Statistical Sampling
for the U. S. Census?
The psychologist in me says ...,
but the genealogist in me says ...
This was an issue for the Year 2000 Census. My loyalties to my
two main research groups were in conflict about this issue.
The American Psychological Association (APA) was advocating for a U. S. Census
based on a scientifically-determined sample of the population. The APA accurately
argued that this method would eliminate some elements of unfairness in the old system
wherein certain groups of people are less likely to be fully counted, and that a
representative count would save millions of dollars in tax money.
As a psychologist, I recognized the efficiency and efficacy of the APA proposal.
At least with the APA's proposal, we could quantify the chances of error, while
we never know for sure how much error there is in the traditional census methods.
But, as a genealogist, I remembered how many times I have turned to U. S. Census
Records to seek research clues to help me learn about the lives of my ancestors.
We shouldn't take lightly any plan to take this resource away from future generations
of genealogists.
So, while the old counting method is costly and prone to errors, I would vote to
keep a system that records real data about real people -- as a gift to future family
historians.
|
|
