Lawmakers press Commerce secretary on decision to revert to paper-based census

Lawmakers grilled Commerce Department officials Thursday afternoon over the Census Bureau's decision to revert to a paper-based system for the 2010 census -- a move that could contribute to increasing the cost of the effort by $3 billion.

Comment on this article in The Forum.Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez and Census Bureau Director Steve Murdock appeared before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice and Science to explain why they decided to dramatically scale back the use of handheld computers for the 2010 decennial census. Gutierrez outlined in his opening statement Commerce's plan to return to the old method of using paper forms for efforts to follow up on people who do not response to the census. Handheld computers still will be used to assist in canvassing addresses.

"The clock is ticking, Mr. Secretary," said Subcommittee Chairman Alan B. Mollohan, D-W.Va. "There's less than two years to census day, and you've got the whole nonresponse follow-up to plan. Census is on the brink of fiscal disaster."

The switch back to paper is expected to result in significant cost increases, mainly because of the extra staff necessary to help process the paper forms. Gutierrez said that adhering to the original plan to use the handhelds would have increased costs by $1.9 billion, while the new plan is expected to bump costs up anywhere between $2.2 and $3 billion. For fiscal 2008, Gutierrez said that Census expected to need between $160 and $232 million -- money that he now proposed transferring to the agency from other programs within Commerce.

Members of Congress voiced their disapproval of that approach.

"I know this is very troublesome, but we believe finding the money within Commerce is the right step," said Gutierrez. "It's disappointing we have to make this decision. But I would rather be disappointed by the decision than by the Census."

In his opening statement, Mollohan called the census "a grossly mismanaged constitutionally-mandated program" and criticized the plan to reallocate Commerce funding that could be used for economic stimulus programs.

Rep. Rodney P. Frelinghuysen, R-N.J., the ranking Republican on the subcommittee, pressed Gutierrez throughout the hearing for an itemized account of the price increases and their causes. Of particular concern: The contract with Harris is still expected to increase from $624 million to $1.3 billion to provide handhelds for address canvassing.

Asked by Mollohan to explain the increase in contract costs despite reducing the scale of the program, Gutierrez acknowledged that the Census Bureau and Harris "should have had more integration and more intensity in working together." He was able to provide some pricing information, but repeatedly said, "I am not an expert on the census," promising to provide additional cost data later.

One example of a price increase involved setting up a help desk for address canvassing. Under the contract's original terms, Harris was slated to provide a help desk for handheld users at a cost of $36 million. Gutierrez said that number had been revised to $217 million, as the Bureau realized that the original help desk was insufficient to handle the number of anticipated calls. "It was a bad number. I can't think of any better way to say it," said Gutierrez. "There's no way we could do a help desk for $36 million."

Other price increases cited included an additional $93 million for the transition from an automated nonresponse follow-up to a paper-based system -- one that Murdock said would require a "substantial addition of PCs and other hardware at local centers."

Gutierrez and Murdock are expected to testify on April 9 along with a Harris representative before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee's Subcommittee on Information Policy, Census, and National Archives.