Posted on 09/29/2011 6:48:09 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o
The Census Bureau admitted Tuesday that it had “artificially inflated the number of same-sex couples” in the United States, initially reporting a number that was about 40 percent higher than what it now believes is accurate.
The original data published by the 2010 Census set the number of same-sex households in the U.S. in 2010 at 901,997, including 349,377 same-sex married couple households and 552,620 same-sex unmarried partner households.
But the Census Bureau said in a Tuesday conference call with reporters that it has revised these numbers downward “because Census Bureau staff discovered an inconsistency in the responses in the 2010 Census summary file statistics that artificially inflated the number of same-sex couples.”
The Census Bureau now says the 2010 Census found that there were 131,729 same-sex married couple households and 514,735 same-sex unmarried partner households in the United States--for a total of 646,464 same-sex-couple households.
Given that the Census Bureau says there were 116,716,292 total households in the United States in 2010, that means same-sex households made up only 0.55 percent of the total. Had there actually been 901,997 same-sex households in the United States--the "artificially inflated" number the Census Bureau originally reported--that would have equaled ony 0.77 percent of the households in the country.
According to the Census Bureau, the problem with the Census data on same-sex couples was due to “data capture errors” that were caused by the confusing layout on the 2010 Census forms--“the matrix format”--where entering a person’s sex often did not accurately reflect that person’s gender.
Households are identified as same-sex based on the sex of the responder and the relationship of the household members, as either unmarried partner or husband or wife, according to the Census Bureau.
Boxes on the Census form for “male” and “female” were stacked on top of each other, making it more likely for a person to mark the wrong gender or make erroneous lines, changing the results.
“After discovering the inconsistency, Census Bureau staff developed another set of estimates to provide a more accurate way to measure same-sex couple households,” the news release said.
“The revised figures were developed by using an index of names to re-estimate the number of same-sex married and unmarried partners by the sex commonly associated with the person's first name,” the Census Bureau said.
The Census Bureau “Names Index” matched common names to their corresponding genders, such as identifying “John” or “Thomas” as male and “Elizabeth” and “Virginia” as female. The index helped solve the “name-sex inconsistencies” which had increased the numbers of same-sex couples.
After it accounted for the “data capture errors,” the number of same-sex couples in the country was revised to 646,464 from 901,997. Thus, the Census Bureau had "artificially inflated" the number of same-sex couples by 255,533--or 39.5 percent.
The Census Bureau said that the errors were not realized until it was too late to alter the 2010 forms.
But the inaccuracies prompted the Bureau to devise a “Preferred Estimate,” revealed Tuesday, to more accurately depict the incidences of same-sex households, according to Martin O’Connell, chief of the Fertility and Family Statistics Branch of the U.S. Census Bureau, during a conference call to highlight the new data.
“There is no dispute that same-sex couple population increased between 2000 and 2010," said O’Connell, during the briefing.
“What we tried to do was try to get a better grip on exactly what the numbers were and what the actual increase was,” he said. "We tried to eliminate population numbers that seemed artificially high using this estimate, and that's what we came up with."
In 2000, the number of same-sex households, as calculated by the 2000 Census, was 594,391.
They came out in person to interview me because I gave the same answer. I told the Census representative (truthfully) that (1) if he tried to guess my race by appearance, he would get it wrong, and (2) if he did that, I would find out and look for a way to sue him for everything from his toenails up. He left my race marked as HUMAN.
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda ping list.
Be sure to click the FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search link for a list of all related articles. We don't ping you to all related articles so be sure to click the previous link to see the latest articles.
Add keywords homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list.
The Census people have no business serving the homosexual agenda. Of course they are no doubt larded with homosexuals bending the mission of the Census to serve the homo-agenda, as it seems every government agency/department/bureau has now. I'm sure the number they now admit is likewise artificially inflated.
Just goes to prove that there are lies, damned lies and statistics.
I’ve taken care of a lot of patients in “same sex households.” Most of them were not sexual partners.
DADT What a farce that was.
There was no proper survey, and the numbers were cooked, 99% of marines and soldiers do not want openly serving queers but hey the left has to try and change the numbers but even worse is now the homo’s are wanting cross dressers to serve openly
THIS IS TOTAL B/S
For any lib on here who thinks this homo agenda is not a problem or just about marriage then WAKE THE HELL UP YOU FOOLS
first thing they need to do when we get power is to overturn all of this queer crap
This is outrageous.
which is why the first thing the president does once in power is to say no survey was done in a proper way, no investigations were done, I’ve had complaints of officers, Generals to the average marine and we will not be letting openly serving homosexuals or cross dressers serve now.
There will be no more lawsuits from past or present homosexuals
I’[d go further and tell them they need mental help
All right, is there some bureau out there that doesn’t have an honesty problem, the weather service, perhaps? Or how about NASA and it’s space toys? Come on, I am disappointed for the institution that is supposed to provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty, to be having an issue with getting their information straight, not just on these matters, but on information in general.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.