The Trump administration spent an extraordinary amount of time and effort messing with the census over four years. Its apparent aim: It wanted to exclude undocumented immigrants from population counts, thereby allowing Republicans to draw more favorable maps in redistricting and gain more ground in the House.
The effort ultimately failed. And it now seems possible that these efforts might have played a role in costing red states seats.
A new report Thursday from the U.S. Census Bureau found that 14 states were significantly miscounted in the 2020 Census, including six by 4 percentage points or more. At the high end, Hawaii’s population was overcounted by an estimated 6.8 percentage points, while Arkansas’ was undercounted by 5 points.
A trend you might notice if you peruse the data is that most of the states with significant overcounts were blue states like Hawaii (e.g., Delaware, Rhode Island, New York and Massachusetts), while most with undercounts were red, Southern states like Arkansas (e.g., Tennessee, Florida, Mississippi and Texas).
ADVERTISING
What that means: When it comes to the post-census awarding of seats — a process known as apportionment — those red states might have been at a deficit, because they weren’t given credit for their full populations. Blue states, on the other hand, might have been given more seats because the Census Bureau thought they contained more people than they actually did.
Analysis of 2020 Census suggests some groups will miss out on funding and representation
Exactly how the new data might have changed things isn’t totally clear. It’s difficult to gauge that with any certainty, given the margins of error involved in the new survey, the interplay between states’ populations in the apportionment calculations, and the fact that the new data are limited in some key ways, as The Post’s Tara Bahrampour writes.
But it seems pretty evident that incorrect numbers probably allowed two blue-leaning states with overcounts — Minnesota and Rhode Island — to keep seats they shouldn’t have, given that they just barely cleared the bar for keeping those seats. Minnesota kept its seat by a scant 26 people, and both states had been expected to lose seats before the bureau announced otherwise.
On the flip side, the undercounts in Florida and Texas might well have cost those two red-leaning states seats that they were on the cusp of adding. Texas did gain two other seats, but its 1.9 percent undercount was enough to deprive it of half a million people in apportionment. In pre-census population projections, both states had been on track to gain an additional seat.
(Some estimates Thursday suggested the miscounts might also have moved another seat from a red state to a blue state. We’ve checked in with some authoritative experts on the subject and will update this post with their assessments.)
So how does this trace to the Trump administration? You might recall hearing, in the heat of the 2020 election, that it decided to cut the census count short by a month. Again, the goal was pretty evident: It wanted to get the data early enough to use for apportionment before the administration might change — and ultimately did change — hands. The data were to be delivered to Trump by Dec. 31, three weeks before he would ultimately leave office.
The effort ultimately failed. And it now seems possible that these efforts might have played a role in costing red states seats.
A new report Thursday from the U.S. Census Bureau found that 14 states were significantly miscounted in the 2020 Census, including six by 4 percentage points or more. At the high end, Hawaii’s population was overcounted by an estimated 6.8 percentage points, while Arkansas’ was undercounted by 5 points.
A trend you might notice if you peruse the data is that most of the states with significant overcounts were blue states like Hawaii (e.g., Delaware, Rhode Island, New York and Massachusetts), while most with undercounts were red, Southern states like Arkansas (e.g., Tennessee, Florida, Mississippi and Texas).
ADVERTISING
What that means: When it comes to the post-census awarding of seats — a process known as apportionment — those red states might have been at a deficit, because they weren’t given credit for their full populations. Blue states, on the other hand, might have been given more seats because the Census Bureau thought they contained more people than they actually did.
Analysis of 2020 Census suggests some groups will miss out on funding and representation
Exactly how the new data might have changed things isn’t totally clear. It’s difficult to gauge that with any certainty, given the margins of error involved in the new survey, the interplay between states’ populations in the apportionment calculations, and the fact that the new data are limited in some key ways, as The Post’s Tara Bahrampour writes.
But it seems pretty evident that incorrect numbers probably allowed two blue-leaning states with overcounts — Minnesota and Rhode Island — to keep seats they shouldn’t have, given that they just barely cleared the bar for keeping those seats. Minnesota kept its seat by a scant 26 people, and both states had been expected to lose seats before the bureau announced otherwise.
On the flip side, the undercounts in Florida and Texas might well have cost those two red-leaning states seats that they were on the cusp of adding. Texas did gain two other seats, but its 1.9 percent undercount was enough to deprive it of half a million people in apportionment. In pre-census population projections, both states had been on track to gain an additional seat.
(Some estimates Thursday suggested the miscounts might also have moved another seat from a red state to a blue state. We’ve checked in with some authoritative experts on the subject and will update this post with their assessments.)
So how does this trace to the Trump administration? You might recall hearing, in the heat of the 2020 election, that it decided to cut the census count short by a month. Again, the goal was pretty evident: It wanted to get the data early enough to use for apportionment before the administration might change — and ultimately did change — hands. The data were to be delivered to Trump by Dec. 31, three weeks before he would ultimately leave office.
