Read election and census data: turnout, apportionment and margins of error

Grade 12 Social Studies Worksheet

Circle the best answer.

1. Read this first

   Use this

   Cards A and B on the 2020 Census counts (the figures are the Census Bureau's; card B is in our words). Card A, "2020 Census population counts, April 1, 2020". Who made it: the United States Census Bureau (census.gov). When: released April 26, 2021. For whom: Congress, the states and the public. Why: to give the counts used to divide House seats. Resident population of the 50 states and the District of Columbia: 331,449,281, of which the District of Columbia had 689,545. Puerto Rico: 3,285,874. Overseas population (military and federal civilian employees, and their dependents, assigned to a home state): 350,686, of which 1,988 are assigned to the District of Columbia. Apportionment population: 331,108,434. Texas: resident 29,145,505; overseas 37,785; apportionment 29,183,290; seats 38. California: resident 39,538,223; overseas 38,534; apportionment 39,576,757; seats 52. The Bureau reports that each House member will represent an average of 761,169 people. Card B, "How the seats are divided". Summary in our words, not a quotation: The House has 435 seats. Each state gets one seat first, and the other seats are shared by population using the Method of Equal Proportions. The Bureau applies the formula to the apportionment population, which is the resident population of the 50 states plus the overseas personnel who can be assigned to a home state. The District of Columbia and Puerto Rico have no voting seats.

2. 1.

   A report says: "Each of Texas's 38 House members represents 766,987 people." Tala checks cards A and B. Which statement about the report is best supported?

   • The report is right: the resident count is the official count, so the apportionment population is a rough check
   • The report overstates each district, since the apportionment population is smaller than the resident count for Texas
   • The figure divides Texas's resident count, but seats were assigned from its larger apportionment population
   • The report is wrong, since the Bureau gives each state the same average of 761,169 people per House member
3. 2.

   A textbook gives 331,449,281 for the 2020 population and a map gives 331,108,434. Bo checks cards A and B. Which statement explains both numbers?

   • The second is smaller because it leaves out Puerto Rico, which the first includes in its count of residents of the states
   • The second is the true population count, and the resident population is a draft that the Bureau has since set aside
   • Different bases: the first is residents of the 50 states and DC; the second drops DC and adds overseas personnel
   • The second is the revised figure: the Bureau corrected the resident count after it added overseas personnel to the states' totals
4. 3.

   A student divides 331,449,281 by 435, gets 761,952 instead of the Bureau's 761,169, and says the Bureau erred. Noah checks cards A and B. What is the best verdict?

   • Supported: the resident population is the smaller count, so dividing it gives a lower average than the Bureau's average
   • Supported: the Bureau's average is too small, since the Bureau should divide the resident population among the 435 seats
   • Not supported: the two figures differ by rounding, since both divide the same national population by 435 seats
   • Not supported: the Bureau divides the apportionment population, 331,108,434, among 435 seats, so the bases differ

5. Use this

   Cards C and D on House seats before and after the 2020 Census (the figures are the Census Bureau's; the 2010 seats are the 2020 seats less the Bureau's change column). Card C, "House seats by state, 2010 Census and 2020 Census". Who made it: the Census Bureau (Table 1, census.gov, April 26, 2021). For whom: Congress and the states. Why: to show how seats moved. Texas 36 to 38; California 53 to 52; Florida 27 to 28; New York 27 to 26; Pennsylvania 18 to 17; Illinois 18 to 17; West Virginia 3 to 2; Montana 1 to 2; Colorado 7 to 8; Utah 4 to 4. The House has 435 seats in both years. Each state gets one seat first, and the other seats are shared by population using the Method of Equal Proportions (in our words). Card D, "Growth since the 2010 Census". Who made it: the Census Bureau (census.gov, April 26, 2021). Resident population. Texas gained the most people, 3,999,944, to 29,145,505. Utah grew fastest, 18.4 percent, to 3,271,616.

6. 4.

   A headline says Montana's gain in House power was far bigger than Texas's. Esme tests it with card C. Which comparison is best supported?

   • Montana's delegation grew by a far larger percent, but Texas gained two seats and so more of the 435-seat House
   • Texas's gain was larger on any measure, since two seats are more than one seat and Texas is the bigger state
   • Montana's gain was larger on any measure, since doubling a delegation is the biggest change a state can have
   • Neither gain changed anyone's share of the House, since the House stays at 435 seats before and after the census
7. 5.

   A writer says West Virginia lost six times Pennsylvania's House influence, since 1 of 3 seats is six times 1 of 18. Ari tests it with card C. What is the best verdict?

   • Weakly supported: the percents are right, but each state lost one seat of 435, so each lost the same share of the House
   • Supported: a third of a delegation is six times 1 of 18, and influence in the House follows the size of a state's delegation
   • Refuted: Pennsylvania lost more influence, since it lost more people than West Virginia over the decade
   • Refuted: West Virginia lost less, because Pennsylvania's delegation was larger and so each of its seats was worth more
8. 6.

   Utah grew fastest, by 18.4 percent, yet gained no seat; Texas gained the most people and two seats. Luz reads cards C and D. Which claim is best supported?

   • Utah's count must have been wrong, since a state that grows faster than the others should gain a seat in the House
   • Percent growth decides seats, so Utah's missing seat shows that the formula does not follow the Census results
   • The most new residents decides seats, since Texas had the largest numeric gain and then gained the most seats of any state
   • Seats depend on a state's population compared with the others', so the fastest percent growth does not guarantee a seat

9. Use this

   Cards E and F on people per House seat (the populations are the Census Bureau's; the averages on card F are our arithmetic, rounded). Card E, "Apportionment population and seats, 2020 Census". Who made it: the Census Bureau (Table 1, census.gov, April 26, 2021). For whom: Congress and the states. Why: to divide the House. Delaware 990,837 people, 1 seat. Montana 1,085,407 people, 2 seats. Rhode Island 1,098,163 people, 2 seats. West Virginia 1,795,045 people, 2 seats. South Dakota 887,770 people, 1 seat. Wyoming 577,719 people, 1 seat. California 39,576,757 people, 52 seats. Texas 29,183,290 people, 38 seats. Card F, "Average people per seat" (our arithmetic from card E). Delaware 990,837; Montana 542,704; Rhode Island 549,082; West Virginia 897,523; South Dakota 887,770; Wyoming 577,719; California 761,091; Texas 767,981. Across all 50 states, Delaware's average is the largest and Montana's the smallest.

10. 7.

    A student says residents of states with the same number of seats have equal weight in the House. Kira tests it with cards E and F. What is the best verdict?

    • Supported: states with the same number of seats cast the same number of votes in the House, and votes are the weight
    • Not supported: Delaware and Wyoming each hold one seat, yet Delaware's seat covers far more people than Wyoming's
    • Cannot be judged: weight per person depends on how many voters live in each state, which cards E and F do not give
    • Refuted: states with fewer seats have the larger districts, as Delaware's 990,837 shows for a one-seat state
11. 8.

    A story says Montana's new second seat left it with fewer residents per seat than any other state. Milo reads cards E and F. Which statement is best supported?

    • True, and it shows the formula favors small states, since Montana's second seat was taken from a larger state
    • Not supported: gaining a seat raised Montana's average per seat, since a bigger delegation covers more people each
    • True: with two seats Montana averages 542,704 per seat, the smallest of any state; one seat would have covered 1,085,407
    • Not supported: Rhode Island also has two seats and fewer residents than Montana, so its average per seat is smaller

12. Use this

    Cards G and H on how accurate the 2020 Census was (the percents are the Census Bureau's, from its March 10, 2022 release; card H is in our words). Card G, "Post-Enumeration Survey estimates of net coverage error, 2020 Census". Who made it: the Census Bureau (census.gov). When: March 10, 2022. For whom: the public, Congress and census users. Why: to report how well the census counted people. The Post-Enumeration Survey (PES) estimated the nation's net coverage error at minus 0.24 percent, with a standard error of 0.25 percent, which the Bureau said was not statistically different from zero. A minus sign marks an undercount. By group, in the Bureau's categories: Black or African American alone or in combination, undercount of 3.30 percent; Hispanic or Latino, undercount of 4.99 percent; American Indian or Alaska Native alone or in combination living on a reservation, undercount of 5.64 percent; non-Hispanic White alone, overcount of 1.64 percent; Asian alone or in combination, overcount of 2.62 percent. For children ages 0 to 4, the PES estimated an undercount of 2.79 percent. A second method, Demographic Analysis (DA), which uses birth and death records instead of a survey, estimated an undercount of 5.4 percent for them (middle series). Card H, "What a net rate means". Summary in our words, not a quotation: A net coverage rate sets the people counted in error (duplicates and others included by mistake) against the people missed. Among 323.2 million people living in housing units, the Bureau estimates 94.4 percent were counted correctly and 2.2 percent were counted erroneously, of which 1.6 percent were duplicates. It estimates 18.8 million omissions.

13. 9.

    For children ages 0 to 4, one method found a 2.79 percent undercount and another 5.4 percent. A student says one method was careless. Jun tests this with card G. What is the best verdict?

    • Not supported: the 5.4 percent figure is a final count and the 2.79 percent is an estimate, so they cannot be compared
    • Supported: two careful methods applied to the same children would give the same number, so one must be wrong
    • Cannot be judged: undercounts of young children cannot be measured, since children are not surveyed by the PES
    • Not supported: both methods find an undercount, and the card shows they differ in size, not which is closer
14. 10.

    A writer reads the Asian overcount of 2.62 percent as "one in 38 Asian residents was counted twice." Pia tests it with cards G and H. What is the best verdict?

    • Supported: an overcount means people were counted more than once, and 2.62 percent is about one in 38 residents
    • Not supported: a net rate sets people counted in error against people missed, so it cannot say how many were counted twice
    • Refuted: card H shows 1.6 percent of people were counted twice nationally, so the 2.62 percent must be wrong
    • Supported: card G labels the 2.62 percent a duplicate rate for the Asian population, not a net rate