[[link removed]]
SUNDAY SCIENCE: SHARP CUTBACKS IN FIELD TESTS COULD THREATEN QUALITY
OF 2030 U.S. CENSUS
[[link removed]]
Jeffrey Mervis
February 5, 2026
Science
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]
_ Efforts to correct historic undercount of poor, immigrant, rural,
and minority populations are at risk, critics say _
This late 2nd-century BC Roman marble relief (c. 122 BC) from the
Campus Martius depicts a census (citizen registration), Public domain
The U.S. Census Bureau this week announced
[[link removed]] it is
dramatically shrinking the size and scope of a trial run this spring
for the 2030 census. Experts worry the changes—notably fewer test
sites, less outreach, and an English-only online questionnaire—will
make it harder to test proposed improvements and could lead to a
significant undercount of the country’s population in 2030.
The cutbacks mean “you’re no longer focusing on how to do a better
job of counting the folks who were historically undercounted, to get a
more accurate census,” says statistician Robert Santos, who led the
Census Bureau under former President Joe Biden. “Instead, you’re
simply testing for efficiency and some new technology,” says Santos,
who resigned 3 weeks after President Donald Trump took office.
To conduct an accurate decennial national head count, the Census
Bureau must first identify all occupied housing units, even those with
no official address. Then it must count everyone living in those
units—and avoid counting anyone twice.
That’s a huge effort—the 2020 census cost $13 billion—and one
that requires massive public outreach and the cooperation of every
resident. Santos says the goal of conducting a field test 4 years
before the next census is to develop “better messaging, better
approaches to use at someone’s door, better partnerships with
community leaders to generate the type of trust that’s necessary for
residents to feel comfortable participating in the census.”
Many demographers think the latest changes go in the opposite
direction, starting with the decision to drop four of the six field
sites announced in 2024. The six sites were selected based on 13
housing and demographic characteristics that have traditionally
contributed to an undercount of poor, rural, immigrant, minority, and
geographically isolated communities. The list of factors also includes
fast-growing areas with large, complex housing units and group
quarters such as colleges, prisons, and military bases.
None of the original sites satisfied all 13 criteria—one in western
North Carolina did best, addressing eight. But together they covered
all the bases. In contrast, the two remaining sites—Spartanburg,
South Carolina, and Huntsville, Alabama—satisfy only three and six
of the criteria, respectively. For example, neither city contains any
tribal lands, unlike three of the dropped sites—western North
Carolina, Arizona, and western Texas. The Texas site also satisfied
another criterion—spotty cellphone and internet service. Colorado
Springs, Colorado, the fourth dropped site, featured lots of new
housing.
The revised field test will also be much smaller. Instead of some
631,000 residents, the Census Bureau now expects to target a pool less
than one-quarter that size.
The Census Project, a nonprofit advocacy group, notes that the Trump
administration reduced the number of tests before the 2020 census,
citing budget constraints. It says that change, along with the
pandemic, contributed to a much higher undercount than might otherwise
have been the case. “The 2026 test was touted as a response to 2020
lessons learned and to help the Census Bureau improve the accuracy of
the country’s upcoming once-a-decade head count,” the group said
in a statement after the revised plan was announced.
The Census Bureau declined to answer questions from _Science_ about
the rationale for the changes. A one-paragraph statement on its
website says the agency “remains committed to conducting the most
accurate count in history for the 2030 Census and looks forward to
continued partnerships with local communities.”
But census advocates question that commitment. Instead, they worry the
White House has overridden the Census Bureau’s best scientific
judgment to serve some political purpose—the results are used to
allocate federal dollars and draw congressional districts. “Had the
people at the Census Bureau [when I was director] believed they could
gain enough insights from only two sites, that’s what they would
have proposed,” Santos says. “The reduction from six [sites] tells
you something about who’s making decisions,” he says.
Another change that troubles demographers and civil rights groups is
the elimination of Spanish and Chinese versions of the online
questionnaire being tested this spring. The 2020 census was the first
time people could respond via the internet, and more than two-thirds
of the country chose that option—offered in 12 languages other than
English—right off the bat.
The Census Bureau says it is hoping to make that option even more
popular in 2030 by adding a QR code to call up the census form and
improving customer service for those having problems completing the 10
questions online. But an English-only version will shut out many
potential users.
The main cost of the census is tracking down and obtaining answers
from residents who did not respond to the initial outreach and
reminders. The field test is the only chance for the Census Bureau to
pilot all the planned improvements it hopes will make that follow-up
exercise faster, better, and cheaper in 2030. Demographers are
especially concerned about one new wrinkle: testing the use of the
U.S. Postal Service (USPS) to nab hard-to-reach residents.
It’s been suggested before, but few demographers think it’s a good
option. A 2011 report by a government watchdog agency said it would be
much more expensive—USPS employees are paid triple what the Census
Bureau pays its army of temporary enumerators. Postal carriers already
have a full-time job, Santos notes, and aren’t trained to interact
with residents in the same way that census enumerators do. Some
experts also think relying on the carriers would undercut the
agency’s promise to respondents of absolute privacy.
“A lot of people, especially in rural areas, know their postal
carrier and might not be comfortable giving out personal information
to them,” says Allison Plyer, chief demographer for the Data Center
and former chair of the agency’s Scientific Advisory Committee,
which was disbanded last year. However, Plyer and others do think USPS
can play a role in helping update the master list of addresses that
the Census Bureau uses as the basis for each census.
The Census Bureau did not explain its rationale for any of the
changes. And that lack of transparency worries those hoping the 2030
census will be as accurate as possible. “This announcement raised a
lot more questions than it provided answers,” says one veteran city
planner who asked not to be identified. “And that’s not a good
sign.”
_JEFF MERVIS tries to explain how government works to readers of
Science._
_Every day, the news staff of SCIENCE magazine and our contributing
freelancers bring you top stories from the world of scientific
research and science policy. Our offerings include breaking research
news, ScienceInsider (news and analysis from the world of science
policy), a weekly podcast, and Sifter, a blog that points you to the
best science stories on the web. We also post a weekly podcast. And
you can now find our weekly news content from Science magazine
included in our daily news feed, on our category and collections
pages, and on our author pages._
_CLICK HERE _
[[link removed]]_for
more information about the News from Science subscription and to
purchase a subscription._
NUCLEAR ARMS CONTROL ERA COMES TO END AMID GLOBAL RUSH FOR NEW WEAPONS
[[link removed]]DAVID
E. SANGER AND WILLIAM J. BROADNEW YORK TIMESBeijing, Moscow and shaken
American allies are seeking new warheads as President Trump ends more
than a half century of nuclear arms control with Russia.February 5,
2026
* census
[[link removed]]
* Census Bureau
[[link removed]]
* population
[[link removed]]
* Inequality
[[link removed]]
* Donald Trump
[[link removed]]
* transparency
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]
INTERPRET THE WORLD AND CHANGE IT
Submit via web
[[link removed]]
Submit via email
Frequently asked questions
[[link removed]]
Manage subscription
[[link removed]]
Visit xxxxxx.org
[[link removed]]
Bluesky [[link removed]]
Facebook [[link removed]]
[link removed]
To unsubscribe, click the following link:
[link removed]
