Journal of Official Statistics, Vol.6, No.3, 1990. pp. 241250

Current Issue
Personal Reference Library (PRL)
Personal Page

Adjustment and Reapportionment – Analyzing the 1980 Decision

Gilford (1983) has demonstrated that, if the adjusted counts from the U.S. Census Bureau's 1980 coverage evaluation program had been used to apportion the U.S. House of Representatives, the variability of the adjusted counts would have had a substantial effect on the resulting apportionment. He further argues that this is sufficient evidence to conclude that the adjusted numbers were unsuitable in 1980 for the purpose of reapportionment. We extend his analysis to take into account the likely bias present both in the unadjusted census counts and the adjusted counts. This extended analysis also indicates that the decision in 1980 not to use adjusted counts for reapportionment was justifiable. We also discuss circumstances under which adjusted counts might be preferred to census counts for purposes of apportionment in the 1990 decennial census.

Apportionment; census adjustment; post-enumeration program.

Copyright Statistics Sweden 1996-2018.  Open Access
ISSN 0282-423X
Created and Maintained by OKS Group