were talking about. Is that true and would you expound on that very briefly, because i need to move on . It was a case out of hawaii that was dealt with. They wanted to apportion locally based on citizen population rather than total population. The court upheld that and there was language in it that strongly suggested such was compelled by the notion of Representative Government, the judge on the ninth circuit specifically said that even though the decision wasnt absolutely require that technically, the logic of it compels it. I think thats right. Can i go back . Representative conley, i know youre protected by the speech and debate clause, that doesnt mean i should not respond to the slanderous statement you made. I do not defend the decision in dred scott. Im a vigorous defender of the dissenting opinions in that. Africanamericans were treated as citizens in this country and he was wrong. I will not let you get away with slander. Professor, i was going to give you an opportunity to respond. Im glad you did. I thought it was irresponsible of my colleague to ask a question along those lines. Im glad you responded. It was not appropriate to direct that towards you. On a very debatable question, very real question, and we can all agree theres a split in the Juris Prudence or a difference of opinion in the Juris Prudence on whether or not apportionment should be accounted for in the way were discussing. And this is a live question. Citizenship in fact matters. Citizenship must matter. If were to be a nation of laws and were going to have citizens vote, citizens running for office, that we should have a robust debate and discussion and frankly this body, this congress ought to act. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle spent last year fighting every ounce of effort on the part of this administration or body and republicans in this body to try to ask a question, a simple question, on the census as to whether or not youre a citizen or not. The vast majority of americans recognize that this is an important question to ask. But we agree. At a bare minimum, theres a split of the Juris Prudence on this question, is that correct . Thats correct. Thank you. A question here for mr. Barabba, pruitt or thompson, i want to get your yes or no on whether im characterizing this appropriately. My understanding of the way the census counts is that we have something called count implementation. And we have something called characteristic implementation. We have status, we have occupancy, and we have household size count. What does this mean for the average listener . It means that we make stuff up. It means that we have situations where we have an address, we cant find the house, and we impute to that address the count of a house nearby. It means that we go through and say, we find the house and theres somebody there, but we cant find them. We say, well, you know, what, the nextdoor neighbor, theres five white people in that house, were going to put five white people in this house or we have household size. We dont know if its one or two or three, but were going to guess its five or ten based on whos next door. We have characteristic imputation where we go into race and characteristics. This is a reality of what our Census Bureau does in order to achieve numbers. Theres another thing where we have the community survey, the acs, and i would ask mr. Eastman if you would jump in here real quick. Is it not correct that the acs is used and that the court acknowledges that its appropriate for it to use those estimates and sampling for purposes of the application of the Voting Rights act. Yes, thats correct. And so my question here would be would it not therefore of course be appropriate to use if youre a state for redistricting purposes. Not apportionment. For redistricting purposes. The same data. If youre going to use it for the Voting Rights act. Yes, absolutely and its more current because its taken every year. And you should use the acs in this case if were going to be doing apportionment. You can use that for apportionment. I believe we could. Certainly to coincide with the census. My question to the former directors of the Census Bureau, am i incorrect that the Census Bureau does in fact have to fill holes and make assumptions on data when they go house to house, when they get into this and imputation is a way that the Census Bureau does that. A yes or no and ill finish my questions, madam chairwoman. Mr. Thompson . Thank you for unmuting me. The Census Bureau has used a technique called count imputation because if they dont do anything, that means theyre assuming everything is vacant or nonexistent which isnt the case either. Mr. Pruitt . Yes, its a longstanding practice. Its used as rare as possible. You would much rather get a direct response. But we dont always get direct responses and we dont just say, oh, well, thats too bad. Well have to go. These are wellestablished technical, statistical processes that have given us a more complete census than we would otherwise have. Mr. Barabba. I concur with my colleagues comments. Thank you all. We now recognize congressman raskin. Thank you very much. Thanks for calling this superimportant hearing. And its really wonderful to hear all of the prior census directors who converge around a very simple conclusion which is that the president s proposal is a radical break from history and a radical break from the text of the constitution, a radical break from the structure and the spirit and the meaning of the constitution and so basically every methodology we have for interpreting what the constitution means supports the proposition that weve been doing it right for more than two centuries. Weve been counting everybody. Thats the way weve done it. Theres no reason to overthrow that right now and what were getting really from the administration is a whole series of attacks on the election. Attack on mailin balloting. The president threatening not to observe the final results of the election if he doesnt like it and so on. This is all part of kind of an anticipated temper tantrum by the president. I wanted to correct a couple of things that were floating out out there, specifically about voting and citizenship. And there seemed to be this false equation between voting and citizenship. The Supreme Court has been very clear that they dont imply one another. Theyre obviously large categories of people who are citizens who cant vote starting with children. And historically, the vast majority of citizens couldnt vote because women couldnt vote, as well as children, and people who werent landowners and property owners. There were lots of people who could vote who were not citizens for the vast majority of American History and even today there are lots of municipalities and localities which allow people to vote without regard to citizenship in local elections. But the way that it existed through the 18th and 19th and really up to the early 20th century was that what mattered was race qualifications, gender qualifications, property and wealth qualifications for voting. If you were a Christian White male property owner, i didnt make any difference what your, quote, citizenship was and that was a confusing concept for more than a century whether there was determined at the state or federal level. We didnt have these rigid ideas about citizenship that are being propounded right now. That was a conservative position having to do with landowner ship and Property Ownership and race and gender for a long time. It wasnt until we started getting immigrants coming in from Southern Europe and other places that that turned around. You should check out the history leading up to the civil war and the admission of kansas and nebraska and a number of the other states there because it was the Republican Party which was the great champion of suffrage in america and the advocate of the idea that if you would be willing to move out to the midwestern and western states, you should be allowed to vote before you became a citizen. That was lincolns position. That was the position of the Republican Party. It was the southeast position that there were all of these radical immigrants coming over from europe bringing antislavery ideas, that it was their position that they shouldnt be included for that reason. In fact, if you look at article i of the confederate constitution, it says you must be a citizen of the confederacy in order to vote. Something we dont have in the u. S. Constitution which is why nonu. S. Citizens could vote for most of our history. A position on the other side, you need to be a citizen of the United States in order to be a member of a Corporate Board of directors and to vote in a corporation in america or to own stock in america. That would be a really startling position. It seems to flow from what theyre saying. Let me ask i got curious about this question of indians not taxed that was repeated so joyfully by one of the witnesses and i wonder, mr. Pruitt, what is the situation today of indians not taxed . Certainly there are children who are native americans who are not taxed but also adults who are not paying taxes. Are they counted in of todays census despite the constitutional tax . Yes, they are. Thats interesting. Let me ask another question of you, mr. Prewitt, if we were actually to go ahead and adopt the president s proposal now we see why, of course, they were pushing for their Citizenship Question, which was struck down by the Supreme Court as lawless and a violation of the whole administrative procedures act. But now we know why they were doing it. If we were to go ahead with this, how would they actually since we dont know whos a citizen and whos not a citizen, how would they go ahead and try to make that work . In my judgment, there is no way. This is what worries me about this initiative. The expert on administrative records at the Census Bureau for many, many years, and i will now quote her. Shes now with georgetown university. To produce a good number, that is a good number separating out the documented from the undocumented, you need to be able to draw a clear line between the two categories, that that sharp definition doesnt exist in the administrative records of the Census Bureau. This is abarticle in Science Magazine just published yesterday. And so were all anxious about this initiative, not because of the arguments tlar being made about so forth and so on, its what its going to do to the census itself in 2020. And look, if we dont come up closer to 100 , then were not coming, then were in trouble. So, just to conclude, its not only unrooted in the text of the constitution and impact cal, but its a danger to having the real census counted and completed. Thank you very much for your indulgence, madam chair. I yield back. Congressman hice. Hes online. You need to unmute yourself, congressman hice. Okay. Okay. Great. Sorry. Thank you, madam chair. Listen, i want to thank all our witnesses for being here today. Unfortunately i think its largely a waste of your time as yet again, it is ours. I mean, we continue not doing our job of oversight, and is this case specifically as it relates to the census. We have here were four months into this census and this is the first time weve had a hearing about it. Weve only 120 days into this, were just now getting around to it, and as mr. Prewitt shared a little earlier, we may not even have a census this go around because of the pandemic and issues. And yet the irresponsibility of this committee to do proper oversight, this is only the third full Committee Hearing of the year, from my count. And its just unacceptable that my colleagues been willing to show up for work as we have done in the Republican Party, perhaps we would be able to continue our oversight, and to somehow think now that we are engaged in an emergency over this and even in this emergency hearing were still not providing oversight as to whats happening with the census is just unthinkable to me and highly irresponsible. And i would ask the chair if we could get back to the order of what this committee is supposed to be involved with. But as it related to right now, again, somehow think that it is unreasonable for unconstitutional for us as a nation to have the number of citizens who are in this country as well as the total number of people in this country, its just unthinkable to me. This is somehow a radical break for us to know the number of citizens as well as noncitizens is, in itself, an absurd may of thinking about all of this to me. But here, nonetheless, we are doctor, i appreciate the testimony youve given and the answers youve given. I know this has already been covered, but i think its worth reiterating again. Is the president within his authority to direct a memorandum to the Census Bureau . I believe he is, and i think the Supreme Courts decision underscores that. And likewise, hes within his authority to ask the bureau to send apportionment account that includes citizens and legal residents. Is that correct . Thats correct. Okay. And just reiterate again why this is so important that we have a count of citizens, not just illegals as well. We need to know im fine if we want to know the total number here. But the critical aspect is knowing the citizens. Again, emphasize why that is the case. The importance of knowing the citizens and apportioning according to the citizen distribution is because its the sids that control the government. Its not foreigners that control y our government. Thats one of the basic premises set out in the declaration of independence. Absolutely. I dont see whats so complicated about this. Its illegal for a noncitizen to vote. Its illegal for them to be involved in our political process. Yet now for all practical purposes we have a political class, a political party, that is determined to give citizens of Foreign Countries the right to vote in our federal elections, to be involved in impacting our federal elections. This whole thing, to me, ought to be deeply troubling. And at worst, it should be seen as election interference. For us to enable or fight in behalf of individuals who are illegally in this country to impact the voting power of the citizens of this country is quite frankly, if you look back i dont know, dr. Eastman, if you caught any of the d. C. Statehood. Its the same thing then as it is now. Its all about gaining and strengthening political power for the democratic party. It shrugs off all norms, it shrugs off common sense. It shrugs off the law itself. I would just thank you again for your testimony here today. And i would implore my colleagues on the other side to end these show boat hearings, and lets get back to the work of good census oversight. With that, madam chair, i yield back. I thank the gentleman for his testimony. I would just like to respond to his attack. I read the president s census memo carefully, and i believe that it is blatantly unconstitutional and that complying with his memo would violate federal law. That is why we called this important hearing. And id like to say you dont have to take sir, i did interrupt you. May i complete . You do not have to take my word for it. All four of four former census directors that served both republican and democratic president s said that they also believe that the president s memo appears to violate the constitution and existing law. So, this is serious. And i now recognize congressman rouda. Thank you, madam chair. It must be exhausting for republicans when the president tweets out lies and you are forced to defend it. It must be exhausting to be a republican when the president of the United States holds a press conference and sells Snake Oil Salesman cures for the coronavirus. And it must be extremely exhausting to come in here and defend the president of the United States when he takes unconstitutional actions, such as he has done here. Candidly, i feel sorry for you. I feel sorry that members of the house of representatives of the United States of america are afraid to speak their mind, to speak the opinions that they hold, to speak the truth that they know in their hearts and their mind and defend this president at all costs. Defending the indefensible. And it seems that the primary argument that has been stated, as representative raskin pointed out at least a half dozen times in this hearing, is that indians not taxed were not counted. The utter stupidity in that statement lies in the fact that undocumented immigrants last year, according to the Internal Revenue service, paid 9 billion in payroll taxes. According to the Internal Revenue service, undocumented immigranted paid 12 billion in Social Security benefits more than they received. And according to the institute of taxation and economic policy, undocumented immigrants paid 12 billion in state and local coffers. Yet here we are. Here we sit today because of this memorandum by this president telling us clearly whats most important to this president , yet he sit here today 140,000 of our fellow americans are dead. Tens of thousands more americans will die in the coming months because of the utter lack of leadership by this president. The economic collapse of our country is unfolding before our eyes because a president is unwilling to do what is necessary as the leader of the United States to ensure that we take the actions we need to take to protect americans. And tens of millions of americans are out of work, struggling to figure out how to pay rent, pay the mortgage, pay medical bills and put food on the table for their families, yet here we are today because of this president showing us this and the millions that follow him what is important to them. Not as a democrat, not as a former republican, but as an american, we are better than this. I yield back. Thank you. I now recognize representative green. Thank you, chairwoman and Ranking Member. And thanks to our witnesses. The right to vote is sacred. As americans, were blessed to live in a country that respects the timehonored tradition of one person one vote. Wars have been fought. Marches have been led. Blood, sweat, and tears have been shed defending and advancing this fundamental right. Unfortunately, democrats are attacking this very right and are trying to disenfranchise american citizens in order to gain more power. Some states, such as california, have already flirted with openly allowing Illegal Immigrants to vote in state and local elections. Currently in california, you can register to vote online. All they require is you check a box certified that youre a u. S. Citizen and you either provide a Social Security number or a california drivers license. But remember, drivers license, which they also grant to Illegal Immigrants. Disturbingly, the l. A. Times reported over 1 million Illegal Immigrants had drivers licenses in l. A. And that was 2019. Democrats dont care about one person one vote. They care about attaining power at any point even if they have to attack american citizenship and the right to vote. Now democrats are continuing their offensive on the constitution by attacking the 2020 census. Theyve managed to politicize every step in the census process, even criticizing President Trump for trying to include a Citizenship Question. Moreover, democrats are ignoring history and the rule of law. The Citizenship Question has been included on most censuses from 1820 to 1950 and as recently as 2000. Additionally, the Supreme Court ruled in 2019. The question of inclusion is perfectly legal. Despite this, the democrat shenanigans managed to get the question removed. The Citizenship Question when used to determine apportionment is a simple matter of fairness and common sense. American citizens have certain rights that noncitizens do not have, the most fundamental of which is the right to choose our leaders. Democrats are eager to cry foreign interference when it comes to the russian hoax, but if we count Illegal Immigrants in apportionment, particularly those new to our country, how is that not foreign interference . I guess all russia has to do is send a few thousand people about our porous southern border into california and they get an extra vote in congress. How is counting Illegal Immigrants in the census or apportionment process not an assault on the fundamental rights of every american citizen. I would like to ask my democrat colleagues if an illegal immigrant cannot vote, whats a point in citizenship . Why not have france vote in our elections . Whats the point . Theres no escaping the fact that including Illegal Immigrants dilutes the vote of every single american citizen. Not only is it unfair. It creates incentive for states to accept more illegal immigration. Including Illegal Immigrants, quote, perversely incentivizes states to encourage more illegal immigration in violation of u. S. Laws and the well being of u. S. Citizens all in the means to gain more representation. Simply put, those here illegally should have no say. The democrats are simply grabbing power at the expense of the American People again. The democrats have actually made the point of the unfairness of counting Illegal Immigrants for apportionment in this committee today. Many of the Democrat Members have asked in survey fashion a series of questions of each of our witnesses. The answer, yes, no, yes, yes, each time. The problem is this. Its a bias sample. They allowed us one witness, and they provided three witnesses who share their opinion. Its unfair. Its biased, and its exactly what well get if we count Illegal Immigrants in apportionment. It will misrepresent the votes of americans in states that abide by our laws. The assertion that the opinion of the census directors is somehow reflective of the people of the america is absurd. There are three voices out of 330 Million People. Their opinion counts 3 out of 330 million. Rather than helping to get the Census Bureau an accurate count during a very difficult time with the pandemic, democrats are further throwing a wrench in the process by coupling statutory relief with the poison pill. Its shameful. Democrats are more about power than they are about the integrity of our elections or the fundamental right of every american citizen. Thank you chairman, and i yield back. I thank the gentleman for his testimony, and i do want to point out that the Census Bureau is not asking people about the citizenship status on the 2020 census, which the Trump Administration wanted it to do. They tried to do that. But this was struck down by the Supreme Court of the United States of america, so the Citizenship Question was removed. I now recognize Debbie Wasserman schultz, representative schultz from the great state of florida. Thank you, madam chair. Im going to present some convenience acts that really fly in the face of the ridiculous argument that was just made by the gentleman who previously spoke. And that is that in the section from census. Gov labelled the importance of apportionment, it reads, article 1 section 2 of the u. S. Constitution mandates that an apportionment of representatives among the states must be carried out every ten years. Therefore apportionment is the original legal purpose of the census as intended by our nations founders. Apportionment is the process of dividing the 435 memberships seats in the u. S. House of representatives among the 50 states based on the state population counts that result from each census. The apportionment results will be the first data published from the 2020 census and those results will determine the amount of Political Representation each state will have in congress for the next ten years. Not only does the constitution not qualify what type of person or category of individual will be counted for apportionment, the Trump Administrations own census b Census Bureau specifically leaves out any reference to categorizing the type of individual that we are counting and whether or not they will count towards apportionment. The Founding Fathers intended that everyone living in the United States other than originally counting slaves tragically has 3 5 of a person, should be counted for the decennial census specifically for apportionment. So, whats going on here is the u. S. Supreme court scuttled the administrations bigoted plans d to try to intimidate people who are not citizens from answering the census, and thus being able to be counted and counted for apportionment purposes, and instead are trying to back door the Citizenship Question by using an executive order to not count those who are not citizens in apportionment. Its not constitution. Its not legal. And its transparent in its really venomous political intent. By question is that we have a number of experts here, and i want to just go through a couple of key facts. This committees investigation showed that the likely reason for the Citizenship Question was electoral politics. I would like to ask mr. Bara bah, do you believe its consistent with the real objective for the proposed Citizenship Question . That was for mr. Barabba. I did not hear my name. Im sorry. Thats okay. Would you repeat the question please . Sure, madam chair, if i could have a few additional seconds to make sure i dont lose my time. Do you agree that the policies proposed by President Trumps memo last week to exclude undocumented immigrants from the apportionment account are consistent with their objective in originally proposing the Citizenship Question . I believe what hes trying to do is to have an effect on the outcome of the employment process to this state. Could you be a little more specific . If you count fewer people, as i pointed out in my testimony, who are low income, youre more likely to not vote for the president because of his positions. Mr. Prewitt, can you explain why fears in the immigrant community about the census would depress Response Rates and ultimately lead to a less accurate census count . Yes, because they are afraid the answers will be used against them as was unfortunately produced in the 1941 period with the japanese american. 60 years ago were still talking about that. It cast a very long shadow other the census. And what were going through now will cast another very long shadow. If they are afraid that it will be used against them as a group, then they have a reason to sort of dodge it and not respond to it and hide out. Thank you. Mr. Thompson, after the issuance of this recent memorandum it is harder to escape the conclusion that the Trump Administration is attempting to manipulate the census count for political purposes. If this behavior was normalized what effect do you think this will have in ensuring an accurate count in the decennial census . Thats an excellent question, congresswoman. It is incredibly important that the census be viewed as a nonpolitical objective enterprise because it is the Foundation One of the cornerstones of our democracy. And perceptions that its politicized, as dr. Prewitt said, will have a long, long life span and will make it very difficult to take not only this census but censuses in the future. Thank you, madam chair. I yield back the balance of my time. Thank you. We now recognize representative higgins. By remote. Hes online. Representative higgins. Madam chair. Thank you. Thank you, madam chair. This type of antiamerican rhetoric that im hearing from my colleagues across the aisle today is exactly why regular american patriots dont like politicians and dont trust the gormt. What are the democrats trying to hide right now . Its the number one thing, its the major point that is incredibly clear across america from sea to shining sea by hardworking american citizens, Voting Rights in america and congressional representation in america belong to american citizens, period. Our nation has changed through the generations. The census is conducted primarily for apportionment every ten years. This is a challenge that has evolved and changed over the course of time. And what we now face is a very clear fact that illegal residents of or country or illegal occupiers of our country has significantly affected representation. What are the democrats hiding . Illegals interfere with our republic when it comes to congressional apportionment and voting. President trumps new policy would restore congressional representation to its rightful owners. The citizens of america. What are the democrats hiding . Why would we not want to know how many citizens versus no noncitizens are in our country . Ill tell you why. America, i hope youre paying attention. Estimates range from 12 million to 25 million illegal aliens in this country. Thats 700,000 constituents per Congressional District, thats 17 to 35 Congressional Districts that can be swayed by illegal aliens within our country. The 150th Congress Majority held republican was 47. The congress, the democrats hold a 34 vote majority. The reality is that illegal aliens present in our country, if counted for apportionment, can actually do shift the balance of one man one vote away from densities of population of american citizens towards densities of population of Illegal Immigrants. And my colleagues across the aisle dont want america to know that but i do because we prefer to speak the truth. And i take offense to some of the language thats been used towards myself and my colleagues by the gentleman prior. You dont know our heart, sir, good sir. Youre calling us minions and other things. Youre wrong for that and you know it. Americas watching and they know it. Mr. Eastman, you are a constitutional scholar, are you not, good sir . Mr. Eastman, please unmute yourself. My question was, are you a constitutional scholar, sir . Madam, i would like this time observed. Lets try again. Yes, sir, mr. Eastman. My question was are you a constitutional scholar, sir . Please unmute yourself, sir. Yes, i am. Back on track here. Welcome to 21st technology that doesnt work for remote Committee Hearings. I urge my colleagues to return to regular order. Mr. Eastman, are you familiar with the president s new policy that were discussing today . Can it not be challenged in court as constitutional or unconstitutional . [ inaudible ]. Your audio is not functioning, sir. Lets try this. Is that better. Yes, sir, thats better. Madam chair, i would like this time observed. Yes. Mr. Eastman, my question to you is very simple. Youre familiar with President Trumps policy regarding the census that were discussing today. Can this policy be challenged constitutionally in court or can it not . Is that not our process . Well, its already been challenged in our Different Cases in court. I believe when it gets to the Supreme Court, based on the franklin versus massachusetts case, the trump policy will be upheld. And in the interest of time, if the President Trumps policy is overturned by the Supreme Court, which is our judicial procedure, i would encourage my colleagues to wrap their passion up in a judicial challenge properly. If the president s policy is overturned by the Supreme Court, then thats it, isnt it . Well, thats yes, thats it. And congress would certainly have a say with constitutional clarifying amendment, but i believe the constitution allows for the policy already. Very well. So, prior Supreme Court rulings that have established by majority rule in the Supreme Court that an agencys action is final when an agency completes his decisionmaking process, specifically as regards to the census,that the president is not required to transmit the secretarys report directly to Congress Rather than be used as the data from the census in making his statement. Are you familiar with that ruling, as written by Justice Oconner . Yes, i am. Thats the franklin versus massachusetts case, which ive been referring. Yes, sir, it certainly is. So, madam chair, i thank you for your indulgence. We had some technical difficulties from the gentleman. I just want to clarify whats before us today is the balance of power of the representative republic of american citizens that we are supposed to serve. And if you if any of my colleagues or fellow americans across the country have a problem with the president s decision, then by all means, follow the constitutional process by which you would challenge that as to article 3 of the judicial process. Madam chair, i yield. Thank you. I now recognize congressman sarbanes from maryland. Congressman sarbanes. Thanks very much, madam chair. Can you hear me . Yes, we can. Okay. Appreciate the hearing. You know, fundamentally, you cant run a country if you dont know how many people are in your country. And thats the purpose of the census, plain and simple. Its not a Democratic Power grab. This is a patriotic exercise that we engage in every ten years to know whos in our country, how many people, so we know how to provide services and resources and function as a country. Thats what this is about. This is about being able to function properly and efficiently as a country so we know where to build the roads and the hospitals and the schoo schools. I want to know how many people live in my district. Whatever district im representing as a member of congress, i need to know how many people there are living in that district so i know what the schools should be, how many resources should come behind Community Health clinics, whats the capacity of the hospitals that we need and our other health care providers. Thats the purpose of this. And if we dont take the census seriously, were not going to be able to function as a country in an effective way. Thats what this is about. This isnt about political power grabs. This is about doing what makes common sense and what our constitution calls upon us to do every ten years. Now, i dont want to belabor what the president has done because its very clear, based on the testimony and i think an easy reading of the constitution, that what the president has proposed most recently is not only unconstitutional, its completely unworkable. Id like the former directors, if they would, to give me your perspective on this very delicate line that were walking right now. On the one hand, we know that the census needs to be completed within a certain period of time is that the data all works. And the further we get away from april 1st, the more potentially compromised that can wibe. On the other hand, we dont want to rush the census in a way that would undermine its accuracy. And i fear that the president is seeking to do that now frr, fro what i understand. Hes trying to, sort of, telescope the processer othe he. So, could you speak and any of you are invited to weigh in, the former directors. Tell me what your greatest concerns are right now about our ability to conduct this census in an efficient way to gather up the data, to be confident in it, and how do we navigate this window that we have to pull that off . And ill turn it back to the directors. Well, i can start. The career people who are experts at making the census requested a fourmonth extension of the deadlines thats in their title. They know what theyre doing. They know what its going to take to get the census done. Not extending those deadlines is going to put tremendous pressure on the Census Bureau. Its not clear what kind of Quality Counts they can produce if they dont get the extension. So, it could be a really big problem. Mr. Prewitt. Yeah, i would just add to that. As i tried to say in my opening testimony, i really do think right now we ought to be appointing an independent Apolitical Group of statisticians and otherwise informed people, National Academy of sciences could certainly do this, and look at metrics. What will be telling us in a census that is inadequate for the purposes of reapportionment . Its inadequate for the purposes of spending over a trillion dollars. And its inadequate as a base number for all of our other surveys for ten years. I think were at risk of giving to the country a set of numbers which will make what our previous what you said at the very beginning. You want to know how many coming to school, how many in the hospitals, whats the traffic load, whats emergency preparation. All of those depend upon number. And i am very worried that we may not have those numbers at a level at which we are able to give them to the president at the end of this year. So, the extra four months is really important. Thanks very much. Madam chair, a appreciate the opportunity. And i think what were hearing is the politics need to be kept away from this space. The president s trying to politicize it. We need to keep it in a safe zone and get this right and do it properly for the benefit of the country. I yield back. Chairwoman, could i make a comment, please . Thank you. Whos wanting to make a comment . I would just add to what my colleagues have said that the manner in can this president is positioning his question on citizenship would be more is designed to be alarming to noncitizens. And its this approach that is going to make it difficult for the census to do its job. Thank you. I now recognize representative robin kelly from remote. Kelly. Thank you madam chair. Thank you. A couple of points i wanted to make first, that ive been on oversight for over seven years. And most of that time, i was in the minority. And i never remember the minority having more than one witness. I just wanted to make that point. And then i thought i heard one of my colleagues say that we want to have the undocumented count because that will help us with our sanctuary citizens. Well, chicagos a sanctuary citizen and new york is a sanctuary citizen. And we already know that illinois will lose one congressional seat. So, counting the undocumented is not helping us over another state that you may represent. That doesnt run account the undocumented. I wanted to ask mr. Rose if undocumented immigrants do not respond to the census either because they are afraid of being identified or unmotivated because of this memo, what affect do you think this will have on congressional funds, and will it affect some communities more than others . If im unmuted, ill respond dr. Groves is left. Thats right. Im sorry. Ive been waiting so long. Ill give you a very quick response. Right now with respect to 62 of the public that has sent in a form, thats a highly variable number state by state. It goes up as high as 72 and it goes down as low as 52 . Thats a 20 difference between those two states. And if that carries forward for the rest of the census, that means youre going to have states that are counted close to 100 and states that are counted at 80 . And that is not a functional census. Hugely disprorportionate. If somebody is 100 and somebody is 80, the one thats 100 is going to get 20 more because its going to be spent somewhere. So, its a very serious issue. Another thing i think about is one of the counties i represent is cook docounty. Even if someone is undocumented, the county or the city, they still help. They just dont leave people to die or to be homeless and that kind of thing. They still feel that responsibility, and none of that is free. You know, it costs money. Yes. So, thats why its so important. Madam chair, i yield back early. Thank you. The gentlelady yields back. Representative grossman is recognized. Thank you for this hearing. The first question i have is for dr. Eastman. The president s memo, as i understand it, doesnt include distribution of federal funds. Its only for the purposes of apportionment. Am i wrong in that . No, youre absolutely correct on that. The two are distinct, and actually the Constitutional Authority is different for each of the two. Okay. So, this idea that if we dont count people here illegally is going to result in, say, less federal aid to the city of chicago. Thats not accurate, right . Thats not accurate. The count will be there. The question is what are the numbers we use for apportionment purposes, not for all the other mirmd of uses for the census. Okay. Good. Now, i want to ask you about other people who are i happen to live in wisconsin. There are people in wis wes for a variety of reasonsment there are people who were born there and will die there and live there their whole life. There could be people there who are diplomats from consulate in chicago driving around seeing whats going on up there. You have tourists who plan on leaving. You have people who spend seven months of the year in florida and five months of the year in wisconsin. You could have someone coming over from iowa taking care of an aging relative and expects to return home. Could you comment on these different situations . Are all of these people supposed to be counted for apportionment purposes, none of these counted for apportionment purposes . If we go through a diplomat, theyre not counted, are they, even though theyre in wisconsin . The technical reading has been offered. Visitors are not counted. Temporary people passing through are not counted. And i think not taxed are not counted. We havent had that citizenship was offered. They werent counted. Its because what the Supreme Court said what were aiming for here is whos being represented . Whos in charge . Who are the sovereign people who are choosing the representatives and allocating the distribution of seats . Congress and electoral votes based oen that . Ill give you the specific example. Lets say im in wisconsin. Lets say a woman moves into wisconsin to take care of her aging mother and expects to run home from iowa, has no intention of staying in wisconsin. Maybe her mother is even in home hospice. Should she be counted as a wisconsin resident . I dont believe she should be and i dont think the Census Bureau does. They ask where her normal place of abode is. Okay. If im in this country illegally, how, under any circumstances, what contortions would you reach to say that a person whos here illegally intends to stay permanently . I would think if i was caught in a country illegally, for whatever reason, i would expect to return home. Isnt it kind of insulting to somebody to say if theyre here illegally theyre going to make the assumption theyre there permanently . Well, i think so. You can read this in the phrase in the state. The other argument is anybody thats residing in the state. Theyve added the word resides there, so why dont we add the word more consistent with the theory, lawfully residing there. That gets more at the question of whos being represented, those who are here lawfully. Im going to go back to the two situations. If you have someone in wisconsin taking care of an aging relative until they pass away, we consider their permanent resident another place, right . I think normally if you have a College Student who is in wisconsin for nine months and then returns to iowa, that iowa is considered their place. Theyre only they dont intend to stay in wisconsin fulltime. By what logic could you say if someone, say, is overstaying a visa and plans on returning home, assume returning home, how in what type of legal logic could you have to say that we expect that person to stay in wisconsin perm wisconsin permanently . I dont understand that. Can you imagine a legal theory that were going to assume someone who comes here illegal is going to be considered a permanent resident . Theres one theory floated called virtual representation. Even though theyre not part of the citizenry of that state or community, they are nevertheless there and therefore the people would treat them as if theyre being represented even if they have no say in the government. Why dont we assume theyre going to leave though . Thats what i dont understand. Congressman, i agree with you. I dont understand with it either. Im trying to make sense of it. I cant. It is fundamentally incompatible with the cornerstone of our sense of Representative Government. I will say on behalf of the illegal citizens in my state, i think its insulting to imply that in the future theyre never going to obey the law. Thank you. Congresswoman lawrence is recognized. Thank you, madam chair. I would like to bring the focus back to what the census is established and that is to count every person. I was a mayor, and i know that the amount of people who were driving over my roads go into the population, goes into the formula of how much i come to the federal government and say i need x amount of build dollars, i need x amount of dollars. I need to know how many children are going to our schools so that we can anticipate the amount of brick and mortar, the amount of taxation for educating the children in our community. Its so sad that this Current Administration uses every single angle to politicize it and have it to be a democrat or a republican issue. The census has nothing to do with your political affiliation. It has everything to do with the numeration of the people who live in this country so that we can appropriately allocate the funds to our country. I know in my district theres a very rich, and thank god, amazing diversity of people, strong representation from the middle east in bangladesh, other countries. We have jewish. We have african. We have india. So, when you knock on the door of a home and you say are you legal or not legal, the trust because of this administrations just just absolute aggressive immigration, demoralizing the value of people in our country, it creates fear whether you want to admit it or not. Mr. Thompson, are you still here . Is mr. Thompson still here . Yes, im here. Okay. Is it true that the immigrant communities have historically been undercounted in the census . And can you explain why this is problematic . Thats an excellent question, congresswoman. So, the Census Bureau has always been measuring a differential undercount, and that is for the white nonhispanic population, there have been measuring slight overcounts and for other populations, theyve been measuring undercounts, American Indians theyre calling it under counts. Theyre calling it the differential undercount. The implications of that filter through all the important ewes of the census including apportionment, including redistricting, and including the allocation of 1. 5 trillion of federal funds every year. If theres an undercount in a community, that community doesnt get its fair share of any of those resources. So, when a community does not get the proper allocation of funds, when we Start Talking about poverty, when we Start Talking about generational misrepresentation, it is all tied to the census and how we count the citizens and the people of this country. Is that correct . Yes, maam. Do you agree that President Trumps executive order is likely to make the problem worse by discouraging legal immigrants from completing the census . Yes. I included in my testimony my concerns that the memorandum was going to increase fears among the hard to count populations which would include immigrants, that their data would not be safe. And therefore their nonparticipation. Madam chair, i just want to be clear on the record. The census is not a democrat or republican issue. Its an issue about how we will fund our country. I sit on appropriations, and i say often if you want to know where a persons heart is, if you want to know what your values are, follow the money. And if we systematically eliminate and discourage participation, then our values will be very clear that if you are a minority, if you are an immigrant, you have no value. Thank you so much. I yield back. Thank you. Thank you to the gentlelady for her powerful statement. Congresswoman miller is now recognized. Thank you chairwoman maloney and Ranking Member comber and all of you witnesses who are here today. As we will discussion further in the direction panel with dr. Dillingham, apportionment is drastically different than taking the census. It is essential that the census count every person living in the United States, as this data is used to appropriate federal resources to the communities in need. Another use for this data is to fulfill the constitutional duty of apportionment. Apportionment is the essential process that Congress Takes to make sure that the members of congress are distributed fairly and proportionately across the United States, allowing some states with a high number of undock yum undocumented immigrants to subvert the will of american citizens by denying other states their fair representation cannot be allowed. While many across the aisle actively champion illegal immigration and deny the governments duty to protect our sovereign border to, turn around and try to distort the president s actions to protect american democracy into a constitutional crisis is an absolute farce. This hearing is just a continuation of the lack of leadership that america is so tired of seeing out of washington. I support President Trumps memorandum of apportionment and reiterate the importance of making sure americans voices are heard here at congress and at the ballot box. Dr. Eastman, how would counting residents living in the United States illegally undermine the representation of legal american citizens . Well, it would create apportionment that shifts numbers of representatives into the house of represent ifs and also the electoral votes for president to places where there are not large numbers of Illegal Immigrants to places where there are, therefore diluting the vote and political power and sovereignty of the people that do not have large numbers of Illegal Immigrants and benefitting those that have violated our law. So, how are smaller rural states which already have very few members of congress negatively impacted by the larger states who are bolstering their census counts with undocumented immigrants . Weve got a number of states that will lose or not gain a seat in congress as the result of counting the large number of Illegal Immigrants that have consolidated in particular states, in three or four states, for example. It would shift away from the rural states. And it would debase the votes of american citizens in large portions of the country. So, basically, in the Congressional District where half the population is comprised of undocumented immigrants, is that fair representation to a district thats comprised entirely of american citizens . Doesnt that dilute the representation that citizens have in congress . It does so in two ways. It gives that state with the Illegal Immigrants an additional seat in congress that creates that enhances their political power. And it also takes each voter in that district and essentially makes their vote worth twice as much as the votes in the district where there are no illegal imgrants. So, historically, why has it been the standard to use total population for apportionment instead of the number of citizens . And does this actually subvert the democratic will of American Voters . Well, historically, weve used total population because it was not a differential between total population and citizen population. And so total population was a very good proxy for the Political Representation. But we now have a vast disparity between citizen and noncitizen areas of the country, and that is skewing the Political Authority of the people that are supposed to be choosing the representatives to govern. Thank you. I yield back my time. Thank you. I now recognize the vice chair of the committee, congressman gomez, for five minutes. Thank you for coming. Thank you, madam chair. I just want to remind people. Im actually very happy that President Trump and the administration revealed its true colors. For the long time, if well remember back when they were trying to add the Citizenship Question to the census, it was always about enforcing the Voting Rights act, and they repeated it and repeated it and repeated it. But even your republican chair, trey gowdy, didnt even believe that was the case. He even made the argument that the logic didnt make sense because theyve been enforced the Voting Rights act since its existence without having that information ton the citizenship on the census. So, we always knew what this was about. It was about the apportionment expert trying to create a scenario that they can make an argument why undocuments immigrants and not all people should be counted in apportionment. Thats what it was always about. So, it just reveals their true colors that they put forward this executive order and this memo of understanding. And the reason why it was always about that because this administration and trump have always attempted to use the census as a political weapon to marginalize communities throughout the country. And i believe that this is only the next step because i believe the true direction this administration wants to go and some individuals on the right of the political spectra is to undermine the 14th amendment itself, the idea that any person, all persons born or naturalized in the United States are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and are citizens of the United States. Thats where ultimately they want to go. They, as im talking about the Trump Administration, im talking about the people who are on the right who dont see people who are born here as valid citizens of this country. So, this is just the next step, what President Trump has done in these memos. But i believe it will be found unconstitutional. I believe that some of the recent rulings by the Supreme Court indicate that this court is not Republican Court or a democratic court. Its the Supreme Court of the United States of america. And i look forward for this case to go forward. But the president s memo does violate, i believe, the constitution. It violates statutes enacted by congress. The secretary of commerce shall send the president , and i quote, the tabulation of total population by states which then the president must transmit to the congress a statement showing the whole number of persons it doesnt say anything else, it says of persons in each state. I would like to go down the line and ask each of you a question. In your experience as director of the Census Bureau, did you ever understand federal law to exclude undocuments immigrants from the census count he or she is required to send to the president . Mr. Barbara . The answer is no. Mr. Prewitt . No. Mr. Thompson . No. Those are some simple questions when it comes to this issue, that its never been allowed and no ones ever requested it. But this administration is trying to, once again, use the census for political ends and to marginalize the undocumented community and undermine our democracy. We have a choice to make. The country is getting more diverse. No matter if we throw up road blocks no, matter what we do, the country is changing. But its not about how we shouldnt allow those changes to determine our character. Its how we handle our character, its how we handle those changes that will determine our character and values in this country. Im proud to be in american and a lot of people are here undocumented or otherwise are proud to be in this country and we will fight for a place in this country every step of the way from the day that we are no longer on this earth and with that, i yield back. Thank you. The chao recognizes congressman keller. Thank you madam chair. Thank you Ranking Member comer. The president issued a reprimand him about the count can joes includes legally and since we all know that a count and a census count in a district are Different Things i am concerned that the title of this hearing conflates all of these into one group. Creating the assumption that these terms are all the same thing makes the accusation that the president statutes or unconstitutional which they are not. Doctor eastman, can you explain how the count is different today sent discount . Sure. The census count total count is addressed to things like federal spending and how many schools we need and how much space we need on the highway. Those are the power under the spending clause and doesnt matter from what basis you are here but its supposed to be tied to people that are choosing representatives and we have the people in the state for that purpose that is different from the total population count that would include visitors and include people and temporary views and the president maduro is directed to the apportionment count. What are we going to use from distributing or political power in this country based on the population of citizens. Thank you. This committee has spent endless hours Holding Hearings and conducting investigations issuing subpoenas and Withholding Administration in contempt of congress all leading to an issue with the Citizenship Question on the senses. Whether this was eventually a ban, this is a a question that should not be controversial and either should using it with the count of only those who resign in our country legally. If someone is here illegally, they should not be represented in the United States. Doctor eastman, why did the Supreme Court ruled that the citizen question being asked on the census questionnaire is in fact constitutional . Well, first of all, in the history we asked that question on almost every sentence in our tire history. The only reason it blocked it from the current census is because the Supreme Court found that the department did not properly go through the requirements of the administrations act. This citizenship is perfectly constitutional. Just one thing. I know theres been a lot of discussion on why we want to make sure the representation is correct. Some of the people on the left wanted to go away with the Electoral College. By counting people who are not u. S. Citizens here legally, is that a way to make the Electoral College less relevant or overtime irrelevant by shifting the representation away from american citizens . It does. It has the same effect of diluting the votes of citizens that the house of representatives has. The Electoral College vote is based on a total number of seats in the house of representatives between two senators. Can we get an amendment directly through International Popular vote and do away with Electoral College i would want to count people for representation who are in our country illegally . He certainly would alter the impact of citizens and the impact they have on elections. Thats the very notion that has been governed. The point i guess i want to make, why would the Trump Administration want to make sure that we know the difference between when were talking a portion man and census and redistricting. We want to take care of everyone thats here in our country but we also want to make sure that the government is selected by american citizens and not people who are not citizens in this country. Is that correct . Thats correct. I dont think its partisan. If you look at the numbers, they will lose seats as a result and the targets say that its a partisan outcome. Its a governance outcome. Its an outcome that means we are exceptional because were americans and we should have governments thats decided by american citizens are not people that are foreign nationals in our country. Thank you madam chair and yield back. Thank the gentleman. We thank all of the panelists further testimony and remind them i that there will be additional questions that may come to them and would be grateful for their swift response. We will now go to the second panel but first, id like to respond to mr. Highs request and stated that we had only had not enough hearings on the census and id like to place in the record that since ive been chair, it had been five hearings on the census including one in the hard to count communities in the 2020 census which was january 9th 2020. We were also privilege to have director i Stephen Dillingham here on february 12th and appreciate him coming back very much. We also had beyond the Citizenship Question and preparing the damage and the count for we the people in 2020. Fwe also had one on getting the account of the important census for states and local communities. That was on march 14th we had secretary debra ross. I would like to place in the record these hearings that we had and mention to Ranking Member if youd like to have another hearing in our account communities we would be glad to accommodate one another. Id also like to place the record a listing of 12 full Committee Meetings that weve had with on different subjects. Obviously five with the full committee and subcommittees has been a priority as it should be for this country. Id like to place this in the record, thank you. The first panel is dismissed with our great thanks. Thank you for your time, thank you for your service and thank you for coming back to testify with us from across the country. We are very grateful, thank you. We are also grateful that we are joined by mr. Stephen dillingham, the current director of the Census Bureau. We thank you very much for your time, for your service and for agreeing to be here and we are very appreciative. If the witnesses would please rise and raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you god . I do. Thank you. Let the record show that the witness answered in the affirmative. We thank you without objection and the statement will be made part of the record and with that mr. Dillingham, you are recognized for your testimony. Again, thank you for your service. I just want to add the coronavirus has changed everything and it has really changed how weve been able to conduct the census and i appreciate your service in this very difficult time. Chairwoman and Ranking Member, i dont know if you notice but i had my own specially designed mask and i provided one to you as the Ranking Member. I hope you will find it useful at least for getting the message out of, thank you so much. Chairwoman maloney, and members of the committee i am honored to be with you today. I would like to congratulate Ranking Member comer on his recent appointment. I appreciate this commitment to a successful 2020 census. The nonpartisan u. S. Since bureau is a nations leading federal Statistical Agency. Its career and noncareer staff Work Together to advance its mission, always in accordance with governing laws. The Census Bureau is not set policy. Nor does it control the use of its data progress. The sets burrow it hears to the high standards of scientific integrity and transparency and the principles and practices of federal statistical agencies. Meeting challenges posed by the unprecedented brutal pandemic remains a top priority. The Census Bureaus dedicated workforce has worked hard and professionally to keep the 2020 census on track. This morning, i am pleased to highlight some recent developments. On july 21st, the president issued a president ial memorandum that surveyed the first panel. In response to the memorandum, secretary vazquez called on the borough to examine the directive and efforts to develop methodologys from producing a special tabulation. A group of expert career staff will examine the possible analogies. They are not affected by the memorandum. We we are committed to tapping every person in the right place and only once. To help the Census Bureau me challenges posed by the pandemic, the White House Office and management budget submitted a request to supplement are hiring Pay Incentives and replenish your conditionsy to provide the necessary flexibility. Despite the pandemic, the 2020 census self response has been a tremendous success. We are now at almost 63 with more than 92 million households accounted for. About 80 have chosen to respond using the internet. I responses them as not had a single minute of down time since we first provided people to respond online beginning in march. We successfully set up we sent up up to five mailings because if you do answer in self response youre not receiving hopefully after a period of time additional mailings. We successfully sent up to five mailings and additional mailing to the areas in the post office boxes. It has begun and could reach 34 million non responding households. In september, we will be sending a seventh mailing including questionnaires to the lowest responding tracks in hard to count areas. Our update leave which is an operation to hand deliver packets to Housing Units is generally complete. Certainly 99 then the last i looked i think it is about 99. 9 . It was basically concluding except for some very fault small communities. Including College Students is progressing. We have a special operation to ensure to complete an accurate count of College Students. College students must be counted where they live or stay most of the time as of april 1st. Congress has considered legislation which was passed by the house to alleviate confusion among college administrators. The largest component of our Field Operation and follow up is underway and expanding rapidly. We have begun a soft launch unexpected areas where we can do so safely and effectively. The first areas began on july 16th and began on july 23rd. 40 more will start an august essex and will be announced today it will begin this work on august the 11th and be covering the entire issue. Today, we are now announcing that its a followup operation and we will contact some households by phone. The health and safety remains a priority and it has a personal protective equipment and appears to social distancing reflecting our commitment to help of the safety and we require all employees interacting with the public to wear a face mask. Regardless of location. We Daily Monitor Health conditions nationally and at the state and local levels. Are hiring of takers and staff continues and we now have 3 million applicants available as temporary census workers. We continue receiving about 1500 new applicants each day. Our 248 area census offices are completing the hiring process for about a half million temporary census workers. More than 900,000 job offers have been accepted. Our partnerships are unprecedented, exceeding our most ambitious goals. With almost 400,000 partners we are expanding our outreach to the account population. Despite having to delay the mobile questionnaire sustenance efforts due to the pandemic, Partnership Staff have identified assistance sites where people go when they leave home. Such as grocery stores, such as pharmacies and other places in compliance with local state and federal safety guidelines. Weve seen great examples of new york city i know you participated madam chairwoman in kentucky as well. And probably in all districts. The 2020 Census Communications Campaign Continues to expand its reach. We increased the Communications Contract budget from 500 Million Dollars to 700 million. And increased our media which is in progress now. We will run many types of advertising in response areas including those with hard to count audiences. Has voices in your communities, thank you for sharing our message that participating in the 2020 census is easy, safe and important. We appreciate your strong support for the 2020 census and our operations. Our committed employees and volunteers remain on mission and are accomplishing tremendous results. Our offices of led other federal agencies in the opening in a rapid, fazed and safe manner. I could not be prouder of are talented and dedicated career temporary workforce. Soon to become the nations largest. We are grateful that almost every house and Senate Office is active as a 2020 census congressional partner. We look forward to our continued Work Together and thank each of you for your support. Together, we are reminding everyone that the 2020 census belongs to our nation at large and will help shape a Better Future for all who live here, thank you so much and i look forward to questions. Thank you. The chair now recognizes yourself for questions. I appreciate your testimony that the census belongs to the people and its part of our future. I do want to report that in new york, the census has been nonpartisan, professional. They have responded to every request from the mayor to attend various meetings from the community that i, the community boards, the block associations work weekends handing out information in parks and have responded to every request my office has made for them to join us and get the word out to the public in a non partisan and professional way. I will thank you for that. Madam chairwoman, i want to thank you. I had some years in regards to your efforts and distribution in new york city. I appreciate you as well as your colleagues. Its very important. But i must tell you, i am very concerned about the president s memo. I have read the president s memo very carefully. I believe that it is blatantly unconstitutional and that complying with this memo would violate federal law. I strongly urge you not to violate federal law. But you dont have to take my word for it, we had quite a lengthy hearing today and all four of your professional nonpartisan predecessors testified on the Previous Panel that they believed the president s memo appears to violate the constitution and existing law. I would like to ask you, to you agree with your predecessors that the memo appears to violate the constitution and existing federal law . Madam chairwoman, i was able to catch parts of that hearing. Perhaps the latter parts and i was amazed by what a healthy discussion was made in a very livid won at times with regard to policy, history, as well as law. They are in a different position and i respect them greatly. We have many things in common and certainly completeness and accuracy of the 2020 census. We have other things in common and that is, the respect for the bureau, the Census Bureau as well as the principles of the government, the relevance and the integrity and the independence, etc. We have a lot in common. I am not in a position where i can express my opinions with regard to the policy and with regard even wise within the history and certainly not with legal analysis which is now a subject of dedication. As i did last year, i have to back off. I cannot answer and even give my personal views because my job as the Census Bureau director will be to execute 2020 census. We do abide by Court Decisions in controlling law. We will have to wait and see how that legal debate comes out and we will do our job and that is our focus, our mission right now is to have a complete and accurate count that include everyone in this lovely country. In your job in executing the 2020 census, did you or anyone else of your knowledge from the Census Bureau, contribute to the president s july 21st memo or provide input before it was released . Madam chairwoman, i certainly do not. Im not aware of others in the Census Bureau that did. I understand there are roughly five other pointings, did any of them participate in this memo . Madam chairwoman, including myself we have six now and thats out of more than 6000 employees. To my knowledge they did not and i would not have reason to think so. We do have im sure you pointed out we have two new ones so, when i cant speak for actions that occurred prior to joining the Census Bureau. Lets move on to the nuts and bolts of the memo. It appears that the president is asking the Congress Department for information that would allow him to exclude undocumented immigrants from the base. As we all know, the scent disappear will not be asking people about the citizenship status of the 2020 census, the Trump Administration tried that and the Supreme Court struck it down. My question is, director dillingham, how will the Census Bureau and department of commerce be determining the number of undocumented immigrants in each state . Madam chairwoman, i can tell you that as you refer. The president ial memorandum has some specifics in it. Prior to that we do have an executive order last year that also directed us to look at our administrative leave and the Census Bureau has a long history of collecting administrative data that is very valuable in many different ways. This particular president ial memorandum, it resulted in the secretary of commerce leaving us the directive and guidance to proceed with the requirements of the president ial memorandum. It calls upon us to look at our administrated data in any data that we have in trying to determine the number which is a statistic on undocumented citizens in the country. For the use of applying it through the apportionment count. We have experts in the Census Bureau that are now beginning to process at looking at methodologys and we have collected data from many agencies, federal agencies. Many of the memorandum existence with some additional agencies to see what we can gain from that administrative data and what the methodology might be in developing a counts of undocumented persons. That process is just beginning and the memorandum just came out last week. Doctor dillingham, your testimony says the bureau and i quote, has begun to examine and report on methodologys, and quote. To let the president exclude undocumented immigrants. My question is, what steps has the bureau taken and will you share any reports with this Oversight Committee that has jurisdiction or the census and its operations . Madam chairwoman, as you are aware we are an experienced organization. Maybe the precision which may be a little bit misleading at this time. We have convened a group. The group was selected by a career deputy in the Census Bureau. They had been tasks with this and there are no reports, no graph reports and they had previous experience in that area. They are generally aware of the methodologys that are considered to be applied to administrative data. For them, this is a new task to look at. They are just beginning their work. Thank you. I think its obvious that the president would try to use some external information that does not come from the census camp to exclude undocumented immigrants. My question, director dillingham is, isnt it true that the bureau cannot provide the president with actual responses from every person in the u. S. In firming their immigration status . Well, we look at the administrative data that we have which will be collecting and to determine to what extent it might identify and how it would identify and how the data could be matched the. We have just recently taken some data that hasnt been finalized. We have received most of the data from the other federal agencies and we are receiving data as well pursuant in executive order last year of some state agencies. That process, again, is underway. There have been no reports and there have been no analysis that i have seen and they are moving rapidly as possible to look at the data, look at the methodologys and to really find options to see if thats how it would be done. Thank you. Doctor dillingham, if the Census Bureau and the Commerce Department are going to rely on external data that they have cobble together to estimate the undocumented immigrants, i believe they clearly believe they violated the constitution which requires and i quote actual admiration. You testified in february before this committee and i quote, we must Work Together to foster public trust and i agree. It seems to me that following the words of federal law and 230 years are essential parts of that public trust. We owe it to our children and to future generations to pass and objective nonpartisan and fair census. I hope we can Work Together to reassure the public that the government will follow the constitution and i yield to you for your comments and to my distinguished Ranking Member for his questions. Madam chairwoman, you are exactly right that everyone regardless of how they feel about the development of the new option with the unfortunate data, everyone is committed and the president ial memorandum provides illegal count for everyone. We will develop the number and the count and we want it as accurate as possible. The issue as you have described is the one thats going to be a new tabulation for the purposes of a porch edmund. I yield to my distinguished colleague. Thank you doctor dillingham, thank you for being here today. Let me begin by thanking you for being here. I think you arrived three hours ago and i apologize that you were on the first panel. Its unprecedented and somewhat disrespectful that the head of such an important Government Agency would be put on the second panel but nevertheless you have had a great attitude and appreciate you being here and look forward to some good questions. Let me begin by saying the online response has been great. Social distancing has been done and using ppe and you take care of your workers and the public at the forefront and ive told the census as well that its delivered a timely and accurate count. Turning to the president s memorandum, from a fundamental perspective its the right thing to do. We cannot allow an individual unlawful the president to dilute the votes of citizens and lawful immigrants who waited their turn to come to this country to engage in our democracy. Congressman in the majority of americans share that sentiment. With respect of the census its more complex than a simple head count. Lets touch on tourist visas for example. If a tourist over stays their visa and they just dont leave, are they considered a resident . We have a historically developed set of criteria for residency that we apply. As you described, its a simple tourist who is not usually resigning where they are found in this country, no, we would not count any response from those individuals. It should be explained on the form their usual residence is a key word. For purposes of approach meant, if a person who stayed longer than 60 days over which under these impression would be the Legal Definition of the United States resident by the way the census reforms are. This person who overstayed their visa they are not lawfully knit therefore, it is fair to say that they wouldnt deserve to have representation in congress. Is that correct . Well, again, we apply the criteria of usual residency. They both differ by times and circumstances but that is the criteria we used to deliver a complete and accurate count. Back to the earlier question that chairwoman maloney asked, what does the memorandum proposed to determine who will be included in the apportionment part . The president ial memorandum is not really specifying what the executive order of last year. It specified a number of agencies. I had a listing here but we have 16 or 17 agreements in place and some are already in place for that to happen. It is a wide variety of federal agencies and in addition to that, the executive order asked us to begin collecting state data where possible. There are many uses of the data generally but some of the data uses would be matching and make sure we have the right individuals or not double counting and duplicating, etc. We have some 16 or 17 agreements in place with data thats come to the Census Bureau in the process for a couple of them still coming. Then we have some state data that we have available. We will be looking at that data very carefully. The Census Bureau and administrative data is not new. Some nations actually do their senses based on administrative data. One of the things as well under the executive order is for us to be thinking about the next census. A lot of people are actually disagreeing on this question that are very interested in the utility and as the chairwoman pointed out, the accuracy of administrative data because it could have many benefits in the future as it does now. You are confident that we can get an accurate count of legal citizens for congressional apportionment . I am confident we will analyze the data we have where we look at the methodology that might be employed for that purpose. I am confident that you can get the accurate count and i know the majority of americans expect that because what america is seeing now especially from my colleagues on the other side of the aisle is a congress that continues to spin an unprecedented rate of deficit. They are seeing mayors in certain cities in the United States turn a blind eye to vandalism, to violence. They expect to be represented fairly and accurately in the United States and the house of representatives. This is very important. I dont think anyone here questions the importance of the census. One thing that many of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have tried to apply and apply falsely is that citizens would not be counted. The census will count everyone, correct . Were not leaving anyone out. Except the two that you mentioned, perhaps. The president s memorandum states that with the census of bureau will implement is the fact that a lawabiding citizens, legal citizens in the United States should not be at a disadvantage with respect to congressional apportionment. I think the memorandum its constitutional, i think its the right thing to do. If anyone out here questions how this will impact funding it will not impact funding because were counting everyone. The memorandum is clearly focused on congressional apportionment. Were seeing as many as 24 seats in the u. S. House of representatives and its a significant number of representatives in the United States. I appreciate what you are doing, we feel at least in my district that this is the right thing to do and a majority of americans feel is the right thing to do and we look forward to hearing further reports on the implementation. Youre doing a great job and we look forward to the data that we use to determine the correct import shipment. Madam chair i yield back. Ranking member can i offer more point . The terminology tier are varied but again, the president ial memorandum in case i misspoke is focused on the undocumented who lacked legal status, differentiating on citizenship. Thank you very much. The gentleman yields back and i recognize one of my colleagues whos the chair of one of the subcommittees jamie raskin and i want to thank him on his leadership on the census. He had hearings in the sub committing and field hearings and not counting the hard to count in the census on local and state delivery of services. I want to thank you for your leadership on the census and thank you for joining us today. I would just returned the compliment madam chair. Youve been outspoken and unabashed champion of this thing at every turn in congress so thank you for your leadership. I remember we had several years on this and one of them was in new york city before the nightmare of covid19 crisis took over. Mr. Telling him, dr. Dillingham, welcome. A few simple questions and its that word thats synonymous in the system . Congressman, i want to thank you and all youre doing for the 2020 census i understand you also wear a hat as a constitutional scholar. As i explained to the chairwoman earlier, it was a very dynamic displayed democracy here today with a different opinion both as to history and policy and legal analysis. I understand that lawsuits have been filed when looking at these definitions. I have to hold off from offering analysis or opinion myself because my job is to get off the 2020 census. My own little insight is that when the founders of the constitution wanted to use the word citizen they used it like establishing diversity and jurisdiction that fell off course or citizen from one state could sue a citizen from another state. But here in article one, section to the article said that the apportionment representative must be based on the actual member ration of the whole number of free persons. Can we agree that if the president s new interpretation is pasted on the census this would be a radical departure from everything weve done for more than two centuries . This president ial memorandum as nothing to do with our operation right now in the census. Were counting everyone and it has to do with a tap of the leash thats been requested. For more than two centuries the census has counted all persons, right . The administrations attempt to try to impose a Citizenship Question was invalidated by them in court that donald trump had to construct himself but that Supreme Court said this was a lawless effort by the administration, right . In other words, you will remain agnostic . I have a professional obligation and thats the thing i will do. Would you pronounce in this one as the text of the constitution changed in the last two years . Not that im aware of. Okay. How long have you been with the census . Just over a year and a half at this point. Its your understanding that non citizens have always been counted in the census according to the constitution . It is my understanding that the memorandum is requesting for a change in the tabulation and calculation for apportionment purposes. Let me focus in on covid19. Are we taking care of our people sufficiently . Are you training your senses in all of the proper covid19 precautions . We are certainly trying to. I think we are. We are very vigilant and continuing to do assessments each and every day, seven days a week. Certainly with the data from the cdc and from Health Services and the statement data of local government data. We have Infusion Centers thats developed seven days a week. We have purchased the personal protective equipment. We have plans to obtaining more. Doing everything we have a process by which everybody wears their mask we are very diligent and we want to make sure that those practices are not only in the training, but we want to monitor. So i think we are doing an excellent job. Okay the reason i ask is that i have heard from a numerator in training can who is planning to quit, because of covid19. And this person told my staff that despite your formal expressed commitment to take care of everybody, they are not getting any training on how to minimize covid exposure in their work. They are given the purell and the cloth masks, but no real direction on how to conduct himself to limit exposure. The. So pleased to get back to us if you would to tell us what your plan is, to fully educate the whole staff and to make sure that this is something we are on top of. Because enumerators can obviously become superspreaders if they are not following the right precautions. We certainly will and there are a lot of travel lot of challenges because a little training is virtual training. But we are improving that training, and i will say when we are hiring 500, 000, half 1 million employees, i cannot say theres never slippage, but we are doing what we can, and will continue to enhance to identify needs. Do you have covid19 rules for the road, or something like. That i do not have the training curriculum with me. But we can get you. That if you would share that with us, im just so we get that out there. We want to make sure that all of our enumerators are properly taken care of. And to that the public knows that and they know you know no one is afraid to interact. And my point is that i mentioned in the opening statement, that we are in the early stages of launching the enumeration now, so we are learning at this stage, and august 11th we will be basically enumerating nationally. We have phase this in so we can learn, and it is a very dynamic environment so you know with the virus so we are learning as we go to make sure everyone is safe. I appreciate that and not you can become a model for the rest of the country. Gentleman your time has expired and now represent by video congressman go sir, can you hear us. I hear you can you hear me. Yes we can. You are now recognized. Thank you madam, the director dillingham weve heard the liberal meaty a accomplices, that the responses to this will fall behind previous dissent heels. Will you explain why the current self Response Response rate, is happening at the current period of time. Let me say if weve pointed out, the Internet Option that we have implemented this year. There was a lot of concerns of last year, and in ensuring that all the technologies were in place, and we are to some extent, a little bit surprised as how people prefer the Internet Option. And it is the safest option and the most efficient option. So 80 , of self responses are coming in via the internet. We still have the telephone option and in the different times. Thats picking up a little. Frequently people use the telephone option to just ask questions about how they can do the Internet Option. We have that and of course they can do the traditional paper options. So having those three options for self response you know our mailings are extensive, and our outreach activities, its making a difference. So in making a difference, can you hear me . Yes. Can you hear me . Yes we got this. Yes you can proceed. Can you hear me . Yes. Okay im sorry. Now weve heard from months, from my liberal friends, on the left that the integrity of the system it was an egg inadequate to respond to to answer the response. Kind of like what weve been seeing today, as the system ever crashed as predicted by my liberal friends . No it is not it has been tremendously successful. Mr. Go sorry i think you need to mute one of your devices, you are getting feedback. We have had, tremendous success with three options, the favor option for self responses the internet. Director dillingham, the majority likes to say that this administration does not want to cater to everyone, does not want to reach hardhit communities. Has anyone in the Trump Administration, ever suggested you do less to include everyone, including reaching hard to count communities. The latter part of that question, is absolutely accurate. We are devoting, tremendous effort, throughout the Census Bureau, we seasoned professionals to make sure that we reach everyone. Particularly the hard to count everywhere areas. Mr. Grocer, hello. Mr. Go saar. Lets proceed at this point with miss tlaib, and we will go back to mr. Go saar when we get his system back up. So during the oversight hearing, when i asked you about the failure to include any category four individuals who are in the north african category. I sent you a letter with our oversight gentlemen asking why this decision was made, and i am underwhelmed. Since then i have worked with committees on the census. And currently the subcommittee, and the report does say, the committee directs the Census Bureau, to do a feasibility study, for ultimately included in the 2020 census questionnaire. So will you commit on record, to do as a committee directs, and include a race category. Congresswoman, i do remember your request, and my understanding was we did at least partially reply. If there may have been other information. No i am asking you. Yes, with regard. To congress. I think it indicated, that it was appropriators asking us, and we are certainly very interested in looking at that topic, and we are very much beginning the process, of looking at the 2030. So i just want you to know, because the previous administration, decided to do it. You all just ignored it. So just to be clear, right now the Committee Also expects, this category to be on the 2030. Will you support it . I will support the research, into your issue, and i do think that one of the improvements that was done, is in fact the right in, but i understand you wanted more than that. And we will look into that. So also, will you commit to do as the committee were directs, and the Committee Report also put in there that they expect the question on Sexual Orientation and Sexual Identity will not be put in the 2030 question. Madam congresswoman, we will look at that, and that has been a topic that has been examined and continues to be examined and we do have questions on some of our surveys that in fact get to the heart of those questions i think that there is a need to make sure that questions of that type will work with the census but we will certainly study that. I appreciate. That thank you and i want to switch subjects now. On april 2020, secretary ross personally called personally called congress, to say they needed additional time, to distribute data due to the pandemic. This modify the 2020 delivery deadlines. Keep that in the sentence official, in operations, may quote we have past the point where we can even meet the current legislative, quota of december 31st. Do you agree with the assessments, that has been put forth by your colleague mr. Olson . Congresswoman, if you could repeat the latter part of your question. Yes tim olson said, we have past the point where we could even meet the legislative requirement of december 30, first we cant do this anymore. Do you agree with mr. Olson . Congresswoman i can assure you, that we are doing continual assessments,. So you dont agree with them . I cannot agree with, and we have many more assessments ahead of us here, and we are proceeding with as soon as possible to conduct the census. You know he runs the Field Operations mr. Dillingham. He does. And he is telling you, but this is bad. We are not even going to be able to make the deadlines. I dont know this is common haulage. You know with the direct contact with people in the residence, i think you should listen to him. Congresswoman, i always listen to him, and he is a very important member of the team. Well despite the operational delay, the white house announced that they will release funds, by december before President Trump will leave the white house. Now theyre trying to finish it before december 31st. I have to tell you, i need you to choose your country first, and making sure that for me its not about real portioning, its something that health, care services, and i dont know the cost of politicizing are consensus, is undeserving they want to be able to afford this. I yield i thank you very much. Madam chairman. This is congressman, i think ive taken over the sharing of the committee. And we yield. I just want to make sure she was overtime. Thank you. Mr. Pom recognized. Director dillingham, for the record and you can speak slowly so all my colleagues understand it. Does the census intend to count everyone . Congressman, it certainly does. For the record, we are accounting everyone. Were counting everyone who lives in this country and inside their usual residents, that is correct. I thank the gentleman and thats the proper approach. And i dont think we should make it about anything else. But counting people who are in the country and let me ask you this. We raised this point earlier in the first panel a substantial number of those are individuals who are about 18 to 20 of whom will not be here for the next census. One of the issues that i wanted to ask you about is how is the Census Bureau count undocumented immigrants who live in that treachery situation . They are only here for a few years and then they are gone . Do you deal with that at all . Congressman, if someone is living here for a few years and all likelihood they will be counted if they are residing here. It doesnt mean they have legal status. One of the reasons the president i assume wanted us to look at the data is for issues similar to that. What is the status of some people that are usually resided in the country and is in a nut undocumented status. We set up things for the memorandum. When there is someone here that is only here for say another year, they will be counted in the census even though you do not know when they are leaving. Thats correct. I want to ask another question and welcome back to that. Do you include short term visitors as people here on student visas who might be here for a year, getting a masters are getting a ph. D. Or maybe four years for an undergraduate. Are those people counted . Congressman, nearly a year makes a big difference. If they are usually residing here and on april 1st their residing here in the usual residents they do come from that. That raises that reinforces the point was trying to make earlier. We should count everybody and that we shouldnt count everyone for apportionment. You just testified that you count people who run their own student visas for the census. But i dont think i will say i dont think anyone would reasonably argued those people should be accounted for because there are a number of people that are here now who would say they should be. I think that raises this very serious issue for counting people who will not be here for the next election but they count for a portion of it. They have a profound impact on representation in congress for a number of states. I raise this point as well in the Previous Panel about states that are declared sanctuaries. There are 20 metro areas and 60 of unauthorized immigrants who live in 60 cities not in 20 metro areas that have declared themselves sanctuaries which creates i think an incredible incentive for people to come there because they will be protected from federal Law Enforcement and, even those who have committed felonies. This doesnt make any sense to me but i do appreciate the fact for the record that you are counting everyone. I just think that i feel like i think a lot of my colleagues agreed that we shouldnt be counting people who are here here temporarily for apportionment purposes. I think gentlemen i yield back. Thank the gentleman who yields back and the chao recognizes Debbie Wasserman schultz from remote. Congresswoman, schultz . Then you madam chair. Director dillingham, this is weeks after the Supreme Court broke down the Citizenship Question. It was an executive order to obtain an estimate over citizens and non citizens by other means. Attorney general barr was very clear about the purpose of doing that. He said and i quote, theres a dispute over legal aliens that can be included depending on the resolution of that this state could blue of relevance. You are on the Committee Days later and you represented the citizen Data Collected with the executive order that would not be used. You responded, quote, we produce high apportionment accounts and let me get back to you on that, unquote. You testified on july 24th 2019, were you already aware of the president s plan to execute undocumented immigrants . No congresswoman, i was not. When did you first become aware of the president or anyone else administration that was looking to exclude undocumented immigrants . I was only formally aware upon issuance of the president ial memorandum. Of days earlier. Tory a couple when did you first become not formally but when did you first become aware of the president s comments or anyone else an administration to exclude undocumented immigrants . There was a story in the local press in the d. C. Area of the capitol hill newspaper as i recall. Someone reported a story that such a directive may be coming down. As i recall, it seemed like it was on a friday and i was waiting to learn more. A few days later the director was issued. The director of the census . You learned about the president s intent to issue executive order from excluding the undocumented immigrants in a newspaper article . Actually, when i saw the formal decision when it was posted on the web. No one gave you a heads up . You had no discussions prior to a notification or nothing between seeing the newspaper article . You had no contact with anyone at all with a formal production of the executive order . That is absolutely correct. You are under oath. Absolutely and i will say it all day long undergrowth. Okay. Just making sure that we are clear, you are the director of the census and you didnt hear anything about this before the formal execution for the newspaper article. Its the decision to exclude undocumented immigrants thats clearly unconstitutional. As a federal officer, you took an oath upon here today to defend the constitution. Do not have the obligation as he senses referenced to see how they will be used . Let me finish my question, please. Do you reconcile the recent memorandum with this to uphold . Congresswoman, let me explain the Census Bureau produces desist excess and data. We had no control over what it chooses. Its your responsibility to know that the data you collect is used with the constitution, isnt it . Im aware of the provision for apportionment, congresswoman. Your obligation how do you oppose . Its to make sure the data you are collecting is that you are a wear of what will be used. How do you reconcile the recent memorandum that you swore to uphold . Or are you just read data receptacle . Congresswoman, like any Statistical Agency we produce advanced and most comprehensive complete and accurate data possibly possible. We have received this request from the president ial memorandum to look i understand. I understand you have received that request and are you responsible for the census and the data in the constitution in this executive order is not compliant with that. I think anyone looking at the attractions can see this memorandum and the ruling of the Supreme Court and the requirements. I only hope that someone leading the Census Bureau better you than somewhere else will stand up and follow the law and not follow a lawless president. Thank you and i yield back the balance of my time. The young lady yields back. Grothman. I will follow up on some of the questions the alabama asked. If im in the military and im from wisconsin and i am stationed in a variety of places over the period of years, stationed in germany and stationed in korea. But i just decide to keep wisconsin as my permanent address and i pay taxes in wisconsin, im a vote in wisconsin even though im not there. Where should they count that person from for the purpose of the census or since there are not sleeping do we not count them at all . We have special provisions for counting military. There are special criteria that certainly our leadership has been implementing for a period of years and how they count people from either place of deployment or their leap of residence. We can get back to you with exact criteria. Is that statutory . I will get back to you if its a statutory basis. It is our criteria. Its relevant to whether it is part of it or not. We have a practice. Id like to know that. Second question as far as students are concerned. If someone lives in wisconsin but goes to school in ohio and returns over summer break and returns given how much people go to school nowadays it may be half the time spent in both places. That person therefore i think probably should file taxes in wisconsin but you are saying that person should be considered a resident of ohio . The enumeration criteria does not match the tax requirements. What we do with College Students is where they usually reside when we look at april 1st. So basically, to simplify, we generally count fulltime College Students where they are residing and if theyre on a College Campus outside of their state thats where we count them. At the university of wisconsin you would have a lot of students from ohio that would be counted there. Its really to capture the count for that mentality. Id say its about 50 50 unless theyre on spring break on april 1st and that doesnt matter if there were their parents for a week on april 1st . The april 1st is particularly with the pandemic. Its not quite as determinant to where they usually resident is. Interesting. With regard to diplomats, if someone is from france and has been living in an apartment in virginia for six months. Do we count that perfect person for the census . We count that person as a virginia resident and part of the census . Its based on the usual residents. There are exceptions for consulates and embassies that people are living in an embassy. But we do count the people where they usually reside. Okay. If a student comes here from france and is here for three months and then leaves for three months and comes here for three months, where they count . That would be a tough question to where they usually reside. The reside means where they physically are. I talk to people a while ago on the last panel and i gave an example where someone from iowa and iowa it was an all the way. The car was registered and votes in iowa and based taxes in iowa, they come to his constant because they have a home hospice. They intend to return to iowa and at one point for the purpose of the census is that person going to be counted in wisconsin incentive iowa . Its probably going to be where they claim they usually reside. We dont know yet. They are hanging out in wisconsin. Two months in . Four months in but theyre there for six months . Its hard to determine. Its not hard for the wisconsin department. Its not difficult for the people who vote to determine. Just a minute and will wait for a second. Can someone mute . There is a disruption, can someone mute their Devices Police . Devices please meet your devices. Please meet your devices please. , okay im sorry. You will get extra time im sorry. We can move on from here. So in that situation at what point does that person say that i am counted in wisconsin instead of iowa. There will be a Certain Circumstance generally what might help with this is that people particularly students move to Madison Wisconsin and there for the state generally there are sort of tradeoffs so if they come from another state that they would be counted not where their parents live. And vice versa. I think those are the reasons behind the criteria. People are asking about this race stuff, obviously within your marriage so many people in this country you know who determines what socalled race you are. Whether you are one eight something the respondent determines. It is entirely subjective . Unlike where i live. That is correct. I could be one 16th mexican. But if im mexican i mexican. That is correct. Okay thank you. I want to thank the gentleman for his line of questioning it was interesting i would like to add to it americans living abroad were assigned to american citizens, but maybe theyve been working abroad for several years, so where they counted . Actually they are not counted if they are not usually residing in the u. S. And one of the reasons theres been Much Research because at the same time we have people from those countries that maybe living here with the same circumstance. We only count those residing in the country and if they are abroad four years of study or whatever purpose we dont count them. Thank you. Thank you. Congressman sore been is recognized. Thank you madam chair and dr. Dillingham. I wanted to talk to you about the timelines that you are working under could you review for me and my understanding it and my understanding correctly that the Field Operation that was originally scheduled to finish may be the end of july was pushed to october as a result of these dynamics that you are referring to. Congressman we did have a shift in schedule because of the pandemic so in late march we had to really call a halt to our operation just for reasons of safety. Just for reasons of safety the governments and the business had to suspend our obligations and appointing time we had to start to begin our assessment process when do we think with the current knowledge we can restart and complete the process and are you as you are well aware nationally certainly with the president s task force they begin to lay out criteria and guidance for what we call reopening. And resuming our operations, and we are really the forefront of the federal agencies and getting back to business and opening our 248 offices all across the nation. We had to do it safely and we have to do it you know we have to enumerate safely as well. Was there also a request by the administration i think it came to congress to push back by two or three months tabulations related to the apportionment and that process and what it would normally be. Congressman my understanding is that there were discussions but it wasnt at my level. So that is my understanding that there were some can discussion and consideration of that and its also been reported in the news but that is not something i personally dealt with. Then is it also true that very recently the administration appears to have reversed direction on that and is now suggesting that they want the census to wrapped up quickly so that that tabulation that i just referred to could actually happen before the end of the year. Are you aware of that . Im not aware of all the many reasons except to say that the Census Bureau and others really want us to proceed as rapidly as possible and to get this complete and accurate count as soon as possible. Do you worry about the census being compromised if there is pressure to finish it too quickly and what would that they be in your mind . I dont have a date. How much time do you need to give us the assurance that the census can be conducted in a way that yields a robust result. Well congressman we certainly want a complete and accurate census so that will be certainly a consideration as to when we consider the job is done. Icy. I think my indictee here is the administration originally seem to be reasonably accommodating the pressure of the pandemic on your efforts by requesting some extension of time in respect to how the results are tabulated for certain purposes. That was in line with your own judgment that you needed to push the Field Operations back by two or three months, that was consistent. But now we are hearing that they are looking for money to push the process forward and what i am concerned with would be done a very premature way and undercut your ability to get this done properly. So you are sort of being whip sawed right now between these two different impulses. And i am alarmed at that. I think it could undermine the senses. We will keep a very close eye on this and try to protect the independence of this process from this politics that arlington leaning in on you right now. With that i will yield back. I want to thank the gentleman for raising that important point the census professionals have told me they need at least ten weeks to do a professional count and they arent starting on august 11th and there has been some rumors of trying to complete it by december 31st the professionals that i have talked to in the Census Bureau has said thats impossible and they need to have the full ten weeks to you know expect to knock on the doors at least six times to six times to get an accurate account. And we are supporting secretary ross is suggestion and request to extend the time of the census. So others that say for political reasons the president wants to have this earlier so that he can make determinations about what information is sent to the state and i think that is clearly unconstitutionally wrong. I want to thank mr. Sarbanes for helping me earlier and taking the chair thank you for your work on your questions and now congressman higgins. Thank you madam chairwoman are you here voluntarily or by subpoena . I am sorry im going to have to ask you to repeat the question. He asked if you are here voluntarily or by subpoena. Im here via voluntarily. I can repeat my questions madam chair. I am here voluntarily that is correct. I think its important that america recognizes that you are voluntarily appearing at a hearing that is doubting every person and safeguarding the 2020 consensus against the unconstitutional attacks. Are you a gentleman of integrity and good faith . Certainly i strive to be, i think i am and i have had the distinction of being confirmed by the u. S. Senate unanimously on two occasion. First time in 1990, by committee that was chaired by then senator biden, and most recently by senator ron johnson. I have served six administrations, so i had considerable experience, and i think they determined that i met the qualifications by statute as well as their criteria, for be unbiased and objective and professional. Thank you for your service, and clarification, you are a gentleman with distinguished accomplishment. And we have to recognize your effort to secure an accurate consensus. So you are, you are the main guy, representing the Trump Administration quote unquote and as you said before, this committee today. Congressman i will say, that my statute, my selection was to be nonpartisan in the agency. Because the agency is non sparks nonpartisan. And yes at as it should be. But you represent the administrations best effort, to secure and accurate consensus is that correct. Yes absolutely congressman. And you intend to do just that sir, you quoted that, the president s directive was stated in part to provide information, to the extent practical, to exercise the president s discretion, and carry out the policy of the exclusion of illegal aliens, from the base, and to the maximum extent of the president s discretion under the law, and that is the quote from the president s directive. You state that this does not change the Census Bureaus plans, for Data Collection across the nation. Do you stand by that statement . Congressman i, do that our operations will continue as planned, and in the context of the president ial memorandum, it does not impact you know it does not it is a request for a special tabulation for apportionment purposes. I very much appreciate you, appearing before the committee today, in service to our nation, doing your very best to lead a large team, of dedicated americans, to determine our defenses. And your appearance before the committee today, despite the fact that there was a premeditated effort, to identify President Trumps administration, and the census efforts, to be unconstitutional. I applaud your courage for appearing today. Minus is a piano. My final question to you sir, is that you stated in your written testimony, that the Census Bureau is working to complete Data Collection, as soon as possible and its drives to comply with the laws. Is that quantify your efforts sir . You are exactly right, that is what we are trying to do, and the final question was we are proceeding in that direction. If that answers your question sure sir. I have a bit of a hearing problem, and i did volunteer for a year service in iraq, and sometimes the acoustics here are challenging that makes two of us, thank you for appearing today, madam chair i yield. Thank you. Thank you congressman. Thank you and we now recognize congressman welch. Thank you very much and thank you for appearing voluntarily. So couple of things, one just an observation, i know you cant speak about the administration, on many of these issues. Youve got to do you draw the best you can. But i know the irony, that the position of the administration, eccentrically is that undocumented immigrants, are not persons. And in that respect that analysis, shares the finding of the United States Supreme Court, from dred scott, which was the most decision in our history. They said that African Americans were not persons. Im just saying that because you should understand, all should understand why we are appalled by that administration position. What id like to ask you about specifically, doctor, is the challenge of getting an accurate account, and vermont is quite rural. Our Response Rate, is 47th in person, and 40th on the internet. We have challenges with access to broadband in many parts of our state. We also have migrant workers, who are helping us in our agricultural sector. Do i understand your Census Bureau, center for economic studies, put it at a 2. 3 drop in self responses, and 8 of drop in responses of households with non citizens. And that includes legal, noncitizens. My question to start, is has sent to the census self Response Rate in rural areas, and how are you going to address that. Congressman, we track in areas all across the area, and we do it by census act. Anyone can go to our website, they can see how that yours diction is tracked. How they do in response, right i do not have the figures here before me, but we are well aware in some Rural Communities we have special challenges. We have very special procedures that we do, and i discussed earlier in my prepared statement, about our update leave, and we also have various ways of increased mailings that we are doing in the low response areas and we have a variety of things that will be listing in the weeks ahead. Beginning august 11th we should be in all communities and i hope that we have already made progress in most of the Rural Communities. We will do everything we can according to our best abilities and informed by the knowledge of the past, in previous consensus. You can i interrupt . Its hard to get access to people, who are skeptical. Even suspicious of the government. Anybody coming from a Consensus Bureau is perceived by many, to be a government person. So what are the specific things, that you are doing to find them . And count them . Certainly, one of the most important things is we have our communication campaign, and we have very targeted Communications Even on local radio, and whatever communications those communities will resonate with them and we will get the information. In addition to that we have a Partnership Specialist and usually selected from those areas who have knowledge of those areas. Also very importantly, using our partners with 400,000 organizations, the largest ever those organizations literally reach into every community in this country. Now i will say. Im sorry i only have a few minutes left. If you are unsuccessful in getting a full count, how does that affect community or states like vermont . Well if you have an undercount, and the census data is if not the most used data in the country. So it is used, for the allocation of resources, federal state and local, its used for research, planning, decisionmaking, and there are multi issues also in the private sector. So it is useful and the message we send, has helped shape your future. So please answer the 2020 census. We are trying to communicate that message, and our partnerships are doing a lot in their effort, and that we will have a half Million People, where we havent received a response but we have more than that in our partnerships. Thank you and i yield back. Thank you madam chair. Thank you, and we now recognize congressman roy. By web x. Congressman roy. Yes maam thank you, i appreciate it doctor dillingham thank you, for being here i was president i was present sorry for the first panel, im going in for the second one. But i appreciate your presence and your service to our country. I have just a couple of questions, and i had some questions to your predecessors earlier. I just want to understand this correctly. Am i right in my understanding, and just leaving off of the previous questions, that when you dont actually come into contact with a person, or no one response, there are systems in place in the Census Bureau for better or worse, where you have you know essentially where you go through count. So if you cant find the address of the house, and if you find house or you cant find a person. So household where you dont know how many people are there, and if you can impute the number, or what you find in one house, and infer to the house you dont find. Or the individuals you dont find. And then there is a second category the characteristic, where you are imputing the characteristic of the area, and say theres five white folks in a house over here, and am i roughly right, that is something that you carry out, and engaging for not an insignificant amount of people you are counting . I have to qualify my answer, we do use this when weve exhausted all efforts, in counting the individuals at that residents, but as you pointed out there is a process in the numbers are low and we are hoping to remain extremely low, but there are times when we have to reasonably evidence that someone is living in the household, but we are unable to communicate with a person. And in fact we do have an accepted method, thats has been accepted by the courts. We have a limited time im sort, interrupt but do we have a rough estimate, of how many were talking to here, is it 100, 000, is about 1 million. We are talking about counting the unaccountable. You know in the census world community, what are we talking about here . I can get you more precise numbers, but we are not talking millions. We are talking about those where weve exhausted our efforts. And we have reason to believe that people are living in the household, and then in those instances there is that option. I would appreciate a response to that, about help with the numbers are, and you know the characteristics, in the method you will use to fill in the halls. My other question is, the doctor, the one overseeing the tabulation. On sure if he has direct management of that, but he is our research and methodology session section. Did mr. Testify against the efforts by the administration to count, or to ask the question of citizenship on the census last year when it was in litigation . Im aware that he was a witness in that case yes. And he testified against inclusion of that question . I have not reviewed his testimony, but i think it was considered by many to be that it essentially raise questions. Okay i just think it merits noting, that he has an intimate involvement in how we are overseeing the tabulation of redistricting, but the question which is an administrative decision, i think it bears some questioning as to how this process is being carried out. I will and without a dont know how much am i have left, and i appreciate your response to the question generally, and i appreciate your taking the time to be. Here thank you congressman. So thank you i now recognized, the vice chair of the committee, congressman gomez, by remote. Thank you madam chair mr. Dillingham, thank you for being here with us. There is a lot of uncertainty, about but actually one thing is definitely clear, at the Census Bureau if its not allowed to continue its count through october. It has time you know to produce the data. And it may be an undercount when it comes to the populations United States. I want to ask you a series of questions i like the answers to. So it is my understanding, that this language request during requesting another 440 million in funding but not granting your quest for the deadline for the data, did you see the language before it was sent . No, i did not but i am aware we put in a request for a billion dollars, and i got approximately half of that in the senate bill. Good to know, so you did not see it so therefore you did not approve it correct . Let me just ask you again, what you describe what it is, im aware that we were requesting additional funds, as part of the appropriations process. And i wasnt involved in the discussion for the negotiation. Your request, was also to extend the statutory deadline, and they sent it without including that language. So youre saying you never saw the language before it was sent. Im sorry i have to go on to the next question. Have you discussed with leader mcconnell. Let me correct when we get the correct, there were discussions about the schedule and our beloved to continually access and im aware of that topic. But you did not see the language as you stated. Have you discussed with leader Mitch Mcconnell the need for extension . If i discussed with who excuse me . Mitch mcconnell. I have not discussed with Senate Leadership any specifics. In this new plan, is it the idea of census officials, that are pulling back the enumeration date, like not granting like john granting the extension to october the october. And asking you initially asked for a four month extension, to get the data to congress by april 2021. So was that the idea of the career a census officials . I can certainly say, that in discussions we have made a census along the way, and they have discussed with the house and senate staff, who have we have briefed on a weekly basis and im sure probably, im not previously im not privy sorry to those discussions, but im sure the topic of extension time, and shift in schedule were discussed. Is the new schedule, one prepared by the career census officials. I would say that we make assessments, and certainly are career officials, are involved in those recommendations and absolutely, we listen to people as to you know the assessment of where we are. So are you still sticking to the bureaus request for congress to, have a 12 month extension to april 2021. Instead of the december 31st deadline to deliver. And to reapportioned the house of representatives. To be clear someone asked me earlier, am i aware that the discussions had been held between the administration and congress is i am. But im not privy. I reclaim my time, your request, the bureaus which you are in charge of, the request to congress, to extend the delivery data through april 2021. Congressman, all requests my understanding goes through omb. I reclaim my time, do you still stand by that extension deadline request that you made. That the bureau made. We have for planning purposes, made assessments and continue to do so. Yes sir and im looking for yes or no. It seems like theres an obvious pattern, that you are not in control of at the Census Bureau, and political appointees are. You know your name will go down in history, if this is the worst senses ever conducted of the United States government. You cant run away and just say that this was only because of the Trump Administration later on. You will be responsible your name will be associated with it. So we will keep pushing, until we have accountability and a complete and accurate count of every person, in the United States. With that i yield back. Congressman let me say im not involved with the hill negotiations, on revising the schedule. I thank the gentleman for his question. His passion. And now i recognize, congresswoman. Thank you Ranking Member, and dr. Dillingham. I want to personally thank you, for what you are undertaking to do. Its a herculean effort, to complete the census this year. In the midst of a pandemic. I wish you all the best of luck, and Congress Stands ready to support you anyway we can. And any essential information mandate once this is completed, you know my district is a representation of how difficult the census can be to compete. Four of the counties in my district, have 100 of their population, living in hard to count neighborhoods. I spent last year, making sure i visited each one of these counties. And i can tell you from firsthand experience, how rural my community in West Virginia is. This is been exacerbated by the coronavirus and the pandemic. But actually in a way, it helped us with this because we were very slow, to get the pandemic and we havent had it to the proportion that has gone on in the country. It is critical that we count, each of our constituents and once we have that count, that we are apportioning congressional seats to each of the states, fairly. As an american citizen, the representation you have in the federal government, should always be fair and accurate. Counting People Living in the United States, illegally in apportionment, is an attack on our democratic institution. And seeks to take away the vote the voice of the American People. I strongly support President Trumps actions, to protect the sanctity of our constitutionally mandated process, for apportionment. And protecting the voice and the representation of the American People in congress. Is the first 2020 census counting, of all the people in the United States, regardless of legal residency status, yes or no . Congresswoman, i dont want to get in the details of people, that may not be establishing residency, and maybe there was another discussion with congressman, but your question i think goes to the heart, of the last question and comment. We are absolutely dedicated to a complete and accurate count of the people residing in the United States. I do think that we are poised, we were poised i think not to have one of the worst but in fact the very best census ever. That remains our goal. So we have not only embraced all sorts of innovations, all sorts of technologies, but our goal is to have a very the very best count possible. Of complete and accurate count of everyone. Thank you. Does the apportionment process play a role in how it is conducted. Or is this only tabulated once the census count has concluded . We do the complete, census count of everyone, and then we are looking particularly as pointed out in other data sources, to determine whether we can identify a group, that the president has recommended. So we will have a complete an accurate account. But we also are working to determine, the data and methodologys that might supply that additional information. Again we are east deceitful agency, and a data producing agency. Not a policy agency. And that is how you will be able to do the apportionment,. That is the way we are proceeding in your correct. Thank you i yield back my time. Congressman lynch, is recognized. Via remote. Yes can you hear me . Can you hear me . Yes we can yes we can. All right thank you. So doctor dillingham, back in june, so i represent along with congresswoman pressley, and we have hundreds of thousands of students, that normally attend school within my district. And miss pressleys district as well. And so, boston is traditionally one of the most difficult more difficult cities to count, because of the influx of students. And you sent a letter back in june, to the College President s asking them for their cooperation. And tendering the role, of students a list of students, that are attending you have their addresses, as of april 2020. And i just would like to get some update, on how that is going. Im a bit concerned because we are in an undercount right now, and in the process. And ive been working with our fantastic secretary of state, this is third concessions hes been around for awhile like me. His third consensus. I am wondering how we are making out on the student assessment, we have a lot of students who are going remotely, so they may not be in their intended location. Because a lot of schools are closed down, they are not even in the same city. How are we dealing with that . Congressman that is an excellent question. Let me say this i thought i might have the facts and figures with me but unfortunately i cant put my hands on them. We are making progress but as i said in my opening statement, we want to do that as accurately and efficiently and as soon as possible. So even though we are making progress, there is still some confusion among colleges and universities, because there are some says special provisions for respecting student information. So there is a grouping of colleges, or some colleges and i understand you have the most colleges purging graphic area in the country. And we want, we want to get that information at least in roster form, and it will save millions of dollars if we get accurately and efficiently and efficiently. But we can help pass a bill with a provision in it, and i will bring that your attention, but we are making progress and i seem to recall, that maybe 60 of the colleges, and i will check the record on that. But we want all the colleges, and we will you know the concern is that perhaps, we would protect the information, but we protect data better than anyone in the country that i am aware of. We understand colleges to a lot, but i think we protected as well, if not better and we have federal law on our side. We have the safeguards for that information, and we want it and wed like to get it efficiently. We appreciate your interest, and other members of congress. Well doctor dillingham, we cannot solve everything on this call, but if i could get a commitment that, my colleagues from the massachusetts delegation theyre interested in, and we have a ton of colleges and universities. So myself and miss pressley, and secretary if we could talk with your office, just to get an assessment on that, because time is short as you know. Absolutely. Would that be possible . Yes congressman. All right thank you so much. And i will yield back the balance of my time. Thank you very much, and i now recognize congresswoman porter. Thank you very much. Mr. Dillingham, is the sense Consensus Bureau, using records to do the consensus. We do use administrative data, for some a because trying to find if theres two vocation, or management of the census. I cant tell you exactly which one. Super, is the Census Bureau using these records, were going to be using these records, to find out the citizenship status of individuals . We do have administrative records, that will be used for us looking at the numbers, of citizens and noncitizens. That is correct. Okay, so under the privacy act there should be a system of records, notice. Its called an as our oan. Explaining what these records will be used for. Have you published and system of records notice . With my understanding, that we have complied with all the regulatory needs, but we can get back to you on specifics. Okay, and do you know if that as our owen, explains what the records will be used for as per the office of management and budget. Are you talking about our administrative records . We actually have to have their permission to do that. Does that statement, and that system of records notice. Does say anything to the administration republic that how using this. Well the executive order is quite transparent and appoint set out. Actually agencies to. But respectfully sir, you have an obligation, to comply with the privacy act. And to file that system of record, and to require the statement of purpose with the office of management and budget. So im asking, you do those statements that you are responsible for, advise the American Public as required, in congress. So as required. At the administration of records, will be used to determine citizens it citizenship status. Congresswoman i will check on that but it certainly is my understanding. Okay actually have it in front of me, and madam chairwoman i ask to enter the system of records noticed. Yes. So the answer is no. These disclosures do not make any mention that you will be using these records for citizenship. And since you are going to be using these records, for what to help actually determine citizenship, you need to put this at the office of management and budget. You should have been saying this of how those records will be used. And the notice are very clear. They say that indicates, and for what purpose the information is to be used. To the president s executive order, does not relieve you of the requirement to do this. I am not sure i understood lost part of your question . But do i am i sure that you. What will you please commit, to following the law with regard to the privacy act. And finally, a new system of record notice, and a new statement of purpose, to the omb. If in fact i am correct, there is no mention for the current records, that you are using this for the purpose of determining citizenship. And in fact you testified that is your intent. Congresswoman i will ask our Legal Counsel to look at this to see if we are in compliance . Thank you very much. And my last question for you, is will you count every person, regardless of citizenship, because that is what is required by the constitution. As ive said here today, we will count everyone in this nation. Okay so the constitution says, the representative how apportioned according to their respective numbers, that shall be determined, by having the number of free persons. So in that context when you think person means. Congresswoman that was a big topic of the first panel here, and as i said in my opening remarks, discussing the policies and history, and the legal analysis is not you know it wouldnt be prudent for me at this time as the director of the Census Bureau, we have to get the work done, and im not going to engage in quite frankly, and im not quite prepared to engage in the legal analysis or policy debate. We are Statistical Agency, distributing statistical products. And it will be the best available data that we have that we can get. Mr. Dillingham, i appreciate that but you cant wax on about the execution of your constitutional duties, and then not having the same answer nursing hearing. But i will follow up you directly about the impact of that. Thank you so much. And i think the gentlelady, for her questions and before i recognize representative for his closing remarks. I want to see clarity on one thing if i could mister director. I asked you earlier, if you would send this committee, the results of the bureaus analysis, after the president special. And you responded, that the bureau would be transparent. So can i take that as a yes that you will share the results of the bureaus analysis . It is the policy, and practice of the bureau to share with the world, any final decisions we make on that. But in the discussions, of it i cannot pledge that. I will say as we utilize decisions are made they will be transparent for everyone. Particularly the users of the data. Okay i now recognize, Ranking Member, for closing comments. Thank you chairman, i appreciate again you calling this hearing today on the 2020 census. I want to reiterate what i said at the beginning of this hearing, by saying the everyone should complete their sentence senses, and engage with enumerators if they come to your door. Very important that every single american is counted. I supported the president s action last week to exclude Illegal Immigrants, from this. Including Illegal Immigrants in the count for representation in congress, only dilutes the representation of all americans who vote in elections, and make a mockery of our basic principles, of one person one vote. I just want to make some points, to correct the record about some things that weve heard today. Democrats have made some very misleading or incorrect statements, that i would like to take this opportunity to correct. First, we have heard from democrats, that the president s memorandum means that Illegal Immigrants are not counted for purposes of the 2020 census. This is not correct. Illegal immigrants, are still counted for the purposes of the 2020 census. The president ial memorandum, does not direct direct the Census Bureau to not count them. Illegal immigrants more counted for the census, will be excluded on the apportionment basis. Second we have heard from democrats, that the democrats that the memorandum,. This is also incorrect. The president s memorandum, does not divert any federal funding, or exclude Illegal Immigrants from being considered in future funding decisions. Complete census, 2020 data, once tabulated, will be available for congress, state legislatures, municipalities to use when making funding decisions. We have also heard from democrats, that the Supreme Court ruled, that asking whether someone is a citizen, is unconstitutional . That is not correct. In fact, the Supreme Court actually held that asking someone is a u. S. Citizen, on the census is lawful. The justices said, that in light of the early understanding, in law practice under the new marriage clause, that we conclude that it permits congress, and the secretary of commerce, to inquire about citizenship, on the census questionnaire. Unquote. Although the administration had failed to comply with some procedural requirements, and reinstating the question, which appeared on previous since his form. The question itself was not ruled to be unconstitutional. We have also heard the president s bottom memorandum is unconstitutional. Not so, says the constitutional law expert, who testified here this morning. We heard from him, that the proper understanding of the constitution, is that we should only apportioned seats based on the citizenry, and not for especially those who are here illegally. They are here illegally. Counting those unlawfully, president creates perverse incentives, to dilute deep representation of floaters, and undermines the prince principle of one person one vote. Representation should matter to everyone. It is a simple question of fairness. And i yield back. I want to thank, the Ranking Member and all of the participants today, all of our panelists and especially you director, i thank you for your service in the military, and for your Public Service and her voluntarily coming here today, to be with us. I want to close by saying, that it is an undisputed fact, that the coronavirus has changed everything in our country. It has changed everything. The way we do things, and i would say that the coronavirus has changed the census. Because of the tremendous challenges and concern for your enumerators health. The enumeration was put off, from your testimony today you said, the enumeration and the hard to count will begin august 10th. And when you, put this off you also are rather secretary ross, asked us to put off the date for collecting the information, and also for sending the apportionment, to the states. From october 2022, to the from yeah october 2020 to april 2021. Some members of our democratic colleges, and we passed a bill called and we included the date change. That you requested so it is against this backdrop, of all these challenges that you are confronting with the hard to count, with the coronavirus, and i would call it a disruptive and historic disease, that has really overburden the Census Bureau and created more challenges. Not just for the Census Bureau to all of government. And it is against this backdrop, that President Trump issued what i consider, and illegal memorandum can last week, and the purpose this is why the reason we call this emergency hearing. Its a response to that memorandum. This memo will dramatically change, the manner in which the census count is reported. I agree with my colleague that you have testified and i applaud you, that everyone will be counted and we all work hard to get undocumented and everyone counted in the census. But, on monday i want to point out that the bureau hosted on its website, that the Census Bureau is working toward the plan to complete the field data the field Data Collection, by october 31st. 2020. Yet i noticed today that this notice has been removed from your website. But it has not been replaced, with a new date or with any date on when the field Data Collection is supposed to happen. Now i believe we should do what the census professionals say they need, they need this postponement to get the field data by october 31st. And to report it later in april 2021. But it has been reported to the press, or in the press, that the administration is trying to rush the apportionment count, and trying to push it back to december 31st before President Trump, would leave the white house if he possibly we dont know what the outcome will be of the election yet, but if he would be leaving the house before the election results. If he loses the election. Im concerned, that the administration is seeking to rush the process, and sacrifice the accuracy of the census for political gain. That the president s intent is to have all of this done before he leaves office. So that he can, do what i believe is an illegal action. So i hope that you will, live up to the standards of professionalism, stand by the request of secretary. I did a check with the professionals in new york who are working on the census, they are working with the numbers that secretary ross collected. And that it is translated to the states, by april 2021. And i also want to say that, without objection that all members we have five legislative days to submit any written questions additional written questions, to the witnesses to the chair, which will be forwarded to witnesses for their response. And i ask our witnesses, to please respond as promptly as they are able. I now say that this hearing is adjourned. Army herridge days is an annual event held in may at the u. S. Army Heritage Education center in carlo pennsylvania. Hundreds of living history hobbyists are selected by the center to conduct demonstrations and talk to the public about military subjects ranging from the American Revolution to the war on terror. Next, on american artifacts. We visit a medical tent set up as a world war ii u. S. Army battalion aid station. A mobile emergency room that would have been