A proposed citizenship question and the lawsuits opposing it have gotten the headlines in recent months – with the Supreme Court already involved – but that’s not the only thing troubling the 2020 census, says Cynthia Buckley, a demographer and an Illinois professor of sociology. Preparations for the census are underfunded and behind schedule, according to Buckley, who’s part of a watchdog effort called The Census Project. She spoke with News Bureau social sciences editor Craig Chamberlain.

The census can be a pretty boring subject for most people – “a vague, decennial annoyance” in the words of one news story. What makes it so important?

Symbolically, most Americans view the Constitution as important, and the Constitution mandates a complete enumeration, or census, every 10 years. Functionally, the results are the basis for appropriating congressional seats, distributing federal funds, informing state and municipal planning, and identifying business opportunities. The census provides information on how our population is distributed and how characteristics such as household size, age, education, gender and ethnic identity vary by region and across time. It is a vital planning tool for the efficient operation of projects and programs in both the public and private sectors.

What are your concerns about census preparations outside of the citizenship question? And why should we be worried, given that we’re still two years from the actual headcount?

We should be concerned because motivating the participation of more than 126 million households in order to enumerate over 325 million residents is not an endeavor suitable to last-minute planning. For example, the testing of online census forms – being used for the first time in 2020, and hopefully by half of households – began years ago.

There are several big issues. The first is that we should have seen a ramp-up of funding over the last two years and we haven’t. Many contend that the prepatory investments for the census have been starved. It’s particularly troubling in 2020, as it is the first time the census will include online response options. While in the long term shifting to online participation will save money and time and do all sorts of great things, in the short term it requires additional investments in testing and development.

There’s also a lot of smoke and mirrors in the financing. Early investments in planning and field preparation are far below the past three censuses. The Trump administration recently trumpeted a move to increase census funding, but even with this proposed increase, the Government Accountability Office views the funding as likely insufficient.

We also still don’t know what questions are going to be on the census, which is a little problematic, to say the least.

All this also means that the setup of regional census field offices, the hiring of enumerators, advertising and other preparations become especially challlenging. The Census Bureau needs to be on the ground and working with local communities, governments and nongovernmental organizations because without those sorts of contacts on the ground, it is very unlikely that we will be able to generate an accurate count.

Many of these concerns were motivating factors for the creation of The Census Project. Their site provides information for citizens and policymakers concerning the need for an accurate count, as well as local strategies and actions that can help make the census accurate and comprehensive.

What are the concerns for Illinois?

The 2020 census is particularly vital for Illinois given that its decline in population – by most statistical measures, rather modest – has become a popular topic of concern in the media and current political campaigns. An accurate census count can help place these concerns in perspective. Just how substantial is the relative decline in population? Does it represent an outflow of retirees to warmer climates or of young, educated workers to better economic opportunities? Current debates will benefit from facts.

Moreover, counting the estimated 12.8 million residents in Illinois is no easy matter. Chicagoland’s urban density, diversity and mobility challenge enumeration. As with other major American cities, it can easily generate a census undercount. Downstate regions, with less-dense populations, are dependent upon high voluntary participation, as follow-up census visits are costly and time-consuming. Illinois also faces the risk of overcounting in its many colleges and universities. In previous censuses, college students have been double counted by reporting on their own and also as a member of their home household.

What might be some of the specific consequences if the census is not done well?

An inaccurate census hurts everyone. It has tremendous costs for both the public and private sectors. Litigation on behalf of undercounted regions is time-consuming and costly at the federal level. State and local planners will lack valuable planning information on school enrollments, funds for roads and sewers, and health care planning. The business community, in particular new entrepreneurs, will lack easily accessible information on target markets and consumers. An accurate census is in everyone’s best interest, regardless of political orientation.

No surprise, areas with low voluntary census participation will be severely affected. Undercounts will translate into fewer federal dollars across a variety of programs and needs, and those in need of federal assistance tend to be at the highest risk of undercount. Those include the homeless, ethnic minorities, the less educated and those who are housing-insecure. Native Americans, approximately 2 percent of the U.S. population, are often missed in the census, prompting additional outreach programs and the intensification of enumeration efforts in states such as New Mexico, Oklahoma and South Dakota.

For many people, the addition of a citizenship question might seem perfectly reasonable. Why are so many demographers and census experts against it?

Current debates on the need for citizenship on the census tend to generate more heat than light. In the 1950 census, a question on country of birth was asked with a follow-up question on naturalization. In 1970 the census long-form included a basic citizenship question, sent to about one in six households. With the initiation of the American Community Survey in 2005, the Census Bureau began collecting much more detailed citizenship data on a nationally representative sample of the U.S. population.

ACS citizenship and immigration data can be systematically cross-checked with aggregate immigration records. Once data are made anonymous, scholars can compare the pattern of responses against immigration records by country of origin to generate systematic estimates of registered and unregistered migrants. These estimates have been shown to be quite robust.

The scholarly consensus is that the inclusion of a citizenship question will not provide better or more reliable data on citizenship, and it will decrease participation. Recent testing of a variety of formats for this question support this stance. The majority of scholars oppose the inclusion of this new question, especially in the present political climate. Given that it will decrease participation, the census will be unable to generate reliable data on either the population generally or on citizenship specifically.