Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Census Bureau undercounted Black, Hispanic and Native American people

census forms
Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

The 2020 census undercounted Black, Native American and Hispanic people while overcounting white and Asian people, the Census Bureau revealed Thursday.

The Post-Enumeration Survey found an overall undercount of approximately 700,000 people out of nearly 324 million, what it describes as an insignificant error rate of .24 percent. However, the data shows Hispanic people were undercounted by 5 percent, Black people by 3.3 percent, American Indians and Alaska Natives by nearly 1 percent, and “some other race” by 4.3 percent.

On the other hand, Asian people were overcounted by 2.6 percent and white people by .7 percent.


“Today’s results show statistical evidence that the quality of the 2020 census total population count is consistent with that of recent censuses. This is notable, given the unprecedented challenges of 2020,” said Census Bureau Director Robert Santos. “But the results also include some limitations — the 2020 census undercounted many of the same population groups we have historically undercounted, and it overcounted others.”

The under- and overcounts were similar to the data found in a study following the 2010 census, according to Census Bureau officials.

PES has been used since 1950 to assess the quality of the decennial population count, but it is not used to adjust congressional reapportionment or the distribution of federal dollars despite the discrepancies.

“We believe the 2020 census data are fit for many uses in decision-making,” Santos said.

Officials and canvassers faced multiple challenges when conducting the population count.

“The 2020 Census faced many challenges, such as conducting fieldwork during the COVID-19 pandemic,” agency officials wrote in a report presenting the data. “Other challenges to the 2020 Census included controversy around a proposed citizenship question, and changes in the duration of the Nonresponse Followup and other operations.”


Read More

Who’s Responsible When AI Causes Harm?: Unpacking the Federal AI Liability Framework Debate
the letters are made up of different colors

Who’s Responsible When AI Causes Harm?: Unpacking the Federal AI Liability Framework Debate

This nonpartisan policy brief, written by an ACE fellow, is republished by The Fulcrum as part of our partnership with the Alliance for Civic Engagement and our NextGen initiative — elevating student voices, strengthening civic education, and helping readers better understand democracy and public policy.

Key takeaways

  • The U.S. has no national AI liability law. Instead, a patchwork of state laws has emerged which has resulted in legal protections being dependent on where an individual resides.
  • It’s often unclear who is legally responsible when AI causes harm. This gap leaves many people with no clear path to seek help.
  • In March 2026, the White House and Congress introduced major proposals to establish a federal standard, but there is significant disagreement about whether that standard should prioritize protecting innovation or protecting people harmed by AI systems.

Background: A Patchwork of State Laws

Without a national AI law, states have been filling in the gaps on their own. The result is an uneven landscape where a person’s legal protections depend entirely on which state they live in.

Keep ReadingShow less
Stethoscope, pile of hundred dollar bills and a calculator

A deep dive into America’s healthcare cost crisis, comparing reform to a modern “moonshot.” Explores payment models, rising costs, and lessons from John F. Kennedy’s space race vision to drive systemic change.

IronHeart/Getty Images

The Moonshot America Needs to Solve Its Healthcare Crisis

In 1961, President John F. Kennedy told the nation, “We choose to go to the moon.” It’s often remembered as a moment of national ambition. In reality, the United States was locked in a Cold War with the Soviet Union, and the fear of falling behind in technological dominance made the mission unavoidable.

Today’s space race is driven by a different force. Governments and private companies are investing billions to capture economic advantages, from satellite infrastructure to advanced computing to the next frontier of resource extraction.

Keep ReadingShow less
After the Court's Voting Rights Decision - How to Protect Black-Majority Districts
a large white building with columns with United States Supreme Court Building in the background

After the Court's Voting Rights Decision - How to Protect Black-Majority Districts

The Supreme Court recently ruled that Louisiana violated the Constitution in creating a new Black-majority voting district. This was after a Federal court had ruled that the previous map, by packing Blacks all in one district, diluted their votes, which violated the Voting Rights Act.

The question is what impact the decision in Louisiana v Callais will have on §2 of the Voting Rights Act ... and on the current gerrymander contest to gain safe seats in the House. The conservative majority said that the decision left the Act intact. The liberal minority, in a strong dissent by Justice Kagan, said that the practical impact was to "render §2 all but a dead letter," making it likely that existing Black-majority districts will not remain for long.

Keep ReadingShow less