CRS-44

involving fewer assumptions than Passel and Woodrow's technique; it would provide timely data with good geographical detail; it would not require the identification in the census of legal and illegal aliens (as would method two); and it would not necessitate estimating and adding illegals to the U.s. population count for nonapportionment uses (as would the first method).

The

Nevertheless, like methods one and two, the variation on the third method would require an addition to the short-form questionnaire, with drawbacks that already have been discussed. Also, the decision to make this addition, along with plans for a registration of legal aliens in January 1990, would have to be made soon in order to allow time for the necessary preparations. variation on method three presupposes strict compliance with the registration program and truthful answers to the short-form citizenship question; the foreign-born population would presumably find the latter less threatening than an instruction to omit illegal aliens from the census form (as in method one) or to identify legal and illegal aliens on the form (as in method two).

ILLUSTRATIVE APPORTIONMENTS, ADJUSTING FOR ILLEGAL ALIENS

This section reports the results of several trial apportionments using Passel and Woodrow's alien estimates to adjust the State apportionment populations. Using their data in such an exercise to determine the impact of excluding illegal aliens from the 1980 apportionment count is more defensible than trying to predict what effect excluding aliens from he 1990 census would have, because, regardless of the quality of the alien estimates, their impact can be shown had they been used to adjust the 1980 apportionment population.

CRS-45

Using these same data to predict the outcome for 1990 is problematical because

of the many more uncertain assumptions that must be made.

The 1980 Apportionment

Table 4 summarizes trial apportionments based on the results of the 1980 Census. The table shows which States would have gained or lost seats if Passel and Woodrow's alien estimates had been subtracted from each State's population. Two scenarios are presented. The first is based on excluding illegals from the population used for apportionment. This results in California and New York

each losing a seat, with Georgia and Indiana gaining seats. The second scenario subtracts all aliens, both legal and illegal, from the apportionment population. This results in the following differences from the actual seat allocations made based on the 1980 Census: California (-3), Florida (-1), New York (-2), Alabama (+1), Arkansas (+1), Georgia (+1), Indiana (+1), Missouri (+1), and North Carolina (+1).

The apportionment showing the impact of excluding all aliens from the apportionment population is included because, historically, the issue has been stated in this way. Although the proposals that are pending before the Congress at this writing only address the issue of illegal aliens, another proposal (either by statute or constitutional amendment) would be to exclude

all aliens.

CRS-46

Table 4. 1980 Apportionment Based on Various Assumptions About the Impact of Accounting for the Alien Estimates of Passel and Woodrow

CRS-47

Table 4. 1980 Apportionment Based on Various Assumptions About the Impact of Accounting for the Alien Estimates of Passel and Woodrow--Continued

SOURCE:

Apportionments calculated on the Library of Congress central computer.

CRS-48

The 1990 Apportionment

Attempts to predict which States in 1990 will be affected by excluding the illegal aliens from State populations used to reapportion the House are almost certain to fail because of the assumptions of uncertain probability that must 78

be made. First, the likely population for each State as of April 1, 1990

must be projected. Table 7, for example, is based on three such projections which produce differing results.

Second, a set of assumptions must be made

about the illegal alien population, including: (1) how many will be counted in the next census; and (2) how they will be distributed among the States.

The first step, choosing a 1990 population projection, poses significant problems.

Caveats About Population Projections

Projecting population is an inexact science. Generally, projections for large geographic units are more likely to be accurate than those for smaller units. To illustrate this, CRS conducted a "test" using projections for predicting a future apportionment for which there are actual results, i.e. population projections issued by the Census Bureau in 1979 that estimated the 1980 population were used.

78 The 1990 apportionment examples do not include information about excluding legal aliens in addition to illegal aliens because the issue currently before the Congress and the courts is one of excluding illegal aliens. Table 4, which presents data on excluding aliens from the 1980 apportionment illustrates that excluding all aliens would probably have a much greater impact on apportionment than excluding only illegals.