Maat Andrews
The Houston Sun

The Regional 2010 Census Bureau encouraged grassroots organizations, community activists and local governing officials to help make every Houstonian count in this upcoming decade-driven population tally, recently at a training conference at Texas Southern University’s student center.

Being included in the 2010 tabulation can make the difference between the number of representatives for the Houston area, the number of dollars allotted for schools, infrastructure improvements, and other city planning strategies that require per person considerations for federal monies.

“We need all Houstonians counted,” Council Member James Rodriguez said.

Historically, some populations resist an easy registering: some are transient, young, black or Hispanic.

“The data indicate that we tend to miss young African-American males, young Hispanic males, and children under two years old,” Gabriel Sanchez, Head of the Dallas Regional Census Bureau Office said.


Also, problematic to Houston, but not unique to this city, are special populations that do not respond to census inquiries because of confidentiality issues.


To overcome these barriers and get an accurate count for 2010, Sanchez and his staff are implementing special programs and are willing to hire extra local folk who know Houstonians’ habits and sensitivities.

Persons interested in applying for positions with the bureau are asked to visit the 2010census.gov website for more information.

These strategies for getting a thorough head count are implemented in stages and will require various kinds of skills and personnel.  Already the buildings and communities have been canvassed.

“The census bureau is not the post office. We do not count addresses.  We count households and buildings,” Sanchez said.  “We will count the old shack out back of someone’s house, which the post office does not deliver mail to.

“We know that someone could live in that building,” Sanchez continued.  “We will knock on that door.”

Before the forms arrive in the mail in March 2010, advertisements will be sent out with instructions and heads up information about the forms.  Sanchez said that he wanted to reach concerned individuals and grassroots press and organizations so that all local persons know about the confidentiality and importance of each human body being counted.

The mailed forms will be followed up with census workers visiting all sites that are not responding.  Each census person can be identified by a badge and a bag.  These persons are the eyes and ears of the bureau and will interview any persons who are reticent about giving their information.

American citizens who are living and working overseas will not be counted, as the census is a body count of persons who add to numbers actually living in and using the resources of the city.  Military personnel are the exception: they will be part of tally.

Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee


Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee, Co-Chair of both the Congressional Afghanistan Caucus and the Congressional Pakistan Caucus released the following statement in response to President Obama’s December 1, 2009 speech on his decision to send addition troops to Afghanistan .  “Although I do not agree that sending additional troops to Afghanistan is the best and most effective strategy to provide for the stability of Afghanistan, I respect and admire the President’s thorough deliberation and thoughtful articulation of his decision.  I look forward to working with my peers in Congress to define a response that must include a heightened commitment that first fixes the government of Afghanistan .

“I am concerned about the cost of sending additional troops, as well as the effect that a larger presence in Afghanistan will have on troop morale.  The White House estimates that it will cost $1 million per year for each additional soldier deployed, and I believe that $30 billion would be better spent on developing new jobs, and fixing our broken health care system.

“Many leaders in our armed forces, including Secretary Gates, have said that it is optimal for troops to have two years between overseas deployments; yet, today, our troops have only a year at home between deployments.  Expanding the number of U.S. forces in Afghanistan by 30,000 will negatively impact troop morale and will bring us further away from the conditions necessary to maintain a strong, all-volunteer military.  “I am also concerned that the United States is shouldering too much of the burden in Afghanistan.  Although the terror attacks on American soil prompted NATO to respond with collective military action, no nation is immune from the threat of terrorism.  We must remember that the military involvement in Afghanistan is led by NATO, and that success in Afghanistan depends on the support of our allies.  To that end, I am encouraged by reports of increased troop commitment by countries such as Britain, Spain, Turkey, and Australia, and I hope that France, Germany, and others follow suit.

“Defeating al-Qaeda, and the threat they pose to America and our allies is the most important objective of our operations. To that end, I believe that Pakistan, not Afghanistan, is now the key to success and stability in the region.  Over the past eight years, Coalition Forces have successfully pushed most of al-Qaeda out of Afghanistan and into Pakistan.  This has not only put them outside the mandate of our forces, but has also forced Pakistan to address an enlarged terrorist threat.  The recently approved aid package to Pakistan will improve Pakistan ’s capacity to address terrorist networks within its own borders, but I worry that a troop increase will cause even more refugees and insurgents to cross into Pakistan.

“Tomorrow, Secretary Clinton, Secretary Gates, and Admiral Mullen will testify before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.  I hope that they will shed light on how they define success in Afghanistan, as well as how the troop surge will achieve our objectives.

“Ultimately, we in Congress must decide what is in the best interest of the American people.  At this time, I remain unconvinced that the projected gain from sending 30,000 additional troops to Afghanistan is the best use of $30 billion.”

BACK TO TOP