Jeff Miller: “Mr. Speaker, during the debate the other side kept referring to sampling, sampling, sampling, and I keep saying the…”

“Mr. Speaker, during the debate the other side kept referring to sampling, sampling, sampling, and I keep saying the Supreme Court ruled it illegal. So we just need to do the best job we can and address the undercount. Yes, there was an undercount. We need to do everything we can to eliminate that undercount, and post-census local review is one way to help eliminate the undercount. It solved 400,000 mistakes back in 1990. They added 125,000 people. Those people count. So why can we not use it? Why would we even be opposed to it? Now, the two criticisms I have heard today was, one, it was going to delay the process by 45 days, by 9 weeks. This takes place parallel at the same time as the sampling plan or the Census Bureau is proposing to use a sample of 300,000. So it should not delay it. It was used in 1990. It did not delay the census in 1990. And so it should not delay it this way around. The other argument is that we have this LUCA program that we allow people to get involved in before the process. That is good. We want people to be involved. But every community is not involved in that. So the idea is that is a before, this is an after. It is kind of like an audit of the books. What is there to be afraid of? It is just a chance to check it. I know it is a pain, and maybe it is a lot of trouble for the Census Bureau. It is not like it is a huge sum of money. It was $7 million in 1990.”