1) THE CENSUS ADMINISTRATION IS A RIGGED AND BIASED SYSTEM. Thomas Cole JD
- Thomas Cole
- Aug 8
- 21 min read
Updated: Aug 17
"Rather than worrying about privacy, we need accurate and timely data, free of institutional bias, free of political bias. We must have transparency and accountability in our constitutionally mandated census." - Thomas Cole JD
Here I want to explain how the US Census Bureau works, who runs it, and how they count people across our nation. The Census is crucial to us all, because it determines how many congressional districts there are, and how many presidential electors come from each state. These two very important voting features are impacted by illegal immigration numbers because illegal immigrants are ‘counted’ in the census. My contention is they are not accurately counted.
1) Summary
Our current census counts by a 1% sample every year of various households and then samples approximately 126.8 million households every ten years. I’ll explain how the census works, how they sample and what problems exist in their methods. Also I will point out reputable studies that find widely differing numbers of even 100% on counting illegal aliens and how their counting methods differ.
One big study by MIT found the numbers of illegal immigrants living in the US to be twice the numbers the census claimed. Another USC study found that illegal alien residents fail to respond to the census by a 40% margin.
Because Illegals will not fill out forms. Many cannot read or write in the first place, and aren’t going to turn themselves in to the government and loose their immigrant/welfare benefits. We will also look at the different methods used by MIT vs the US Census.
For instance the MIT approach looked at modeling immigrant inflows and outflows directly, aiming to capture populations missed by surveys due to underreporting or nonresponse. While the official census uses a survey-based model that depends on self reporting of data by households.
Over Under Counts favored Democrat States
Also we crunched the census after action review numbers and found large statistically relevant overcounts in democrat states, and relevant undercounts in red states. These error rates were enough to flip 12 or more congress seats to Dem and substantially influence the presidential election.
2) Article I, Section 2, Clause 3.
The census was drafted as part of the US Constitution during the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, which began in May 1787. The first census was held in 1890 with results a year later. It’s primary purpose when drafted was to determine populations in each state to apportion congressional representation. How many people in your district, means how congress members. The founders never envisioned an invasion of illegals. Although they drafters of the Civil War amendments the 14th did provide a remedy to the problem illegal 'immigrants'.
Here is the original census decree from the 1787 Constitution.
Article I Section II Clause 3:
"Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons. The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct.”
In article I section 2, free persons means free and indentured persons, not enslaved. The current slave population of the United States of America at that time, (697,680) were given 3/5ths vote each, due the the southern states demand for a vote for their slave populations. This gave the fairly sparse southern States an extra 418,560 votes to apply to apportionment. Thus the south gained almost 12 additional members in congress. Not a lot compared to the 65 total in congress at that point. This was known as the Three Fifths Compromise, and was hammered out during the Constitutional Convention of 1787. Without this compromise the southern states had refused to join the union. And of course no enslaved peoples voted, just the southern democrat owners voting in congress with these extra numbers. These 697,600 enslaved people produced an estimated 7% percent increase in representation. Twelve extra southern congressmen. Bringing southern representation in congress from 38% without the compromise to 45% with the compromise. Back in the 1790’s southern states were sure to count their enslaved people. The more the better to keep their political power.
“In the first U.S. Congress of 1790, there were 30 representatives from states where slavery was legal, out of a total of 65. This figure is based on the fact that there were 30 representatives from the Southern states of Georgia, South Carolina, and Virginia, all of which were slave states.” Grok
Parallels to today's working Illegals
Today there are parallels to our census where the more illegal aliens a state can shovel into its borders, the more they will increase their voting power in congress and voting power for president. And this is regardless that this extra power comes from non citizens. This arraignment was ended by the Civil War and its political aftermath.
The Civil War 14th amendment provides a remedy for this apparent injustice to our voting rights, which I will cover in future articles.
In today's census there are competing factions wanting higher or lower counts for illegal immigrants. Democrat states like CA may wish to have as many counted as possible because it will mean more congress people in congress and more presidential electors. For instance if CA can pack in an extra ten million into the state, and into democrat controlled areas, that will produce 11.7 new democrat congress people.
3) Why Count?
Our 250 year old constitution requires a Census count every ten years. Americans depend on our government to provide accurate and timely immigration data. Not only does our Constitution give this order, but such data controls all our apportionments for the election of Presidents, the number of congress people, federal funding of schools and a myriad of social services all depend on these numbers to be accurate. But the census data are not accurate in the least. In fact it’s becoming clear the data is highly rigged, massaged, biased and faulty. The last administration government funded influx of 10-15 million illegal immigrants has added to the 20-30 million already here in the US, all using services, clogging healthcare, schools, hospitals, jails and illegally altering the voting patterns in many state and national elections. I’ll expand on this later but since they are counted as ‘persons’, Illegal aliens are now literally ‘voting’ in presidential elections, choosing our presidents. That’s why an accurate census is a crucial and needed tool.
4) Who Counts?
The American Community Survey (ACS) is an ongoing survey conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau, which is a division of the U.S. Department of Commerce. This ACS service sends out questionnaires to 1% percent of ‘households’ every year.
Scale: “With ~3.5 million ACS households sampled annually and 126.7 million households in the 2020 Census, verifying individual truthfulness is logistically infeasible.” Grok
There are challenges in verifying the truthfulness of anyone who fills out these census forms, because they are sometimes filed out, sometimes thrown away or lost, and rely totally on self reporting. If you get this in the mail and throw it out, they send again. If you say there’s only one person living at the home, that became a fact. If you say there are twenty persons living at the residence, and that they are all citizens, that becomes fact, and is added into the census data each year.
There is an obvious problem with Self-Reporting Bias because respondents may intentionally or unintentionally state incorrect or false information due to distrust, misunderstanding, or because they are in the country illegally, from over stayed visas, or just crossed the border twenty years ago and never bothered to get legal.
Also there is no cross checking of these filled out census forms, called a ‘lack of ground truth’.
Due to so-called privacy concerns, the government cannot and will not crosscheck drivers licenses, SS numbers, work or school status, bank accounts, tax records. All are all off limits. Nothing beyond age or sex may be corroborated on the census forms, and even those are useless if the person is not in the system.
This alleged privacy fear does seem a contrived reason to purposely make the census less accurate. We all have to provide ID for most all government services, schools, travel, banking, but not for the census?
“Lack of Ground Truth: For many questions (e.g., income, education), there is no definitive external source to verify responses, unlike age or sex, which can be cross-checked with vital records.” (Grok)
“Federal law (Title 13, U.S. Code) mandates confidentiality, limiting the ability to follow up with individuals to verify responses without their consent.” Grok
Census Verification Lacking
So here we see there is no way to verify any census responses because of so called privacy concerns or because its logistically infeasible. We can’t find the people who moved, who never lived there, who never existed as far as we know.
All this missing, false, unverified, self reported so called data, is then used and compounded into census reports and combined with the decadal census. It’s like making a sausage, you don’t want to ask what’s in it. But this data directly affects our voting for presidents as noted. As a counter to the government numbers there is an MIT study presented later, that came back with numbers twice as high as the Census Bureau for illegal aliens for instance. These MIT numbers and methods are shown later in this article
Currently all this data enters the Census bureau where it is massaged, added to, subtracted from, adjusted by top government workers. All done under the watchful eyes of several Biden autopen appointed, DEI infused, census employees at the ACS, the ‘American Community Survey.
“Leadership of the American Community Survey (ACS)
The ACS is managed by the U.S. Census Bureau, and its operations fall under the bureau’s broader organizational structure. The ACS does not have a single "director" in the way the Census Bureau does; instead, it is overseen by senior leadership within the Census Bureau, particularly those in charge of demographic and survey programs. Key points:
Program Management: The ACS is administered by the Census Bureau’s staff, with oversight from senior officials responsible for demographic surveys. Data Equity Leadership: Meeta Anand - (Foreigner) mentioned as the senior director of the census and data equity program at The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, provides external stakeholder input on ACS-related matters but is not a Census Bureau employee or ACS director.” (Grok)
Here we see that officials overseeing census data are unsupervised, unelected foreigners running the - Equity DEI outreach programs at census. This of course is not what many of us want at census. With DEI concerns at the top of their list, there is little doubt of a lack of accuracy, in favor of not offending anyone, and a democrat bias. Next we’ll be hearing about foreign governments granting awards for DEI and anti American citizen bias to these denizens of the Census. Oh wait..
4) Who Runs the ACS - DEI Priorities
Currently the head numbers cruncher at Census is Robert L Santos, a Biden auto-pen appointee from 2022. Robert Santos’ main goal it appears at ACS, is to implement DEI into the survey and appoint DEI personnel at census, creating equity for everyone.
“Santos prioritized diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in Census Bureau operations, emphasizing outreach to historically undercounted communities (e.g., Black and Latino populations) to improve trust and participation in surveys like the ACS.” Grok
Which is a very subjective process seemly removed from counting people, regardless of race, color, religion, creed as required by the 14th amendment. Here is what we can know about the director of ACS’ beliefs and proclivities. Robert Santos, the DEI, Biden auto-pen appointed, pro illegal alien apologist and fourth column activist.
“Appointed by a Democratic president (Biden), Santos’ nomination was supported by Democrats like Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, who praised him as the “perfect fit” to protect the Census Bureau from partisan pressures.” Grok
How placing people of color into the organization fulfills the constitutional mandate to count people is not clear. Again the 14th amendment makes clear that voters and voting rights shall not be abridged, and the census is the method the founders proscribed to count our population regardless of politics, regardless of race or religion. Whether or not these goals are best reached with DEI flavored counting is unclear.
“Urban Institute Work: Before the Census Bureau, Santos’ work at the Urban Institute, a left-leaning think tank, included research that critiqued Trump administration attempts to include citizenship questions..” Grok
Santos even got awards from Mexico, and the Mexican Legal Defense Fund. This does not give much assurance about the American Community Survey ability to accurately and without bias, count 350 million people. Many of them hiding in the shadows, working for cash, getting welfare benefits intended for American citizens.
Even Mexico was giving this Robert Santos awards..
“Robert Santos was Awarded Mexico’s Ohtli Award (2022) and the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund’s Excellence in Community Service Award (2023)” Grok
(TC note: Why is it every time we dig around in these gov agencies we nearly always find hardcore liberals running them? With DEI, race and gender obsessed priorities? Why is that?
If not by intentional design.)
The current director of Robert Santos exemplifies the hard working, DEI infused, Biden auto-pen government drone, bent on providing census numbers that support the left’s narrative, that there’s only a 10-15 million illegal aliens in all of America. This despite the fact that 35% of Mexico has left for somewhere.
“His (Santos’) tenure included efforts to address undercounts from the 2020 Census and modernize data collection methods, such as integrating administrative data and exploring private data sources. He also oversaw proposed changes to ACS and census questionnaires to better capture race, ethnicity, and gender identity, aligning with Biden administration directives, though some proposals (e.g., disability data changes) were dropped - to add a citizenship question to the 2020 Census and exclude undocumented immigrants from apportionment counts. This suggests alignment with progressive priorities on census inclusivity, though his professional focus remained on statistical rigor rather than overt political activism.” (Grok)
5) Problems With ACS Methodology
Under Robert Santos the ACS can be shown to have numerous problems with counting or the under counting of illegal aliens. Such as;
Samples only 1% of US households per year.
MIT studies show 2X the numbers of illegal immigrants in the US than the official US census.
Political Bias Concerns: X posts highlight skepticism about state-level overcounts in blue states and undercounts in red states, suggesting potential methodological or political influence.
Samples do not include flop houses, do not include skid row, does not include farm stations, nor car dwellers or transient aliens.
These ACS questions rely on self reporting of any and all questions including questions about citizenship, and so if people answer falsely there is no recourse.
USC studies show a 40% non compliance by illegal aliens to census questionnaires.
Does not ask about citizenship status.
Does not ask for SS numbers, nor crosscheck for drivers license, SS, passport, visa, or any other ID’s
ACS’ Reasons for Continued Inaccurate Reporting is to protect ‘privacy’
Over counting in blue states and under counting in red states. Thus using illegal immigration to tilt electoral and congressional power towards democrat strongholds. For instance to 2020 census errors gave democrats 12 congressional seats, overcounting people in democrat states, and undercounting republican states.
Illegal aliens run from any government reporting process. They will not touch any census forms, nor reply to any government form, respond to government questionnaire. This is purely a government fiction for us to believe otherwise.
Robert Santos at the ACS claims that asking illegals for citizenship information would cause distortions to the census. Yet the clear result is a very inaccurate census. And these inaccuracies create the false impression that there are only a few illegals in our nation. Because studies show what common sense tells anyone who drives through our major democrat cities, filled with homeless people, ridden by crimes that did not used to occur in great numbers, 43% of America on food stamps, jails and hospitals filled with foreigners, none speak English, none love America, they wave foreign flags, pine for their old country but never go back. Or that could just be one set of impressions. Maybe America is just fine.
“Research from the early 2000s, including work by the U.S. Census Bureau and University of California scholars, indicates that Mexican-born and other immigrant populations, especially those with unauthorized status, were prone to undercounting due to factors like distrust of government, language barriers, and mobility. Studies such as those by De la Puente (2001) on small-area ethnographic analyses and the 2001 Census Barriers, Attitudes, and Motivators Survey II suggest non-response rates were higher among Hispanic populations, with Spanish-speaking respondents showing varied awareness of census confidentiality and mandatory participation (e.g., 91% knew data was confidential, but only 46% recognized it as mandatory).” (Grok) Critical Perspective on Establishment Narrative
“The Census Bureau claims the 2020 Census was “robust” with a 99.98% completion rate and no significant national coverage error, as confirmed by the PES. However, this narrative is challenged by:
Demographic Disparities: Significant undercounts for Hispanics, Blacks, and American Indians suggest systemic issues that the PES may underreport due to its reliance on census data for matching.
Political Bias Concerns: X posts highlight skepticism about state-level overcounts in blue states and undercounts in red states, suggesting potential methodological or political influences. While these claims are inconclusive without evidence, they reflect public distrust in the PES’s impartiality.
Non-Governmental Critiques: Studies like those in Science Advances and SpringerBriefs argue that the PES may not fully capture errors introduced by differential privacy or undercounts in hard-to-count populations, questioning its ability to independently validate census accuracy. GroK
“The 40% avoidance figure cited could reflect an extreme estimate of non-response or undercount risk among a subset of Mexican-born residents in Los Angeles, possibly undocumented individuals, based on qualitative or adjusted data from that period. For instance, a 2014 study by Warren and Warren (PMC) estimated a 25.1% undercount for children of Mexican-born mothers in the early 2000s, suggesting higher rates for adults or specific demographics. Without the exact 2001 UC survey, it’s plausible this 40% figure emerged from a localized study or adjustment factor, but it exceeds typical undercount estimates (e.g., Census Bureau’s ~10% adjustment mentioned in some analyses)” (Grok)
6) Over Counting and Undercounting by Census
In 2022, the U.S. Census Bureau produced the 2020 Census estimated overcount and undercount rates by State. This was determined by the 2020 Post Enumeration Survey (PES). Census uses PES to estimate the accuracy of the population figures reported by census to improve the Census Bureau’s counting operations for future counts. In this report 14 States are estimated to have had statistically significant net overcounts or undercounts of their state populations in the 2020 Census. States with significant overcounts include Hawaii +6.8% Delaware +5.45% New York +3.44% Minnesota +3.84 Mass +2.24%. And undercounts in Florida -3.48% Mississippi -4.11% Tennessee -4.78%
Arkansas -5.04% In New York that overcount amounted to a projected 695,422 extra ‘persons’ added to the population erroneously.
We charted out the data from this PES and found some very interesting facts.
a) Undercounts vs Overcounts
Looking at all 50 states, the Democrat states are overcounting persons by a 3 to 1 margin over Republican states.
Whereas 15 Dem states had overcounts, only 6 Republican states had overcounts.
Republican states had 19 undercounts while D states had only 5 undercounts in the 2020 census
Thus R states have 300% more undercounts than D states.
The pattern emerges that democrat states are ‘over counted’ by the 2020 census, which added to democrat states electors for president and to their congressional districts. Over counted by 300%. This convenient over-count gave democrats 13 extra congress seats.
b) If 2020 congressional seats were adjusted to PES corrections
Without adjustments
D seats 185.
R seats 186
Swing seats were 63
After adjustments for census corrections over and under error counts…
D seats are 178
R seats are 191
Swing seats 65
There are no adjustments made for these PES/census 2020 errors. What happens is nothing except the democrat states get to keep there extra congressional seats, 13 of them statistically. And that is also 13 more democrat presidential electors.
c) Undercount numbers nationwide - lower statistical boundary
Republican states - undercounts nationwide 5.2 million (PES estimated)
Democrat states - undercounts nationwide 1 million (PES estimate)
When we look at the nationwide effect of over/under counts by the 2020 census, a pattern emerges. Nineteen Republican states were shortchanged by the census 5.2 million persons. While only five democrat states were under counted and by only one million persons. So republican states were shortchanged by a 5/1 margin by the 2020 census. And we note that in the 2010 census there were no statistically relevant over or under counting uncovered by the PES/Census. WE see this as potential technical fraud by the DEI, leftist controlled census bureau. The census error study is here:
7) Report on Self Reporting Inaccuracy
A little known (and highly media censored) USC study regarding the accuracy of the census determined the underreporting rate for illegal aliens is 40%.
40% Census Avoidance
So right there we have a huge hole in the data. We cannot know or even ask who are citizens, we cannot know if they are working, we cannot know where they live or how many are there in our nation, county or cities.
This lack of accuracy and accountability falls to Robert Santos, the DEI director at the ACS who each year turns in widely inaccurate data to the Censes department, which is compounded into our national reports on immigration. All false by design. Claiming that if we ask too many questions we might get a false reading.
“The ACS’s 1% sample and self-reporting indeed introduce undercounting risks. MPI notes that estimates are adjusted upward by ~10% to account for underreporting, based on studies like a 2001 University of California survey showing 40% of Mexican-born respondents in Los Angeles avoided census responses (). The Census Bureau acknowledges sampling and coverage errors, particularly for hard-to-count populations like unauthorized immigrants” (Grok)
8) MIT/Yale Study:
This MIT study is on the real numbers of illegals in the US as of 2016. It came out in 2018 and was of course roundly criticized by mainstream and government outlets because MIT’s numbers were twice what the Census Bureau predicted. And when you add in the last ten years from 2016- 2026.. well, try adding another 15 million to the figure.
That means MIT is talking about 38 million illegals in the USA. Shall we argue with MIT now? This author will accept their numbers over any government, NGO or church group numbers.
“The MIT study estimated the undocumented immigrant population in 2016 to be 22.1 million (mean estimate), nearly double the commonly cited estimate of 11.3 million from Pew Research Center, which relies on survey data like the American Community Survey (ACS)” GroK
“The 2018 study’s high estimate (22.1 million) challenges the establishment narrative (Pew’s 11.3 million) by modeling inflows/outflows rather than relying on surveys, which may miss undocumented immigrants due to distrust or nonresponse (e.g., 2020 Census PES undercounts). Its academic rigor (published in PLOS ONE) lends credibility, but critics like CIS argue it overstates the population due to assumptions about inflows. The study’s 2016 focus limits its applicability to 2025, but it remains a landmark for questioning survey-based estimates”Grok
This study “applied demographic principles, using data on legal admissions, deportations, and population changes from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and ACS.” Thus MIT was using real numbers from independent government agencies like DHS.
And they “simulated parameter ranges to account for undercounts and uncertainties, producing a probability distribution for the population estimate.”
This is a better approach then the Census Bureau’s antiquated, Please fill out our form approach.
“The (MIT) approach differed from survey-based methods (e.g., Pew, ACS) by modeling inflows and outflows directly, aiming to capture populations missed by surveys due to underreporting or nonresponse.”Grok
So this is what we’re talking about here. Illegals will naturally not fill out forms. The government knows it and hides the errors. Most can’t read or write in the first place, and are not going to turn themselves in. To get honest numbers we cannot rely on the biased DEI census people, but instead look to outside unbiased studies by absolute professional data scientists like MIT and USC. As usual we are finding the government incompetent, politically biased and irascible.
MIT study is here: the PLOS ONE study (journals.plos.org) for MIT/Yale
9) Conclusions
Our conclusion is the Census Bureau is deeply biased, with DEI and open border partisans running the show. This coupled with the last administrations open borders policy has worked to illegally increase democrat states congressional and electoral representation. Because the Census Bureau and its internal review committees are lead by DEI infused foreign born, liberal biased, marxist adherents, the numbers cannot be trusted. Of course they approve of their own work, but the MIT numbers showed a 100% error in undercounting people in our country. Who shall we trust?
The scores of problems mentioned herein are reiterated;
The census only samples 1% of US households per year.
Samples do not include flop houses,
do not include skid row,
do not include farm stations,
nor car dwellers or transient aliens.
The questions rely on Self Reporting, with any and all questions including about citizenship removed.
The result is - if people answer falsely there is no recourse.
An illegal home resident could say ‘there are 30 US citizens in this household’ and there is no way to check because..
We are not allowed to cross reference or even ask about SS numbers, California ID, immigration status…
Over counting in blue states and under counting in red states. Thus using illegal immigration to tilt electoral and congressional power towards democrat strongholds.
These lapses are intentional and guided by the over riding and insidious goal to obscure the true numbers of illegals. By making it an offense to ask about citizenship we are forced into not knowing the true numbers of illegals. The excuse for avoiding these pertinent questions is couched as “privacy concerns’, but the real reason is to prevent the American people from seeing the reality of 35% of Mexico moving into the USA. And that illegal population living on our welfare and civil systems, is also counting in our presidential elections and federal apportionment venues affecting the number of districts and the number of democrat congresspeople.
This is a direct affront to our right under the 14th amendment which guarantees our rights to be free from …“voter rights abridgment in any way.”
Epilog
Even lefty government centered Grok acknowledges the Census Bureau has major built in deficiencies and biases. Of course the bureau reports they are doing a great job. Because they checked their own work and it is great! Institutional bias is how government works, or fails to work. Thus the time is now to revamp and retool the Census department. Rather than worrying about privacy, we need accurate and timely data, free of institutional bias, free of political bias. We must have transparency and accountability in our constitutional mandated census.
“”The 2020 PES has legitimacy through its independent design, dual-system estimation, and quality control processes, but its reliance on Census Bureau data and institutional oversight creates a risk of self-confirmation. The lack of external, non-governmental validation and limitations in sample size and COVID-19-related disruptions further undermine its ability to fully challenge census inaccuracies. The top four non-governmental studies (Science Advances 2024, American Journal of Public Health 2018, Northwestern 2015, SpringerBriefs 2019) highlight persistent undercounts and methodological issues (e.g., differential privacy) that the PES may not adequately address, supporting your concern about self-referential bias. To improve legitimacy, future PES efforts could incorporate third-party audits or larger samples, as recommended by Oversight.gov for the 2030 Census. (Grok)
REFERENCES
MIT Study Predicts 22+ million Illegal Aliens 2016 here:
Census errors overcounts here:
Differential Privacy’s Impact (Science Advances, 2024): Quantifies how differential privacy degrades small-area data, especially for minorities, affecting accuracy for redistricting and funding.
Inaccuracies and Public Health (American Journal of Public Health, 2018): Links census inaccuracies to misaligned funding for health programs, highlighting undercount risks.
Apportionment and Funding Impacts (Northwestern University, 2015): Estimates losses in seats and funding due to inaccurate counts, emphasizing systemic undercounts.
Differential Undercounts (SpringerBriefs, 2019): Details demographic undercounts and their long-term impacts on representation and resources.
Grok references:
Challenges in Verifying Truthfulness
Privacy Protections: Federal law (Title 13, U.S. Code) mandates confidentiality, limiting the ability to follow up with individuals to verify responses without their consent.
Scale: With ~3.5 million ACS households sampled annually and 126.7 million households in the 2020 Census, verifying individual truthfulness is logistically infeasible.
Self-Reporting Bias: Respondents may intentionally or unintentionally misreport due to distrust, misunderstanding, or social desirability bias (e.g., underreporting income or misreporting household size).
Lack of Ground Truth: For many questions (e.g., income, education), there is no definitive external source to verify responses, unlike age or sex, which can be cross-checked with vital records. (Grok)
“Leadership of the American Community Survey (ACS)
The ACS is managed by the U.S. Census Bureau, and its operations fall under the bureau’s broader organizational structure. The ACS does not have a single "director" in the way the Census Bureau does; instead, it is overseen by senior leadership within the Census Bureau, particularly those in charge of demographic and survey programs. Key points:
Program Management: The ACS is administered by the Census Bureau’s staff, with oversight from senior officials responsible for demographic surveys. The Associate Director for Demographic Programs at the Census Bureau typically has responsibility for the ACS, as it is one of the bureau’s major survey programs. However, specific names of individuals directly managing the ACS (e.g., program managers or division chiefs) are not explicitly mentioned in the provided sources or widely publicized in a way that identifies a singular "director" of the ACS
.Key Personnel: While no specific "ACS Director" is named, the ACS operations are supported by various divisions within the Census Bureau, including those handling data collection, processing, and dissemination. For example, posts on X mention individuals like Zachary Henry, who was the division chief for the communications directorate at the Census Bureau, but this role is broader than just the ACS.
Data Equity Leadership: Meeta Anand - (Foreigner) mentioned as the senior director of the census and data equity program at The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, provides external stakeholder input on ACS-related matters but is not a Census Bureau employee or ACS director.” (Grok)
“Research from the early 2000s, including work by the U.S. Census Bureau and University of California scholars, indicates that Mexican-born and other immigrant populations, especially those with unauthorized status, were prone to undercounting due to factors like distrust of government, language barriers, and mobility. Studies such as those by De la Puente (2001) on small-area ethnographic analyses and the 2001 Census Barriers, Attitudes, and Motivators Survey II suggest non-response rates were higher among Hispanic populations, with Spanish-speaking respondents showing varied awareness of census confidentiality and mandatory participation (e.g., 91% knew data was confidential, but only 46% recognized it as mandatory).” (Grok)Critical Perspective on Establishment Narrative Grok
“Research from the early 2000s, including work by the U.S. Census Bureau and University of California scholars, indicates that Mexican-born and other immigrant populations, especially those with unauthorized status, were prone to undercounting due to factors like distrust of government, language barriers, and mobility. Studies such as those by De la Puente (2001) on small-area ethnographic analyses and the 2001 Census Barriers, Attitudes, and Motivators Survey II suggest non-response rates were higher among Hispanic populations, with Spanish-speaking respondents showing varied awareness of census confidentiality and mandatory participation (e.g., 91% knew data was confidential, but only 46% recognized it as mandatory).” (Grok)Critical Perspective on Establishment Narrative
… “The ACS’s 1% sample and self-reporting indeed introduce undercounting risks. MPI notes that estimates are adjusted upward by ~10% to account for underreporting, based on studies like a 2001 University of California survey showing 40% of Mexican-born respondents in Los Angeles avoided census responses (). The Census Bureau acknowledges sampling and coverage errors, particularly for hard-to-count populations like unauthorized immigrants” (Grok)
“The (MIT) approach differed from survey-based methods (e.g., Pew, ACS) by modeling inflows and outflows directly, aiming to capture populations missed by surveys due to underreporting or nonresponse.”
The 2020 PES has legitimacy through its independent design, dual-system estimation, and quality control processes, but its reliance on Census Bureau data and institutional oversight creates a risk of self-confirmation. The lack of external, non-governmental validation and limitations in sample size and COVID-19-related disruptions further undermine its ability to fully challenge census inaccuracies. The top four non-governmental studies (Science Advances 2024, American Journal of Public Health 2018, Northwestern 2015, SpringerBriefs 2019) highlight persistent undercounts and methodological issues (e.g., differential privacy) that the PES may not adequately address, supporting your concern about self-referential bias. To improve legitimacy, future PES efforts could incorporate third-party audits or larger samples, as recommended by Oversight.gov for the 2030 Census. (Grok)
Context of Appointment: Appointed by a Democratic president (Biden), Santos’ nomination was supported by Democrats like Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, who praised him as the “perfect fit” to protect the Census Bureau from partisan pressures. However, some Republicans, including Senator Rick Scott, expressed concerns about potential politicization, though these were not substantiated with specific evidence. The bipartisan Senate vote (58-35) indicates broad support despite some opposition.(Grok)
Comments