Making Sense of the Census

By Rebecca Winters Sunday, June 09, 2002
    • The U.S. Census Bureau last week reported new figures on income, occupation, immigration and other demographic issues covered by its year 2000 long-form questionnaire. But depending on which newspaper you read, you got a very different picture of how the nation fared in the 1990s.

    --THE NEW YORK TIMES headlined its downbeat Page One story GAINS OF '90S DID NOT LIFT ALL, CENSUS SHOWS. The story cited data indicating that 9.2% of families were deemed poor in 2000, only a slight improvement from 10% in 1989, despite the decade's surging economy. Huge growth in immigration paralleled the economic gains, the paper said, creating "a barbell economy of extreme haves and have-nots."

    --THE WASHINGTON POST called the glass half full in its Page One story, headlined '90S BOOM HAD BROAD IMPACT; 2000 CENSUS CITES INCOME GROWTH AMONG POOR, UPPER MIDDLE CLASS. The piece noted that the proportion of households at the low end, earning less than $15,000 a year, shrank, and the Midwest and South fared especially well in the 1990s, with income rising and poverty declining more than the national average.

    --THE WALL STREET JOURNAL in its Page 6 story led with a point that made the last line of the Times story and was not mentioned at all in the Post's: the median U.S. household income rose almost 8% faster than inflation during the 1990s, reaching $41,994 by 1999.

    All three papers noted one piece of bad news: the average commute to work is now longer, 25.5 min. each way, up 3 min. from 1989.