[House Hearing, 116 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
BEYOND THE CITIZENSHIP QUESTION:
REPAIRING THE DAMAGE AND PREPARING
TO COUNT `WE THE PEOPLE' IN 2020
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON CIVIL RIGHTS AND CIVIL LIBERTIES
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT
AND REFORM
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
JULY 24, 2019
__________
Serial No. 116-52
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Oversight and Reform
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available on: http://www.govinfo.gov
http://www.oversight.house.gov or
http://www.docs.house.gov
___________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
37-949 PDF WASHINGTON : 2020
COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND REFORM
ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland, Chairman
Carolyn B. Maloney, New York Jim Jordan, Ohio, Ranking Minority
Eleanor Holmes Norton, District of Member
Columbia Paul A. Gosar, Arizona
Wm. Lacy Clay, Missouri Virginia Foxx, North Carolina
Stephen F. Lynch, Massachusetts Thomas Massie, Kentucky
Jim Cooper, Tennessee Mark Meadows, North Carolina
Gerald E. Connolly, Virginia Jody B. Hice, Georgia
Raja Krishnamoorthi, Illinois Glenn Grothman, Wisconsin
Jamie Raskin, Maryland James Comer, Kentucky
Harley Rouda, California Michael Cloud, Texas
Katie Hill, California Bob Gibbs, Ohio
Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Florida Ralph Norman, South Carolina
John P. Sarbanes, Maryland Clay Higgins, Louisiana
Peter Welch, Vermont Chip Roy, Texas
Jackie Speier, California Carol D. Miller, West Virginia
Robin L. Kelly, Illinois Mark E. Green, Tennessee
Mark DeSaulnier, California Kelly Armstrong, North Dakota
Brenda L. Lawrence, Michigan W. Gregory Steube, Florida
Stacey E. Plaskett, Virgin Islands
Ro Khanna, California
Jimmy Gomez, California
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, New York
Ayanna Pressley, Massachusetts
Rashida Tlaib, Michigan
David Rapallo, Staff Director
Candyce Phoenix, Subcommittee Staff Director
Valerie Shen, Chief Counsel
Amy Stratton, Clerk
Christopher Hixon, Minority Staff Director
Contact Number: 202-225-5051
------
Subcommittee on Civil Rights and Civil Liberties
Jamie Raskin, Maryland, Chairman
Carolyn Maloney, New York Chip Roy, Texas, Ranking Minority
Wm. Lacy Clay, Missouri Member
Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Florida Thomas Massie, Kentucky
Robin Kelly, Illinois Mark Meadows, North Carolina
Jimmy Gomez, California Jody Hice, Georgia
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, New York Michael Cloud, Texas
Ayanna Pressley, Massachusetts Carol D. Miller, West Virginia
Eleanor Holmes Norton, District of
Columbia
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on July 24, 2019.................................... 1
Witnesses
The Honorable Steven Dillingham, Ph.D. Director, U.S. Census
Bureau
Oral Statement................................................... 5
Robert Goldenkoff, Director of Strategic Issues, U.S. Government
Accountability Office
Oral Statement................................................... 7
Nicholas Marinos, Director of Information Technology and
Cybersecurity, U.S. Government Accountability Office
Oral Statement................................................... 8
Written opening statements and witnesses' written statements are
available in the U.S. House of Representatives Repository:
https://docs.house.gov.
Index of Documents
----------
The documents listed below are available at: https://
docs.house.gov.
* Questions for the Record from Rep. Miller to Mr. Goldenkoff,
and responses.
* Questions for the Record from Rep. Raskinto the U.S. Census
Bureau, and responses.
BEYOND THE CITIZENSHIP QUESTION:
REPAIRING THE DAMAGE AND PREPARING
TO COUNT `WE THE PEOPLE' IN 2020
----------
Wednesday, July 24, 2019
House of Representatives
Subcommittee on Civil Rights and Civil Liberties
Committee on Oversight and Reform
Washington, D.C.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 1 p.m., in
room 2154, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Jamie Raskin
presiding.
Present: Representatives Raskin, Maloney, Clay, Wasserman
Schultz, Kelly, Gomez, Ocasio-Cortez, Pressley, Norton, Massie,
Meadows, Hice, Cloud, Miller and Keller.
Also present: Representative Horsford.
Mr. Raskin. Good afternoon. Welcome. Thank you all for
coming today. Welcome to our subcommittee hearing on the status
of the 2020 census.
I want to start by welcoming a new member to the
subcommittee as well as a new member to the Oversight
Committee, Fred Keller, who comes from Pennsylvania 12.
Welcome. We are delighted to have you.
And also, let's see, without objection I want to waive onto
the subcommittee today Steven Horsford from Nevada, who wanted
to ask question. And so by unanimous consent we will grant him
that privilege.
Before I make my remarks, I want to thank our witnesses for
their ongoing cooperation with our subcommittee. Mr.
Goldenkoff, Mr. Marinos, you and your staff have been truly
excellent partners in this oversight process, so I want to
thank you both. Dr. Dillingham, I also want to thank you for
your work preparing for the 2020 census.
I learned from my district staff earlier this month that
you toured Silver Spring and Langley Park in beautiful
Montgomery County, Maryland. These are diverse, high-density
areas with a high concentration of immigrants, where a variety
of languages are spoken, and I really appreciate you coming out
to check out our community. My district director, Kathleen
Connor, met with your staff this month and was really
encouraged by the Bureau's preparation, so I want to thank you
and your staff for your hard work.
That work, of course, is ongoing. We have got a lot to
accomplish before 2020. We spent a lot of the last year
embroiled in a battle over the citizenship question. Now that
the Administration has been forced to stand down by Congress
and by the Supreme Court the Bureau must devote all available
resources to repairing the damage of this effort, getting us
back on track, and conducting a complete and accurate account
in 2020.
Although the move to impose the citizenship question has
been rejected by the courts as arbitrary and capricious, I fear
that it may still be endangering an accurate count in 2020, so
I am eager to hear about the aggressive steps that the Bureau
can take and is taking to repair the damage caused by this ill-
considered campaign.
Every 10 years the Bureau struggles to count everybody in
America--according to constitutional directives. Some
communities, including communities of immigrants and people of
color, are chronically under-counted. They then do not receive
their fair share of government resources, in everything from
Federal and state legislative representation to Medicaid and
Head Start.
The consequences of an under-count reverberate for decades.
The Bureau's own study showed that distrust of the government
imperils a good count. Among communities of color, 41 percent
of Asian Americans, 35 percent of African Americans, and 32
percent of Hispanics are very concerned about the census being
used against them. Similarly, 39 percent of people who are not
English proficient and 34 percent of those born outside the
U.S. are afraid to respond in the census. So, there is a lot of
fear in our communities that we have got to strive to overcome.
The citizenship question, the President's Executive Order
and his immigration policies, and the threatened raids all
strike fear in the hearts of many of the communities that are
already mistrustful of government. And even though the question
will not be on the 2020 census, there is a test in the field
right now where 240,000 families are being asked the
citizenship question. Why is that?
This decision to post the citizenship question to hundreds
of thousands of people after the Supreme Court rejected it
seems hard to reconcile with the reality of the Supreme Court
decision and the unbroken defeat of the question in the lower
district courts. So now we face the threat of prolonged
confusion, and I do hope we can talk about that.
The Bureau must outline specific steps it is taking to
increase outreach to the communities whose participation has
been chilled. Specifically, the Bureau must reassure everyone
of the confidentiality of the data collected. It must reaffirm
its commitment that census data will not be used for law
enforcement purposes. It must clarify the impact of the
President's Executive Order on the confidentiality and use of
census data, and it must identify specific actions that it will
take to differentiate itself from law enforcement in the field.
In light of the damage done, I think the Bureau should
increase outreach to hard-to-count communities instead of
sitting on $1 billion in appropriated funds. Earlier this year,
the Bureau told Congress it intends to carry over $1 billion to
Fiscal Year 2020 instead of spending it this year. Why is that?
I fail to see a compelling reason for the delay.
The Bureau relies heavily on partnership specialists to
create relationships in hard-to-count communities but it is two
months behind on filling 1,500 positions, reportedly due to a
backlog in background checks. But we can't afford this delay.
Census staffers will soon begin knocking on doors. Shouldn't
the Bureau be using the leftover funds or the existing funds to
clear this backlog?
Earlier this year, the House Appropriations Report ordered
the Bureau to improve its communication strategy and to open
questionnaire assistance centers, QACs, to reach communities
missed in the Bureau's count. QACs would provide reliable
locations in hard-to-count communities where people could seek
face-to-face assistance from census staff. QACs only cost the
Bureau $27 million in 2010. Why isn't the Bureau using the
carryover funds to open QACs, as directed by Congress?
The Bureau has been underfunded for many years. Now that it
has been granted a healthy budget it is refusing to spend it.
Outreach for the census should be fully funded now.
Finally, the Bureau should improve its processes for
tracking and implementing security recommendations to safeguard
data and avoid missing key deadlines. I am alarmed to hear that
the commerce inspector general recently found that the Bureau's
IT systems contained fundamental security deficiencies that
violated Federal standards, indicating that the Bureau is
behind schedule in developing its systems for 2020. This is a
common theme.
GAO has noted that the Bureau is behind schedule on
resolving 104 high-risk or very high-risk security
vulnerabilities and that it has no schedule or process for
implementing security recommendations that were rendered by the
Department of Homeland Security. That is not acceptable. The
Bureau is home to one of the largest data bases of identifiable
personal information on the American people. The security of
this data is paramount, not only to a well-run census but to
the public's confidence in our system. I trust that the GAO has
recommendations for the Bureau to get back on track and I look
forward to hearing its plans for that today.
And now I happily will yield to the ranking member of the
committee, my friend, Mr. Meadows.
Mr. Meadows. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for calling
this hearing. Obviously this is not the first hearing we have
had on the census. The decennial census is something that we
have had under this Administration and under the previous
Administration where we have had timelines that we have been
working on. So, Dr. Dillingham, we look forward to hearing from
you in terms of how we are making progress.
I do want to offer--I mean, this is Mr. Goldenkoff's at
least ninth hearing, I think, as we look at this particular
issue, because I know that when I was chairman of the
Government Operations Subcommittee this was of critical
importance that we get it done right. And so whether it is this
Administration or the prior Administration, my fear had been,
and continues to be, are we going to do those cybersecurity
issues and the end-to-end testing to make sure that we can
count on not only the privacy that the chairman talked about
but the integrity of the system.
I will also offer a little bit of a counter-narrative. We
have spent way too much time on the citizenship question. It is
time that we get serious about implementing this, and,
candidly, any direction that we continue to maintain as it
relates to the citizenship question is problematic, in terms of
delivering and actually counting those individuals. I also know
that there is a strong outreach. Dr. Dillingham, I want to
thank you for the strong outreach to those, what I would say
more rural and underserved communities, that the chairman was
talking about. The funds that are allocated--I happen to agree
that we need to roll those into next year, because I don't know
about any of you but if there is a thing that most Americans
are thinking about today, if there is a top 20 list, census
doesn't make the top 20 list. I am just telling you. It will
make it starting in March and April of next year, we will start
to see that, and that outreach needs to really be dedicated.
But we need to have the systems in place now.
And so what I would say is identifying those systems,
making sure that they are there, making sure that the way that
we collect the data--I know this is going to be a
groundbreaking way that we use the internet like we have never
used it before. But we tried that in 2010, and it didn't work.
And so the last thing I think this chairman wants, or that I
want, is to have egg on our face when it comes to actually
counting every individual.
And regardless of where you stand on whether the
citizenship question should be asked or not, it is imperative
that we count everybody, and it is imperative that we do that
in a way where we can allocate not only the resources, the $650
billion or so that flows to each one of our districts, but that
we do it in a fair and accurate way. And so I look forward to
hearing from you on that.
I have got a longer written statement that I would ask for
unanimous consent to be added to the record.
Mr. Raskin. Without objection.
Mr. Meadows. I thank you, the chairman. And I apologize in
advance. I actually have a meeting at the other end of
Pennsylvania Avenue that I have to get to, and so we have got
other people coming in, but we have got staff that is paying
attention. And so with that I yield back.
Mr. Raskin. Well, we appreciate that. We appreciate your
very thoughtful remarks, Mr. Meadows, and we will release you
to the uncertain fortunes of the Article 2 branch, and we will
stick right here with Article 1 branch. But thank you for
coming.
I now have the pleasure of welcoming our witnesses. First
is the Honorable Steven Dillingham, Ph.D., who is the Director
of the U.S. Census Bureau; Robert Goldenkoff, who is the
Director of Strategic Issues for the U.S. Government
Accountability Office, the GAO; and Nicholas Marinos, the
Director of Information Technology and Cybersecurity at the
GAO, at the U.S. Government Accountability Office.
I will begin by swearing all of you in, please rise, if you
would, and raise your right hand. And Mr. Keller has been
promoted very quickly to the ranking member of our committee.
[Witnesses sworn.]
Mr. Raskin. Let the record reflect that all the witnesses
answered in the affirmative.
Thank you, and please be seated.
The microphones are sensitive, so please speak directly
into them. And without objection, your written statements will
be made part of the permanent record.
With that, Director Dillingham, you are now recognized to
give an oral presentation of your testimony for five minutes.
STATEMENT OF STEVEN DILLINGHAM, Ph.D., DIRECTOR, U.S. CENSUS
BUREAU
Mr. Dillingham. Chairman Raskin and committee members,
thank you for inviting me. This is an important time for the
Census Bureau and the 2020 census. The census clock is ticking,
we are increasingly ready, and we thank you for your support.
Regarding the President's Executive Order, we are reviewing
it. Steps have begun to form an interagency working group. We
will share updates.
Preparations for the census continue unabated and execution
is near. The census will begin in remote Alaska in less than
six months. The nationwide count commences in nine months, in
March 2020.
It is my opinion, one shared by the Census Bureau
professionals, that we have an outstanding plan built upon best
practices, with cost savings and important innovations. We have
teams in place and hirings are underway. Our teams are entering
a high-performance phase. Hiring is proceeding. Training is
continuing. Safety and accountability are progressing.
Currently we are onboarding tens of thousands of address
listers. We appreciate congressional help in recruiting them.
With hurricane season here, we must be prepared for
disasters and unforeseen events. When a disaster strikes, we
can and will adapt. Information system readiness and
cybersecurity are paramount. Our well-designed IT systems and
integrated operations are working. We test for functionality,
scalability, and, of course, cybersecurity. Data is encrypted
at every stage. We are working closely with government and
industry experts.
Oversight, accountability, and support are valued. First,
we are committed to assisting Congress and this subcommittee.
Second, we appreciate the work of the Government Accountability
Office and Office of Inspector General. We agree the 2020
census is high risk, given its scope, complexity, and
importance.
Third, we appreciate bipartisan support, including
continued funding. Appropriators requested a plan for
additional funds. We developed an option to increase community
partnership assistance and hard-to-count outreach.
Our highest priority, as mentioned by the chairman, is to
reach hard-to-count groups. We continue to identify and visit
such communities, found in all states and in urban, suburban,
and rural areas. During my travels I see partners reaching
people in new and better ways. Counting children has been a
perennial challenge. We are working closely with pediatricians
and schools. We have plans to reach the homeless. Our
partnership specialists from local communities and different
backgrounds enhance these efforts. We have integrated,
research-based outreach campaign that messages for diverse
communities.
I often repeat the message that the 2020 census is easy,
safe, and important. A member of the congressional Hispanic
Caucus recently suggested that I reverse that order.
The census is important. Its importance increases daily.
Data is used for apportionment and redistricting, and by
governments at all levels in developing policies and
administering programs for billions of dollars reaching
millions of people. Funds support education, transportation,
health and human services, safety jobs, and more. It is used by
government, businesses, and families.
The census is safe. Census data remains secure with
confidentiality protected. Congress passed stringent laws with
severe criminal penalties of imprisonment and fines for
violations. Census employees take a lifetime oath to protect
our data. The Census Bureau sets the highest standard and
maintains a culture and practice of protecting data. It is not
shared with anyone or any agency.
Finally, the census is easy. This is due to improvements in
technologies. People may complete the census anytime, anywhere.
Our language assistance will reach more than 99.6 percent of
the population. This will be the first census ever where people
may choose to answer electronically. If people prefer paper,
questionnaires will arrive automatically in the mail.
I describe our technologies and tools in context of a
familiar story. Late at night, a person sees a friend under a
street lamp, looking for a lost item. The friend joins the
search but is having no luck. He asks his friend, ``Are you
sure you lost it here?'' The friend replies, ``No. I dropped it
down the block in the dark, but I am looking here because the
light is better.''
We can no longer rely on collecting data in the usual ways
and places. With internet and phone options we have tools to go
into the less-visible, hard-to-count areas and collect the
data. In the boroughs of New York City, mobile devices can
count in the street markets or among the students at Queens
College. In Detroit, they can be used in civic centers and
houses of worship. In South Carolina and Georgia, the
technology can count persons displaced from closed mill
villages or rural farms.
In Silver Spring, Maryland, you can deploy the tools in
community centers and commercial establishments like Korean
Corner. In Baltimore, Maryland, libraries and recreation
centers alone provide 80 locations with interconnectivity that
can and will be used. Partnership specialists will work with
community groups, using computers and laptops and phones, to
count others wherever they may be, including homeless beneath
the freeway. Options for reaching hard-to-count persons are
limited only by imagination and initiative. In Baltimore, I met
partners with great ideas and initiative.
On the lighter side, I made an offer to the mayor to repeat
a well-known act of a previous mayor. When the opening of the
city's aquarium was delayed, that mayor publicly fulfilled his
bet on the opening date by jumping, with cameras rolling, into
the aquarium's seal pool. I made that pledge to Mayor Young
last week. If the city's response rate matches or exceeds the
state average, I would love to jump into the seal pool to
celebrate the city's success. I expect to lose that bet. The
Baltimore city's plan, that I have with me, was released on
Friday. It is complete with extensive partnerships and a host
of exciting innovations.
I am optimistic about what I am seeing across the Nation.
Preparations are underway. Partnerships are increasing.
Interest and enthusiasm are growing. Working together, arm in
arm, hand in hand, and with new technologies, expanded
outreach, and community partnerships, we can conduct the best
census ever, one that is complete and accurate.
I look forward to answering your questions.
Mr. Raskin. Thank you very much, Mr. Dillingham. Mr.
Goldenkoff, you are recognized for five minutes.
STATEMENT OF ROBERT GOLDENKOFF, DIRECTOR OF STRATEGIC ISSUES,
U.S. GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE
Mr. Goldenkoff. Chairman Raskin and members of the
subcommittee, GAO is pleased to be here today to discuss the
Census Bureau's readiness for the 2020 head count.
As you know, in recent years we have identified a number of
operational, IT, cybersecurity, and other challenges that raise
serious concerns about the Bureau's ability to conduct a cost-
effective enumeration. In February 2017, we added the 2020
census to GAO's list of high-risk government programs and it
remains on our high-risk list today.
My remarks this afternoon will focus on two such
challenges--implementing design innovations aimed at
controlling costs and hiring temporary staff. My colleague,
Nick Marinos, will then discuss the challenges the Bureau faces
in implementing and securing critical IT systems.
The bottom line is that as the countdown to census day
grows short, the Bureau has made important progress toward
mitigating some of the risks facing the census, and we are
encouraged by the Commerce Department and Census Bureau's
leadership commitment toward carrying out a cost-effective
enumeration.
Still, the Bureau estimates the census may cost as much as
$15.6 billion, a $3 billion increase over the Bureau's original
estimate, and significant uncertainties lie ahead. For example,
with respect to design innovations to help control costs while
maintaining accuracy, the Bureau will use new procedures and
technology for 2020, including greater use of automated data
collection methods, administrative records in place of data
collected by enumerators, verifying most addresses using aerial
imagery and other in-office procedures rather than by going
door to door, and allowing households the option of responding
to the census via the internet.
These innovations show promise for controlling cost but
they also introduce new risks, in part, because they have not
been tested extensively, if at all, in earlier enumerations. As
a result, testing is essential to ensure that key IT systems
and operations will function as planned. However, citing
budgetary uncertainties, the Bureau scaled back operational
tests in 2017 and 2018. Without sufficient testing across a
range of geographic locations, housing types, living
arrangements, and demographic groups, operational problems can
go undiscovered and the opportunity to refine procedures and
systems could be lost.
Another risk factor is the hiring of temporary staff, and,
in particular, the onboarding of partnership specialists.
Currently, the Bureau plans to recruit approximately 2.24
million applicants, and from these, to hire over 400,000
temporary field staff for two key operations, address
canvassing and non-response followup. According to Bureau
officials, the Nation's current low unemployment rate has not
yet impacted their ability to recruit staff, and as of July
2019, the Bureau reported that for all 2020 census operations
it had processed just over 500,000 applicants.
But at the same time, the Bureau was also seeking to hire
approximately 1,500 partnership specialists by the end of June
2019, to help increase census awareness in minority communities
and hard-to-count populations. The Bureau fell short of this
goal with just 903 partnership specialists hired as of July 6,
and as of July 17, another 872 applicants were awaiting to have
their background checks completed. The Bureau expects to have
all 1,500 partnership specialists on board by September 1,
2019.
In the coming weeks, it will be important for the Bureau to
hire and retain the full complement of partnership staff
planned for 2020. Otherwise, it might affect the Bureau's
outreach efforts to key communities at risk of being
undercounted.
In short, while the Bureau and Department of Commerce have
taken steps to keep preparations for the decennial on track,
additional steps are needed. Going forward, to help ensure a
cost-effective head count, continued leadership attention and
strong congressional oversight will be needed to help ensure
that the Bureau implements our open recommendations, that key
components and systems work as required, that preparations stay
on schedule, and management functions follow leading practices.
This concludes my prepared remarks, and I now turn it over
to my colleague, Nick Marinos, who will discuss the risks
facing the Census Bureau's IT and cyber systems.
Mr. Raskin. Thanks very much.
Mr. Marinos, you are recognized for five minutes.
STATEMENT OF NICHOLAS MARINOS, DIRECTOR OF INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY AND CYBERSECURITY, U.S. GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY
OFFICE
Mr. Marinos. Thank you, Chairman Raskin and members of the
subcommittee. Thank you very much for inviting GAO to discuss
the Bureau's efforts to prepare for the 2020 census.
As Robert mentioned, our most recent high-risk report
highlighted a number of IT-related challenges facing the
Bureau. These include IT systems readiness and cybersecurity.
The bottom line is that these challenges still remain today,
and we believe that it is important for the Bureau to overcome
them prior to the 2020 census.
Starting with systems readiness, the Bureau plans to rely
heavily on IT for the 2020 census, including through the 52
systems it plans to use during different stages of census
operations. Many of these systems will be deployed multiple
times in order to add needed functionality over the course of
16 operational deliveries.
The Bureau has delivered the first group of systems to
support early hiring and training, and the next few months will
see key testing and production deadlines for many additional
systems. However, our ongoing work has determined that the
Bureau is at risk of not meeting key IT milestones for five
upcoming operational deliveries. These include deliveries in
support of internet self-response, a new innovation that the
Bureau intends to rely on for a significant portion of
responses to the census, and recruiting and hiring for peak
operations, which includes hiring hundreds of thousands of
temporary employees to assist with counting the population. The
Bureau needs to closely monitor these schedule risks in order
to ensure that the systems are all delivered on time.
Regarding cybersecurity, the Bureau is working hard to
assess security controls, take needed corrective actions, and
gain the proper sign-off to ensure that each system is ready
for operations. Although a large majority of the 52 systems
have at least received an initial authorization to operate,
significant assessment work remains. According to the Bureau,
nine systems will need to have their security controls
reassessed to account for additional development work prior to
the 2020 census, and five systems are still awaiting that
initial authorization.
I would like to note that we have been encouraged that the
Bureau is coordinating with the Department of Homeland Security
on cyber issues. DHS has provided this assistance through cyber
threat intelligence and information sharing and through
conducting instant management and vulnerability assessments,
among other activities.
All of these internal and external assessment efforts,
including the recent evaluation performed by the Commerce
Department's Office of the Inspector General, are vital,
especially since the majority of the Bureau's systems that will
support 2020 operations contain personally identifiable
information.
At the end of the day, however, they will only be as
valuable as the corrective actions the Bureau takes in response
to them. We recently made two recommendations to the Bureau for
management attention in this area. The first called for the
Bureau to address its security to-do list in a timelier manner,
and the second called for it to establish a formal process for
tracking and completing actions in response to DHS'
assessments.
The Bureau reported that it is working to implement our
recommendations. If fully implemented, the Bureau will be
better positioned to ensure that assessments will result in
high-priority improvements to its cybersecurity posture.
In summary, we are running short on time before key census
operations begin. Moving forward, it will be critical for the
Bureau to devote enough attention and effort to completing IT
system development activities and implementing cybersecurity
improvements in a timely and prioritized way.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement.
Mr. Raskin. Thank you very much for that cogent
presentation. Thanks to all of the witnesses. We will now begin
our questioning according to the five-minute rule. I now
recognize myself for five minutes.
I want to focus on the confusion caused by the census test
that is currently in the field. Despite the Administration's
abandonment of the citizenship question in the wake of the
Supreme Court decision, hundreds of thousands of households are
now still being asked to answer it. In mid-June, while the case
was pending, before the Supreme Court made its ruling on June
27, the Bureau pushed a last-minute field test to 480,000
households, half of which got the citizenship question and half
of which did not.
The result has been confusion. Hundreds of thousands of
people heard the news that the question wouldn't be asked, and
yet they received a form from the census with precisely the
question that the Supreme Court had rejected. Just last week,
we got a phone call from a citizen wanting to know why she had
received a census form with the citizenship question. I was
asked that at a town hall meeting over the weekend. According
to the Washington Post, one Florida resident who received the
form said that receiving the test questionnaire, quote, ``feels
like a scare tactic.''
So, Dr. Dillingham, everyone knew the Supreme Court had to
rule on the citizenship question case at the very latest by the
end of June. Why didn't the Bureau wait until the end of the
month to hear what the court's decision was before launching
this test?
Mr. Dillingham. Mr. Chairman, that is an excellent
question. Let me provide some context for you.
The planning--this is actually a test, a 2019 test, was
designed for operational consequences and impact. So if the
question was going to be in the census, we wanted to know what
would be the differential impact for purposes of devoting
resources, such as the partnerships, such as the enumerators,
et cetera.
The planning for it began actually last calendar year. The
printing occurred, I think, in April, and it followed a
schedule as perfectly as possible, the same type of schedule
that we would have for the 2020 census, and that is the
staggered mailings, et cetera, response dates. It was to
replicate, as closely as possible, the 2020 census.
Now the form itself, on each page, has ``this is a test,''
and in the introduction it says, ``This is a test to help us
prepare for the 2020 census.'' So anyone that reads the
information, it should be quite bold, that this is a test.
Mr. Raskin. But if it says to get ready for the 2020
census----
Mr. Dillingham. That is correct.
Mr. Raskin [continuing]. it implies that the citizenship
question will indeed be on the 2020 census.
Mr. Dillingham. Well, it certainly implies it is a
possibility. So again, half went out without the question, half
went out with the question, and our desire was to see what is
the differential impact.
So we followed the schedule and actually, I think--and I
will double-check--only one of the staggered mailings that I
think stretched about probably six weeks, the same as with the
census, or maybe it was a little more condensed, but five or
six weeks, I recall, it was already--before the Supreme Court
ruled--four or five of those were already in the mail, and
actually the last went out earlier this week.
Mr. Raskin. Whose decision was that?
Mr. Dillingham. That was actually the career staff at the
Census Bureau felt it was very important that we would know the
operational impact for purposes of resources.
Mr. Raskin. So you never made that judgment?
Mr. Dillingham. No, I did not make that decision.
Mr. Raskin. All right. Thank you.
Mr. Goldenkoff, is it normal to have a large-scale field
test like this, this close to the census? In other words, if we
went back to the 2010 census, would we have found a similar
test in 2009?
Mr. Goldenkoff. No, and I think this highlights the risks
associated with last-minute design changes to a decennial
census. Typically, the last major test is conducted in the
eighth year of the decade, and so when you do this--and I
don't--you know, you could argue this was an important risk
mitigation strategy----
Mr. Raskin. I see that.
Mr. Goldenkoff [continuing]. with everything that was going
on. But, you know--and it will take a lot of effort to kind of
get the word out on ``what was this?'' And, you know, even
though it says ``test'' on every page, it could still strike
some concerns.
Mr. Raskin. Mr. Dillingham, just to be clear, is it still
going on? In other words, are there still people----
Mr. Dillingham. All the mailings have been made and we are
getting the results. I did check last night, and out of the
480,000 that have been mailed, more than 200,000 had been
returned. But the only information we have--we haven't looked
at the content of the returns--but it does verify and provide
some very important information for us, and that is with regard
to both the 2020 census and potentially in the future, what
kind of impact this may be.
One of the things that you can tell, just by looking at the
basic data returning, is that the hard-to-count areas, again,
are responding at a much less rate than the other areas. So
that is helping to verify that.
Mr. Raskin. Are people being mandated to respond to the
test? I mean, are you required to answer that question?
Mr. Dillingham. Mr. Chairman, actually, under the laws
governing the Census Bureau, when we send out a survey it does
recite that this is pursuant to law and you are supposed to
reply to it. That is----
Mr. Raskin. So there are hundreds of thousands of people
who, in essence, are being told they are legally obligated to
answer the citizenship question right now.
Mr. Dillingham. Well, in the context of a test. We do
testing, all sorts of testing and surveys, and so it really is
part of the routine business. But this was to look at the
impact for operational purposes.
Mr. Raskin. Okay. My time has expired and I now recognize
Mr. Keller for five minutes.
Mr. Keller. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, gentlemen,
for being here today.
I just want to make sure that I understand. I know we
talked about the importance of making sure we count everybody
accurately so that money gets appropriated properly. I think
another concern of the American citizens is the fact when they
transmit information to the government that that information is
secure.
And the question I have goes to the IT systems that we are
putting in place. Are they government employees that do that or
do we contract the building of that software from private
companies? I guess, Mr. Marinos, that would be----
Mr. Marinos. So the answer is that contractors are
leveraged by the Bureau, and so there is a significant
responsibility on the Bureau to ensure oversight of those
contractors.
Mr. Keller. Okay. So if we do that, you are confident that
we have--and I guess, Mr. Dillingham or Mr. Marinos, you can
answer this--we are confident that we have accurately and
thoroughly vetted these contractors to make sure that the
information will remain secure and that there is no possible
way for anybody to hack into it or get that personal
information of American citizens?
Mr. Marinos. I would defer to Dr. Dillingham.
Mr. Dillingham. Congressman Keller, we have very elaborate
protections. As you are well aware, Title 13 requires, by law,
that we protect this information. So we had existing security
and it goes into, but in the collection, during the 2020
census, using the new devices, we have the latest state-of-the-
art software and devices that encrypts the information
automatically. It encrypts it when it goes into the device, and
when it is sent to the----
Mr. Keller. I understand that, but the companies that build
this, we are sure there is no way that there is anything built
into it that anybody can hack into this and gain access to the
information?
Mr. Dillingham. I can assure you--and we do. There are the
requirements, the security requirements, for the contractors as
well, and that we work with them and monitor, et cetera. And
then it goes into, I will call it our normal safeguarding
systems. We do apply the state-of-the-art, we have the best
minds, both in the private sector and the public sector,
working with DHS, the intelligence agencies, as well as the
major high-tech companies to look at this. And so I can assure
that we have identified no major issue that would be the type
of breach that you----
Mr. Keller. We have identified none. And again, I just want
to--a question regarding a $61 million printing and mailing
contract issued by the Government Printing Office, awarded in
October 2017. It is my understanding that the company receiving
the contract has filed for bankruptcy, after they received a
payment from the Federal Government?
Mr. Dillingham. Mr. Congressman, that does predate me, but
my understanding is--and I think the record is clear,
publicly--that a contract was let out of the Government
Printing Office, and the firm that it was given to had
financial problems, and, in fact, it resulted in a settlement
and having to go with another contractor.
Mr. Keller. Understand my concern. If we, as the Federal
Government, couldn't even vet a company as far as financial
stability and make a payment to them, I think that we should
have some concern that we would be able to make sure that the
companies building the software, that American citizens are
going to be using to transmit their information, that their
information remains secure.
I hope you can understand the concern that I have, and
maybe you can speak to what processes have been put--or let me
ask you this. Have processes been put in place----
Mr. Dillingham. Yes.
Mr. Keller [continuing]. to make sure?
Mr. Dillingham. Yes, and I am certain that--again, we had
another Federal agency involved that actually lets those
contract, the Government Printing Office, and I do know that
both in our agency as well as in that agency reforms were made,
changes were made to guard against that in the future.
Mr. Keller. Another question, just real quickly. I
understand, too, that we let a contract for a company and the
company was sold and the company sold that contract, or the
subsidiary that was doing that, to another company. Do we
approve that, if a company is offered a contract or awarded a
contract, and they sell that subsidiary or whatever?
Mr. Dillingham. Mr. Congressman, I think I better get back,
and maybe with particulars from our acquisition folks as to
what the Federal acquisition requirements are and our adherence
to those.
Mr. Keller. Okay. I guess the point I want to make, you
know, in securing the information that American citizens are
required to provide to their government I think should be
paramount to all of us. And I have heard a lot of things about
the citizenship question that was going to be asked. And that
question should not be--citizenship should not be
controversial. It is not new. But I think what our committee on
oversight should do is make sure that when we require American
citizens to transmit information to their government, that this
committee--this committee focus on making sure that that
information is secure and not going down a rabbit hole, and
something that should not be controversial or is not new, in
the form of a citizenship question. Thank you.
Mr. Dillingham. Congressman, we agree.
Mr. Raskin. The gentleman's time has expired. I now
recognize the gentleman from the first district of Missouri,
Mr. Clay.
Mr. Clay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for
conducting this hearing. As we know, the census is such an
essential part of our government and of the operation of this
country.
Let me start with Dr. Dillingham. The marketing ad agency,
VMLY&R, are they considered the census marketing prime
contractor?
Mr. Dillingham. Not to my knowledge, Congressman. We have--
the one we have, we call it Y&M, Young & Rubicam.
Mr. Clay. Yes.
Mr. Dillingham. Yes. Yes. Maybe that is the full name. I
apologize.
Mr. Clay. Yes. That is who.
Mr. Dillingham. That is, I will call it, the prime
contractor, and we have at least eight subcontractor that
specialize, particularly with hard-to-count populations and
special reach efforts.
Mr. Clay. Can you tell me which--what entity or entities
are responsible for the African American media buys?
Mr. Dillingham. Congressman, we definitely have that
information. People sitting behind me have that. I will be glad
to talk with you and meet with you.
Mr. Clay. Yes. Can you provide that to the committee?
Mr. Dillingham. Absolutely.
Mr. Clay. Let me ask you, when purchasing ads for the
census, must contractors pay media outlets in advance, and if
that is so, what is the timeframe for repayment? Is it 120
days?
Mr. Dillingham. Mr. Chairman, let me answer your former
question, and I am told Carol H. William Agency is really the
prime subcontractor with the African American population.
The timing of the buying of the ads--this week, today, the
career professionals at the Census Bureau are working,
actually, in New York City, reviewing the creative products
that are going to be produced for all forms of media--
television, radio, print media, et cetera--and out of that
process will come the messaging and the materials and the
creative products, is what they call it.
The actual buying of time, to the best of my knowledge, is
probably late December, but I will get you exact dates for
purchasing. And I know that discussions are going on and there
is a complexity, because some of the information is considered
to be somewhat proprietary.
Mr. Clay. And I do understand that, but when you have to
pay in advance, do you think that that could inhibit some
small, minority-owned companies from really being able to
engage, with you and I knowing that we have to focus and do a
better job on counting those hard-to-count populations. And so
to have barriers in the place of these small businesses, it
really doesn't make sense.
Mr. Dillingham. Yes. Congressman, I certainly agree with
your concerns and what I think we better do is get you some
particulars as to the buying practices and the schedule dates.
But I do know that another side of the coin is the sooner you
buy the time, the cheaper it is. But we can work with you and
see what coordination may be needed.
Mr. Clay. And I would appreciate that. And, Mr. Chairman--
and perhaps the Bureau could help me with this--I would request
that the Bureau provide this committee with the names of the
minority-owned subcontractor firms and minority suppliers
participating in the census 2020 marketing and advertising
efforts for African Americans, the area of the country and
communities that they are responsible for covering, the value
of awarded contracts, and when these contracts were executed.
I also want to know how these minority suppliers and firms
were selected, and finally, I would like to know how much money
total is being allocated for African American media. Can you
help us----
Mr. Dillingham. Congressman, we will be glad to get you
that information.
Mr. Clay [continuing]. with that information?
Mr. Dillingham. Yes. Some of it may not have yet been
decided, some of the buys, but we will get you what we have.
Mr. Clay. And you and I understand how challenging it is--
--
Mr. Dillingham. Yes.
Mr. Clay [continuing]. to count hard-to-count communities.
And so I want to work with the agency in every aspect of this.
Mr. Dillingham. We join you on that goal, yes.
Mr. Clay. Thank you. My time is up and I yield back.
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez.
[Presiding.] Thank you.
The chair now recognizes the gentlelady from West Virginia,
Ms. Miller.
Mrs. Miller. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman and Ranking Member
Hice, and thank you all for being here today.
Democrats on our committee have been so consumed by the
citizenship question all the while that we could have been in
this very room performing the necessary oversight to make sure
that this census goes smoothly, safely, and, most importantly,
accurately counts the number of the people in the United
States.
If you look at the past decennial census, our committee is
far behind in conducting the necessary oversight for the 2020
census. Now is our opportunity to finally get to work and do
what the American people have sent us here to do.
Director Dillingham, my district in southern West Virginia
is historically one of the hardest to count in the country.
Over half of my constituents, 51 percent, live in so-called
hard-to-count neighborhoods. What is being done by the Census
Bureau to make sure that constituents in rural, hard-to-count
neighborhoods are accurately accounted for?
Mr. Dillingham. Congresswoman, as I mentioned in my opening
statement, that is, in fact, the most important thing to the
Census Bureau, is reaching the hard-to-count, and I understand
many of the obstacles and challenges in West Virginia, as well
as other states, and we are working on that very diligently.
Let me just mention some of the very important ways.
Certainly we just mentioned the communications outreach
plan. So we will have national and localized advertising on the
census, reminding people how easy, safe, and important it is,
and we hope we will reach those communities. And I have seen
communities such as yours that have special needs,
particularly, some communities listen more to the radio,
perhaps, than television. There are other avenues. Some
actually, particularly ethnic communities, look at their local
newspapers, and particularly if it is in a different language.
So we have these outreach efforts.
But another thing that we have done, which the chairman
mentioned, is our partnerships. We have more than doubled the
partnerships for this decennial census, and as I mentioned in
my opening statement, we also--Congress asked us, the
Appropriations Committee, to come up with--if we receive some
additional funds, how would we use it? And we specifically
provided in there that we want to continue some temporary
employees during the census, if it is funded by Congress, to
reach those hard-to-count communities and to deploy people with
laptops and with phones, et cetera, to help reach them.
But in the event that our public relations, communications,
as well as our outreach efforts and the partnerships, even
despite all the new resources we are applying to that in the
new technologies, we ultimately have the enumerators, who will
be coming around and knocking on the doors, and they will be
doing that more efficiently, more professionally than ever
before.
So those are some of the things, but that is not an
exhaustive list, and we totally agree with you that we want to
reach those communities that are the hardest to count. And I
have seen that, and when I went to the Navajo Nation--actually
Navajo Nation, compares itself to West Virginia. It covers the
same territory as West Virginia, but has its own set of
circumstances. And we are working with them to make sure we can
reach the hard-to-count.
Mrs. Miller. That is good because I know television seems
to be a good manner, you know, because of the satellites and
the rest, that they can be reached. Cell phones are another
story.
Director, children under 10 years of age are the most
difficult population to count, and this is doubly true in rural
areas. What is the Census Bureau doing to make rural children,
in particular, making sure that they will be counted?
Mr. Dillingham. Congresswoman, another excellent question.
Children are hard to count in many areas, and even outside what
we would traditionally consider hard-to-count areas, but
particularly important there.
There has been a problem with counting children since the
census began. I saw some information shared with me, back in
1850 people were commenting on that, complaining about it--why
is it difficult to count the children. Certainly the
circumstances have changed and some of the factors have
changed, but it has remained a perennial problem, counting the
children.
So we are partnering with organizations such as the Annie
E. Casey Foundation, which has devoted staff and time and
publications, and other national organizations. We are focusing
on that hard-to-count population in our communications
campaign, as well as with our partnership specialists. We are
working with a variety of pediatrician groups. We are working
with the cities--we call it the Statistics in Schools program,
which is designed for the Census Bureau, in reaching the public
schools, to reach the children.
But then, finally, if we are not getting the results--and
when we come around and ultimately may have to knock on the
door, we have specially trained our people to ask special
questions on, ``Do you have any children living in your
household?'' et cetera. And even on the online internet we have
a dropdown that reminds you about, are you counting the
children?
So we are looking at it from all angles. It continues to be
a problem. We are working that problem. We are continuing to
research that problem. But we have so many partners around the
country that are also working on that problem, and cherish
those relationships, to make sure that we are counting the
children.
Mrs. Miller. Mr. Goldenkoff, has the GAO----
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. I am sorry. The gentlelady's time has
expired.
Mrs. Miller. Thank you.
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. The chair will now recognize the
gentlelady from Florida, Ms. Wasserman Schultz.
Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Dr. Dillingham, my questions will be directed at you. I
want to focus on the Bureau's plan for Questionnaire Assistance
Centers in the 2020 census, which provide localized, in-person
assistance, as you know, in completing the census
questionnaire, helping hard-to-count communities get counted.
Only July 1st, Senator Jack Reed and our colleague,
Congresswoman Brenda Lawrence, who is a member of this
committee, sent you a letter asking for details on your
proposal Mobile Response Initiative, which I understand is
replacing the QAC program this year. Have you responded to that
letter?
Mr. Dillingham. Congresswoman, regretfully we have not.
Ms. Wasserman Schultz. When will you be responding?
Mr. Dillingham. As expeditiously as I can, after this
hearing.
Ms. Wasserman Schultz. More specifically, when will you be
responding?
Mr. Dillingham. We will be responding very quickly, and I
will----
Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Within the week? Within two weeks?
Within three weeks?
Mr. Dillingham. I would envision within two weeks.
Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Within two weeks from now. Okay.
Will you simultaneously provide a copy of your response to that
letter to this committee?
Mr. Dillingham. Absolutely.
Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Thank you.
Okay, Dr. Dillingham, I have some quick-fire, yes-or-no
questions for you.
In 2010, QACs counted more than 700,000 people. Correct?
Mr. Dillingham. I--I--I am not--I would have to check that.
Ms. Wasserman Schultz. I can assure you that that is now
many the Census Bureau says they counted, which is more than
the entire population, for example, of the state of Vermont.
So, Dr. Dillingham, are there plans to open QACs across the
country for the 2020 census?
Mr. Dillingham. Congresswoman, there are not.
Ms. Wasserman Schultz. So you are getting rid of these
centers, where more people than the population of an entire
state were counted?
Mr. Dillingham. Congresswoman, let me explain that we are
providing expanded advice and assistance through other
mechanisms----
Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Okay. I am going to----
Mr. Dillingham [continuing]. than what was----
Ms. Wasserman Schultz. I am going to get to asking you
questions about that, because I don't share that view.
Is it correct that the Fiscal Year 2019 Appropriations Bill
Report specifically directed the Bureau to open QACs?
Mr. Dillingham. That was not my understanding,
Congresswoman.
Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Okay. Well, I have----
Mr. Dillingham. They did ask us to look at it----
Ms. Wasserman Schultz.I have it right here----
Mr. Dillingham. Yes.
Ms. Wasserman Schultz.On page 611 of the Fiscal Year 2019--
--
Mr. Dillingham. That is correct.
Ms. Wasserman Schultz.CJS appropriations bill, which
governs your agency, and it says, ``Additionally, the Bureau
shall devote funding to expanded targeted communications
activities as well as to open local Questionnaire Assistance
Centers in hard-to-count communities.'' It says ``shall.''
Mr. Dillingham. Okay. And I think--I don't want to differ
with you on the language, but let me tell you how we are
delivering that assistance.
Ms. Wasserman Schultz. It is right here in black and
white----
Mr. Dillingham. That is correct----
Ms. Wasserman Schultz. On page 611.
Mr. Dillingham [continuing]. but let me tell you where--we
are delivering more assistance than ever before, certainly than
the last census.
Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Okay. I have some more yes-or-no
questions, because I don't agree with your characterization.
Are you aware, according to the census' own audit, that
many of these QACs were budgeted only enough for 15 hours of
staff time per week, or were only open during hours when most
people are at work?
Mr. Dillingham. In the past census?
Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Yes.
Mr. Dillingham. I know there were problems----
Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Yes or no? Are you aware of that
fact?
Mr. Dillingham. Not those specific facts but I knew there
were problems.
Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Okay. And that the Bureau's own 2020
audit of QACs did not recommend eliminating QACs but working to
improve them. Were you aware of that?
Mr. Dillingham. I am aware they wanted the function
fulfilled. That is correct.
Ms. Wasserman Schultz. And did not recommend eliminating
them.
Mr. Dillingham. The bricks and mortar. We didn't go that
approach.
Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Right. Did the Bureau consider
increasing the availability and staffing of QACs instead of
eliminating them entirely?
Mr. Dillingham. We very much not only considered but are
increasing the staffing for that function.
Ms. Wasserman Schultz. But you just said you are not going
to have QACs.
Mr. Dillingham. We have----
Ms. Wasserman Schultz. And increase the staffing for that.
Mr. Dillingham [continuing]. It is a matter of terminology,
but when we have the mobile response units we consider those--
--
Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Okay. I am going to ask you a
question about the mobile response units in a moment.
Earlier this year the Bureau told Congress it intended to
carry over more than $1 billion in funds to Fiscal Year 2020,
rather than spend it this year. Is that still the case?
Mr. Dillingham. We have carryover funding to guarantee
continuity of funding. That is correct.
Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Of $1 billion?
Mr. Dillingham. Approximately $1 billion, yes.
Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Yes. So there is funding,
appropriated funding available to you, that you could be using
immediately to open QACs with the census being right around the
corner.
Dr. Dillingham, will the Bureau commit to using some of the
$1 billion--and I am an appropriator so this matters to me--in
carryover funds to open QACs.
Mr. Dillingham. Congresswoman, my understanding is it is
not feasible at this point in time.
Ms. Wasserman Schultz. I beg to differ. So let's talk about
the Mobile Response Initiative that you are touting. In a
report the Bureau prepared for Congress you criticized QACs
because they required individuals to find a physical location,
set it up at regular hours to provide assistance. Your Mobile
Response Initiatives actually are, for the most part, going to
be two-person teams with iPads, popping up at markets,
festivals, and events.
Now I know from experience that unpredictable things like
weather can affect turnout at events. I went to a festival in
June, for the Juneteenth, and it poured rain in South Florida,
and no one came. How will two people with an iPad find critical
mass in that way?
Mr. Dillingham. We have actually an interactive live
system. We call it the ROAM system, which is the Response
Outreach Area Mapping tool, that we can monitor tracks during
the census. We can monitor self-response rates. We can target
those tracks----
Ms. Wasserman Schultz. With two people.
Mr. Dillingham. No, no, no, no.
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. The gentlelady's----
Mr. Dillingham. No, no. We would have more. Would have more
and we would have a multitude of partners. And so in our
discussions----
Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Not according to your plan.
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. The gentlelady's time has expired.
Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate
it and thank you, Dr. Dillingham, for your answers. You have
some work to do.
Mr. Dillingham. Thank you.
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. The chair now yields to the gentleman
from Georgia, Mr. Hice.
Mr. Hice. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Thank you for
being here. I, too, am very glad that we are finally getting
around to oversight on the census. I believe we are majorly
behind the eight ball at this point, and there are so many
issues to deal with, from the IT component, the overall
strategy and performance and budget, staffing, on and on and
on.
But I would like to begin, if I can, Director, on the IT
component. This whole issue of cyber threat increasingly is
becoming an issue across the board on so many different areas
of our personal lives as well as business and government. Where
do we stand on this?
Mr. Dillingham. Congressman, that is, you know, one of the
primary concerns, certainly, of anyone following the census,
but the GAO and others, it is something of a concern with the
Census Bureau. We have been working on it since the last
decennial census. We are putting a lot of protections in place.
We are working with the leading Federal agencies. We are
working with DHS. We are working with their Community and
Infrastructure Security Agency very closely, visiting their
facilities, and also working with them on a five-pronged plan,
which is the management, the intelligence, the network
security, the response areas, the incidents, as well as the
assessments.
We are also working the private sector. We are working with
the leaders in the high-technology industry. They are assisting
us in many different ways.
Cybersecurity is of concern, and GAO actually says it is a
governmentwide concern, of course, throughout the Federal
Government, and we are doing everything we can to make sure we
have the best minds, the best people, and the best policies and
the best tools to deal with it.
So we are making tremendous progress. We continue to work
on it. Certainly by January we will have our systems fully
tested on cybersecurity. But cybersecurity remains an issue. We
are all aware that across the globe that threats are posed, and
we do scan--I want to explain. We scan, each month, over
100,000 vulnerabilities. So we have an ongoing, very intense,
very rigorous process for looking for those threats.
Mr. Hice. Okay. I would tend to differ with you on some of
your--I mean, you have lofty words stating that you are ready
and everything is pie in the sky. I have much more serious
concerns of that. Mr. Marinos, what about you? There is going
to be more IT involved in this census than any one in our
Nation's history. Where do you see that we stand on
cybersecurity?
Mr. Marinos. It is definitely a key element to the high-
risk area that GAO designated back in 2017, with respect to the
2020 census. Two big things here. One is the additional testing
that Bureau has ahead of it with respect to cybersecurity. We
are talking about having to reassess nine system out of the 52,
and then assess five systems to get them to the point of a sign
up that says, yes, we are good to go.
On the other side, we credit the Bureau for the assessment
efforts it has done to date, as well as the work that the
Department of Homeland Security has done, but we would really
like to see that turn into corrective actions implemented.
And so I think ahead of it the Bureau has still some work
to do when it comes to assessments, but more importantly, take
those assessments and turn them into corrections within their
cybersecurity program.
Mr. Hice. Absolutely. I totally agree. And, Director, I
will come back to you. The census security assessment
identified 217 high risk or very high risk corrective actions
that need to be addressed. As I understand it, there have been
104 of those delayed.
Mr. Dillingham. That is correct.
Mr. Hice. That does not sound like you are on top of the
ball here.
Mr. Dillingham. If I could--Congressman, I appreciate your
concern and we are concerned as well. But let me provide a
little bit of context. We identified, in the last year, 150,000
vulnerabilities, and when we don't resolve those
vulnerabilities we create a plan of action and we establish
milestones, and those plans of action and milestones is what
GAO looks at. They look at the milestones that we have
established. So we have an ongoing inventory of approximately
300 out of many, many thousands, and we have them, coming off
each and every day.
As a matter of fact, I am apprised that we do at least 100
a month--that is several every day--coming off of the list, and
others coming on----
Mr. Hice. What are the chances----
Mr. Dillingham [continuing]. and we will----
Mr. Hice [continuing]. what are the chances you complete
all of this----
Mr. Dillingham. There is no chance.
Mr. Hice [continuing]. before----
Mr. Dillingham. There is no chance. The way we----
Mr. Hice. So it is not pie in the sky, as you described it.
Mr. Dillingham. No. No, absolutely not. We are managing
risk, and that is going to be until this census is completed,
there will be risks identified and risks coming off. So we are
working the list, and that is the way we do--and that is
actually the way GAO recommends we do business, is risk
management and risk mitigation. And we have the people and
resources, and that is what we are working it.
But I would never envision that risk list would reach zero.
Mr. Hice. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. Thank you. The chair now recognizes the
gentleman from California, Mr. Gomez.
Mr. Gomez. Thank you, Madam Chair.
While the citizenship question is over, I believe the
ramifications of the question still remain. Fear and confusion
in our communities still exist and we must ensure that millions
of Americans, rich and poor, citizen and immigrant, are
counted. Historically, communities of color and immigrant
communities have been under-counted, while non-Hispanic whites
have had a higher count.
As someone who represents one of the most diverse districts
in the country, this is a big concern of mine. California's
34th congressional District is home to multiple communities,
like Chinatown, Koreatown, and Boyle Heights, composed of a
wide range of ethnicities and nationalities, with dozens of
languages spoken in the district, many residing in multi-family
households, and some living below the Federal poverty level.
All these barriers make the enumeration in my district
difficult, making it one of the hardest-to-count districts in
the country, with 42 percent of my constituents living in hard-
to-count neighborhoods.
More concerning is that the 2020 census' increased reliance
on technology. Although it will have some positive impact, I am
also concerned about hard-to-count communities. For the 2020
census, the Census Bureau is pushing 80 percent of the people
to respond online, with only 20 percent of communities
receiving a paper form as their first option. But 35 percent of
U.S. adults don't have access to reliable internet in their
homes, including 53 percent of Latinos and 43 percent of
African American communities. In my district alone, one-quarter
of my district's households have no access to the internet.
So the first question is, given that more than 35 percent
of adults lack reliable internet, I am concerned that the
Bureau is pushing 80 percent of the population to respond
online. Dr. Dillingham, what is the plan to increase responses
in under-represented rural and low-income communities that have
disproportionately lower rates of internet access?
Mr. Dillingham. Congressman, that is an excellent question,
and we are working the hard-to-count. But let me clarify some
of the context--and when we met last week with the
congressional Hispanic Caucus we also discussed some of these
topics.
But our language assistance will reach 99.6 percent of the
population, and in those areas where there is a substantial
Hispanic community, they will be in those two languages, both
English and Spanish. The 80 percent figure--I apologize, I have
never heard before, and we don't use the 80 percent figure.
Actually, if we received 80 percent of people responding
electronically that would be a mammoth accomplishment, but we
don't expect that. We are actually aiming--I think it is 60.5,
and we will have to see how that comes out.
But the paper--the paper--I just want to remind everyone
the paper--if a person does not respond online or by phone they
are going to receive the paper, and in the hard-to-count
communities they receive the paper questionnaire in the first
communication. We send out five mailings to the communities in
the hard-to-count. In many of those they will receive it in the
first mailing, and then they receive it again in the fourth
mailing.
So every household that hasn't responded will receive a
paper questionnaire that they can submit, and in some
instances----
Mr. Gomez. Let me follow along with that.
Mr. Dillingham. Yes.
Mr. Gomez. I have been informed that some advocates said
that the Bureau identified that 20 percent of the communities
will receive a paper form first. Is that correct?
Mr. Dillingham. Well, I will have to look. One of the
things we do--I think if the community, if the area is 20
percent of Hispanic, for example----
Mr. Gomez. Okay.
Mr. Dillingham [continuing]. then they will get the paper
in the first mailing.
Mr. Gomez. Okay. So a lot of advocates, a lot of groups
that are working on this want to know the list of communities
that will receive that paper ballot first. Could you make that
list of communities available?
Mr. Dillingham. I would not see why not. I am not sure. It
could be a moving list, but we will work with you on that.
Mr. Gomez. Okay. I appreciate that.
If someone wants to answer on a paper form that is not
included on the 20 percent of communities, how can they get
one?
Mr. Dillingham. Again, it will be mailed to them. They
should have--there will be five mailings. If they are in the
hard-to-count communities, as we were describing, they will get
it the first and the fourth. Now the normal--I will just call
it the non-hard-to-count populations--receive it on the fourth.
So in these mailings--it will come to their household, a hard
copy, on paper.
Mr. Gomez. Okay. One--well, I am almost out of time, but
the National Association of Latino Elected Officials reported
that only 20 percent of Latino participants responded digitally
in the end-to-end test in Providence, compared to 70 percent of
the general population. Does that comport with your
understanding?
Mr. Dillingham. I don't have the--I wouldn't challenge that
at all, but I will check on that.
Mr. Gomez. Okay. Well, thank you for coming. This is an
important issue for all of us. I believe that the citizenship
question would have had a huge negative impact on the count. I
am glad that is resolved. But we are still going to work to
make sure that you get the resources and we get everybody on
board to ensure a complete and accurate count.
Thank you so much.
Mr. Dillingham. We appreciate your support. Thank you so
much.
Mr. Gomez. And I yield back to the chair.
Ms. Pressley.
[Presiding.] The gentleman's time has expired. I now
recognize myself for five minutes.
Mr. Dillingham, I want to thank you for being here today.
Please know that Congress is a partner in this endeavor, and as
evidenced by this committee we plan to stay engaged and to do
the work today, in 2019, so we can be ready in 2020.
I represent the Massachusetts 7th congressional District,
which includes Boston. Boston ranks ninth among the 100 largest
cities where it is hardest to count, and we see that under-
count resulting in really stark disparities and inequities in
the district. Plainly speaking, if you are not counted, you
don't count. And there are so many communities, from the LGBT
community to renters, who are unseen and not counted.
So today I would like to focus my questions to the Bureau
specifically.
Dr. Dillingham, on July 11, 2019, an Executive Order was
signed directing the Commerce Department to obtain citizenship
data by other means. Dr. Dillingham, in light of the Executive
Order, will the Bureau be producing block-level data on
citizens and non-citizens? Yes or no.
Mr. Dillingham. Block level, I would--at a level they will,
of citizen versus non-citizen, from administrative data. That
is correct. The availability of block-level, I am not quite
sure, because it is a complicated thing. But we also have some
very important protections at the basic level. We call it
disclosure avoidance, where we inject noise into the data. So
what level is yet to be determined.
Ms. Pressley. I see. Has anyone in the Administration
indicated to you that block level data produced by the Bureau
will be used to target neighborhoods for immigration
enforcement? Yes or no.
Mr. Dillingham. Congresswoman, I am aware of concerns
about--the Census Bureau never does any law enforcement--it
would prohibit it from law, from doing it. The only thing that
we release are statistics, aggregate numbers, and we protect
the privacy. So the data is made available to the Nation, so--
but I can tell you----
Ms. Pressley. I am so sorry. Just reclaiming my time----
Mr. Dillingham. Yes.
Ms. Pressley [continuing]. and my time is short here. What
would you say to those who are concerned about this block level
data being used for that purpose? Because I understand what you
are saying here, but how do you communicate en masse what you
are saying, that you don't collaborate in that way?
Mr. Dillingham. Very important, and one of the things that
we are doing right now is the messaging for our outreach
campaign to make sure they understand the security that is in
place and why they should not be afraid to complete the census.
But also what is very important are the trusted voices, such as
Members of Congress, others in the communities----
Ms. Pressley. Excuse me. My district is 40 percent
immigrant. I can't even begin to count--in our Boston public
schools alone there are 150 different languages.
Mr. Dillingham. Sure.
Ms. Pressley. So do you have the staffing resources to
communicate in the most culturally competent of ways, given the
diversity of districts which are historically undercounted?
Mr. Dillingham. Well, we do have the language assistance at
99.6 percent, and then once we enter the enumeration phase, our
enumerators are trained to get the assistance. We have
special--even to outreach, even to the handicapped or the
people with special needs of all types. And so we will, through
our enumerators and through our partnership specialists, and
through our outreach campaign, will address those needs.
Ms. Pressley. Okay. Can you confirm for us today that the
citizenship data collected pursuant to the Executive Order will
not be used in the Bureau's apportionment counts?
Mr. Dillingham. The--we produce--I--and apportionment
accounts--let me get back to you on that.
Ms. Pressley. Do you believe it should be used for that
purpose?
Mr. Dillingham. I don't have any belief whatsoever. I just
need to know the mechanics, Congresswoman, and I will get back
to you on that. But what the----
Ms. Pressley. Please do. Is it possible you could get back
to me with an answer in the next 10 days----
Mr. Dillingham. Um----
Ms. Pressley [continuing]. specifically on this question--
--
Mr. Dillingham [continuing]. yes.
Ms. Pressley [continuing]. if you plan to use this data
collected pursuant to the--that it will not be used in the
Bureau's apportionment count? Can you give me an answer on
that, in writing?
Mr. Dillingham. I--I don't see why I couldn't.
Ms. Pressley. Okay. Wonderful.
Mr. Dillingham. I don't have the answer.
Ms. Pressley. Okay. Will the information be used in
determining the allocation of Federal resources for Medicaid or
for CHIP, for the Children's Health Insurance Plan?
Mr. Dillingham. Congresswoman, we don't determine the uses
of it. We just produce the numbers.
Ms. Pressley. Do you believe it should be used for that
purpose?
Mr. Dillingham. We--we hope that our data is accurate and
complete and is useful for many purposes. But all the Federal
programs, totaling more than 675--some people estimate it could
be close to $1 trillion, we hope that our data that they are
using is very accurate, complete.
Ms. Pressley. Okay. Have you, or anyone you know, discussed
including citizenship data in the redistricting file?
Mr. Dillingham. In the redistricting file? The--
Congresswoman, let me get back to you on that.
Ms. Pressley. I would love to understand if you have those
conversations and what was the nature of those conversations
and who participated.
Mr. Dillingham. There--if you--I can only refer you to the
Executive Order that we are going to be looking at and putting
the administrative data together. I can refer you to that. So
whatever that Executive Order says.
Ms. Pressley. All right, Doctor, my time has expired. I now
recognize the gentlelady from New York, Mrs. Maloney.
Mrs. Maloney. I thank the chairlady for yielding and I
thank all the panelists for your testimony today. It is a very
busy last week here in Congress, and I thank you for all your
hard work, all of you.
In the past two years, it has shown that the census is
vulnerable to political manipulation, when the citizenship
question was added. In fact, our Nation was one vote on the
Supreme Court away from erasing an estimated 8 million people,
professionals said, from the formulas we use to determine who
represents us and who governs us and how we distribute over
$700 billion in Federal funds yearly. And we really cannot
allow our country to be in that position again, where really
the accuracy of the census is questioned.
So my first question is about a bill that I authored called
the Census Idea Act, which would prevent arbitrary and
capricious harmful questions from being added at the last
minute, really over the objection of the professionals at the
Census Bureau and many others. And the way you would prevent
that is require, by law, basically the administrative code as
it exists now, and require in law testing periods for each
question, additional reporting to Congress on that testing, and
certification by the GAO that tests were adequate before forms
can be printed.
And this bill, in my opinion, would allow the country to be
protected from what Judge Furman called, in one of the
decisions, capricious and arbitrary addition of questions to
the census, basically to have the formula--actually, it is the
formula that is in the administrative code, but the Census
Bureau decided not to follow the administrative code.
So I would like to present this question to all of you in
writing, and with the bill, and give you a chance to see the
bill, and particularly GAO, I would like your responses to it
on whether you think it would prevent capricious and arbitrary
tampering with the census in the future, so that it is well
thought out, approved, done in the proper procedures. And I
think it is important that we not only make sure that everyone
is counted but we prevent any type of behavior that undermines
the accuracy of the census.
But now, moving forward, and would all of you respond in
writing to this question and to viewing it? I would appreciate
it.
[Witnesses nod heads.]
Mrs. Maloney. Okay. Thank you.
Now I really want to talk about the neighborhood
partnership specialists, and I understand that that is
critical. We have the Census Bureau up and running in New York
now, and the director there says that these partnerships are
very important, and that we need to have them fully operational
partnerships, that they are essential to the 2020 census. And I
would like to really ask, first of all, Mr. Dillingham, do you
think these partnerships are important and are you--the
Bureau's goal was to have 1,500 partnership specialists on
board by the end of June, and I would like to know, did we meet
that deadline--maybe I would ask Mr. Goldenkoff, since you
wrote about it--and how far behind is the Bureau? And then I
would like to hear from Mr. Dillingham whether we can move
forward quickly to get this in place.
Mr. Goldenkoff. Sure. Well, thank you. That is an excellent
question. As you know, partnership specialists are so important
in terms of convincing people, particularly populations that
are traditionally under-counted, to participate in the census.
They are the so-called trusted voices.
The Census Bureau had planned to hire around 1,500
partnership specialists by the end of June of this year. They
fell short of that goal. As of July 8, they had only 813
partnership specialists hired, and they hope now to reach that
full complement of 1,500 by September. So already the Census
Bureau is two months behind on this important effort.
Mrs. Maloney. So Mr. Dillingham, as I understand it the
delay in hiring is caused by massive backlog in background
checks, and the Bureau is about to embark on a massive hiring
effort where it will seek to hire roughly 15,000 workers for
area census offices and non-response followup. And if the
Bureau can't handle the 1,500 background checks, how in the
world is it going to handle 15,000, which I understand is your
goal?
Mr. Dillingham. Congresswoman, I certainly appreciate it
and I certainly agree with your observation on how important
the partnership specialists are. As a matter of fact, when I
met in your office in New York City we had partnership
specialists with us, and I addressed the whole region's
partnership specialists in a phone call from the van while we
were outside your office.
Mrs. Maloney. Yes.
Mr. Dillingham. And I also notice, besides these
partnership specialists, we shared with you the information,
where you had the longest list of the Members of Congress whose
districts we had, in terms of your partners, and we commend you
on that.
But on the partnership specialists, we have made more than
1,600 offers. The majority are on board. But we are waiting for
a few that--and as has been pointed out, we are going to be on
track, on time. So within 30 days they will all be onboarded.
We should have--we envisioned 1,500, but, in fact, we have made
offers to more than 1,600.
In addition to that, as I had mentioned with the
Appropriations Committee, we presented an option for Congress
to consider, that we could, in fact, besides the 1,500, which
doubled from the last decennial census, we could have up to
5,000 assistants that would assist the partnership specialists,
and that would be from continuing on our assistant recruiters
who have already gone through the hiring process and have the
computers, and they could be dispatched to assist the
partnership specialists.
So there is a mammoth--the effort being made in devotion of
resources to this topic. And in our hiring, we are presently
hiring, as you are well aware, the address canvassers, and we
have----
Mrs. Maloney. But my question is, not the 1,500, you are
going to move forward on that----
Mr. Dillingham. Mm-hmm.
Mrs. Maloney [continuing]. but you are supposed to hire
another 15,000 non-response followup workers. And if you are
having trouble hiring the 1,500, how are you going to hire the
15,000, with the background----
Mr. Dillingham. I appreciate your concern, but we have not
reached the stage yet for the non-response followup. That will
be in our peak hiring and we will be advertising later. But
right now we have over a half million applicants in our
applicants. More than 600,000 have gone to our website and
begun the process to apply for jobs. And we are hiring,
currently, 40,000 out of that 500,000. So at this point in time
we were very pleasantly surprised at the job pool that was out
there.
Mr. Raskin.
[Presiding.] The gentlelady's time has expired.
Mrs. Maloney. Can you give me two seconds more, three
seconds more----
Mr. Raskin. Okay. One final question.
Mrs. Maloney [continuing]. for a GAO question? Mr.
Dillingham, will you commit to providing a detailed plan to GAO
and to this committee on how you will improve the background
check process and stay on schedule? We just--we want you to
stay on schedule, and I am sure you are going to do it, but let
us know how you are going to do it. Okay?
Mr. Dillingham. Congresswoman, we certainly will. Thank you
so much.
Mrs. Maloney. Thank you.
Mr. Raskin. Thank you very much.
Mrs. Maloney. And may I thank the chairman for being a
visionary on the census and in so many other----
Mr. Raskin. I appreciate that.
The gentlelady from Illinois is now recognized. Ms. Kelly?
Ms. Kelly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. If I am redundant I
apologize. I had other hearings.
Dr. Dillingham, the 2020 census will use cloud technology
to stored data from respondents. Correct?
Mr. Dillingham. That is being pursued. That is correct.
Ms. Kelly. The Commerce inspector general investigated the
Bureau's cloud-based IT systems for the 2020 census and found
what it called fundamental security deficiencies that violated
Federal standards and the U.S. Department of Commerce policies.
Are you familiar with this report?
Mr. Dillingham. Yes, I am.
Ms. Kelly. In that report, the IG office writes that it
found severe risk to 2020 census cloud environment. Dr.
Dillingham, the 2020 census cloud environment is where
residents' confidential data will be stored. Correct?
Mr. Dillingham. That is correct.
Ms. Kelly. And the IG's office found security issues that
left critical systems vulnerable, quote/unquote, and found that
basic security practices were not fully implemented to protect
Title 13 data.
Why have basic practices not been implemented to protect
data, which is considered among the most confidential under
Federal law?
Mr. Dillingham. Certainly, Congresswoman, and let me fully
explain also that there was no breach of the system. And as
revealed in that report, as the system was being set up it
really was an access issue, and we do involve contractors, and
there was a--and I am going to generalize it here--but there
was actions--corrective actions were taken to make sure that no
one had the special capability of accessing the system. And
they further identified the problem of when you have data on
the cloud you need plans in place to take it down, so that none
of that data remains.
And so those were two things; we very much respect the
findings of the inspector general. Immediate action was taken.
It was some time ago. It involved contractors and setting up
the system. But by the time of the 2020 census--and those
corrective actions have already taken place, but we will have
more by the time of the 2020 census. Thank you.
Ms. Kelly. Thank you. The report concludes many of these
deficiencies indicate that the Bureau was behind schedule. Mr.
Marinos, do you agree that the Bureau rushed to deploy IT
systems with truncated IT security testing, as the IG
indicated?
Mr. Marinos. Yes, and, in fact, we have previously reported
it, based on the Bureau itself identifying that there were time
constraints that resulted in shorter timeframes for testing
during the 2018 end-to-end test.
Ms. Kelly. Okay. And, Dr. Dillingham, the IG's report
indicates that the Bureau agreed to implement all of its
recommendations.
Mr. Dillingham. Let me explain, as a matter of course. We
appreciate these people looking over our shoulder. They see our
timelines, they see our milestones, and they hold our feet to
the fire. If we are not meeting those milestones they remind
us. We appreciate it greatly.
Ms. Kelly. So you will confirm here today that you will
implement each and every recommendation?
Mr. Dillingham. So far, I think we have agreed to all.
Maybe there is one that was actually post-2020 census. But our
normal practice is to agree and to take corrective action. That
is correct.
Ms. Kelly. And how are you doing on your timeline with
completing the recommendations and repairing the fundamental
security deficiencies?
Mr. Dillingham. Certainly. There are certain areas, and the
ones they were tracking, we are making tremendous progress. The
majority corrective actions have been taken. Some are underway.
And so we monitor it each and every week and we are looking to
see the progress has been made, and will continue to do that.
Ms. Kelly. Thank you.
Mr. Marinos, will GAO be tracking the Bureau's progress on
the IG recommendations?
Mr. Marinos. Yes. We coordinate very closely with the
Inspector General's Office on related reviews, and on a
continual basis talk about the status of recommendations. I
believe there were eight recommendations made by the Inspector
General's Office within that report, several of them that we
think are vital to implement as quickly as possible.
Ms. Kelly. And have you received a plan on how this will be
accomplished?
Mr. Marinos. We haven't. I think it would be best to defer
to the IG on those specific recommendations, but I would say
that this relates also to our more general recommendations
around corrective actions and ensuring that the Bureau is
prioritizing all of this good feedback it is getting from these
sources, and making decisions on what to tackle first.
Ms. Kelly. Additionally, the GAO, in its monitoring of the
Census Bureau, found that the Bureau is at risk of not meeting
near-term IT system development and testing schedule milestones
for five upcoming 2020 census operational deliveries. Mr.
Goldenkoff, can you tell us what those five are and how they
are delayed--and how delayed they are, I should say?
Mr. Goldenkoff. I will refer to----
Mr. Marinos. Sure. The five operational deliveries relate
to peak recruiting and hiring, internet self-response, remote
Alaska counting, and then group quarters enumeration, both
advanced and enumeration activities.
In terms of where they are right now, there are multiple
milestones related to each of these deliveries, and again,
across the 52 systems several systems may be touched at
different times. I think that the most important and most
critical ones are going to be based on what operations are
coming up. We did see, to the Bureau's credit, address
canvassing, from when we were recently tracking in the spring,
come off of the at-risk list, and that is an operation that is
starting up in August. But we will continue to monitor the
status of these deliveries as well.
Ms. Kelly. And they also are very, very important and
critical to the success of the 2020 census. Thank you. I yield
back.
Mr. Raskin. Thank you. The gentlelady's time has expired.
We now go to go to the gentleman from the 4th District of
Nevada, who is waived on today, Mr. Horsford.
Mr. Horsford. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Chairman Raskin, and
thank you very much for allowing me to be here today to speak
about the importance of the U.S. census, particularly for the
African American community.
Just yesterday, the congressional Black Caucus, under the
leadership of Congresswoman Karen Bass, our chair, launched a
new census--the 2020 Census Task Force, of which I will serve
as chair. One of the goals of the task force will be to partner
with the Census Bureau and coalition stakeholders to ensure an
inclusive, complete, and accurate 2020 census count. We will
also work to increase the participation of all communities, but
specifically black residents as well as black immigrants, and
ensure a fair and accurate count of all people across the
United States.
During the last census count in 2010, African Americans
were under-counted by over 800,000. That is totally
unacceptable and we must close the gap and ensure higher
participation in the 2020 census so that all communities that
need Federal resources are able to receive them.
So my question is, first, does the Bureau have a goal or
plan to improve the black under-count and increase
participation?
Mr. Dillingham. Mr. Congressman, we certainly do, and I
agree with every statement you just made. There is nothing more
important, no higher priority than reaching the hard-to-count,
and among the hard-to-count are certain populations, including
the black populations. And so we are engaged in that. We are
doing it through the ways that I have mentioned, in terms of
our communications campaign, in terms of our partnerships. But
I want to commend you, that one of the most important things is
to have the groups at the local level that have formed the task
forces, the complete count committees, working with your
stakeholders. We cannot conduct the decennial census without
the support of the Congress and the communities and the
partners and the state and the local governments, and I commend
you for doing that. And we have given toolkits to all Members
of Congress, and I know many are helping us in so many ways.
Mr. Horsford. Thank you.
Mr. Dillingham. We appreciate your help.
Mr. Horsford. And I look forward to reviewing that plan.
Has an analysis been done to determine the impacts that the
consolidation of the census offices will have on hard-to-count
communities? For instance, we learned, within our CBC task
force meeting, that there are only going to be six regional
census offices to serve the entire United States. So what
analysis went into the decisionmaking to reduce by half the
number of census offices and what steps are being done to
remedy this issue?
Mr. Dillingham. Mr. Congressman, the regional offices
mirror our regional offices that are in place permanently, and
so that is where the six, but we have 248 area census offices,
which is, in fact--we had a discussion earlier--it is a
reduction from the past.
But let me explain to you that in reducing those offices we
are beefing up the mobile response so we can take the devices
directly into the community centers, into the churches, into
the areas of need.
Mr. Horsford. What was the justification for cutting by
half the offices? There were over 450----
Mr. Dillingham. That is correct.
Mr. Horsford [continuing]. and there were 12 regional
offices. If you could just get to us with any----
Mr. Dillingham. I certainly will, but let me just say,
generally, it was the conclusion of the professionals at the
Census Bureau who have done many, many decennial censuses, that
it was not cost-effective, that we had better technologies, we
could reach people better, devoting more resources to reach
those people, and the bricks and mortar, in many instances, was
not working.
The General Accountability Office has said that this
decennial census cannot follow the same practices of the past.
That was one of the areas where we saw a great opportunity for
improvement.
Mr. Horsford. And one of those areas is to have it
completed through the internet. However, many hard-to-count
communities do not have access to the internet. So what are the
Bureau's plans to help ensure seniors, low-income populations,
and others get counted?
Mr. Dillingham. Again, that is one of the areas that we are
working the hardest on, and we think we have a lot to show. The
tools we have with the internet and the telephone options,
where people can answer anytime, anywhere, are very important
in the hard-to-count communities. In Columbia, South Carolina,
they are putting Wi-Fi in the city busses. People on their way
to work can get on their phone and answer the census in less
than 10 minutes. It is very important that we apply all these
technologies to the hard-to-count communities. We are in total
agreement with you there.
The bricks-and-mortar idea is sort of gone. If I could do
an analogy, it is like if you are in the volume pizza business
you usually have a delivery service now, and we need to reach
these people in the most efficient, effective way possible. And
working with the groups that you are part of enable us to do
that.
When we go to a community center we expect, yes, we will
have a partnership specialist there or an assistant, but we
will have dozens of people from that community--volunteer
organizations, partners, stakeholders, et cetera--that will be
working with us, and that really makes it happen and gets the
job done.
Mr. Raskin. Thank you, Mr. Dillingham. The gentleman's time
has expired and I am going to recognize, finally, the
gentlelady from Massachusetts, just for two minutes.
Ms. Pressley. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just picking up on my
previous line, Dr. Dillingham, regarding the diversity
throughout our country but certainly the district that I
represent, the Massachusetts 7th, as I said, nearly 40 percent
of my residents are foreign-born and speak languages other than
English. You spoke to me a little bit about how you plan to
engage those communities and to--you have got a big job in
combating a lot of the misinformation and fear that has been
stoked.
Just--I want to use this platform responsibly here. One of
my constituents comes across something on social media or in
the mail, for example, that they believe is fraudulently
representing itself as part of the census. How should they
report that?
Mr. Dillingham. We will have procedures in place to do
that. Particularly, we will have, through our customer
assistance centers, by phone, people can pick up the phone and
say, ``Hey, someone is in my neighborhood,'' or ``There is
something on the internet.''
Ms. Pressley. Is there a number that you can share today, a
number, an email address, or a website they should go contact
or report to?
Mr. Dillingham. On the website, I will double-check to see
what our website will have. But there should be certainly
referral information and there should be procedures in place
exactly to report, that we are working with law enforcement
nationwide----
Ms. Pressley. Okay.
Mr. Dillingham [continuing]. to make sure we--they are
aware of that problem.
Ms. Pressley. All right. Is there any process in place
where people can contact you to find out whether a document is
a legitimate 2020 census document?
Mr. Dillingham. I--specifically for that, I think there is,
but I will verify and get back to you.
Ms. Pressley. Okay. On both of those, I just would
appreciate----
Mr. Dillingham. Certainly.
Ms. Pressley [continuing]. having information that we can
promote on our platforms, to combat any fraud.
Mr. Dillingham. Absolutely, and fraud is one of the things
that we are certainly working with other agencies and groups to
prevent.
Ms. Pressley. Thank you. I yield.
Mr. Dillingham. Thank you.
Mr. Raskin. Thank you. The gentlelady's time has expired.
I want to thank Mr. Hice for his patience. I want to thank
all the members for their participation today, and I want to
thank the witnesses for excellent testimony, and we will look
forward to working with you for the most successful possible
count we can get in 2020. Thank you for your testimony.
[Whereupon, at 2:32 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
[all]