The Executive Officer’s Column
A Fight to Preserve Research and
Ensure Government Accountability
Since the President released his proposed FY 2007 budget last
month, disturbing details have surfaced, causing a significant stir
among science and policy constituencies concerned about the fate
of scientifically, socially, and economically important federal
programs. Of special note to sociologists are cuts in agencies
charged with quantifying our nation’s social and economic health
to guide informed, democratic decisionnmaking and facilitate
social research. Several important, long-standing federal data collection efforts are slated
for severe reduction or elimination (see the January 2006 Footnotes [p. 2] Vantage Point
budget prognostications).
At risk is the collection and dissemination of data crucial to both private- and publicsector
decisionmakers and to policymakers working to refine government programs and
increase public accountability. These datasets help quantify employment, population,
income, businesses, wealth, medical insurance, participation in government programs,
poverty, and myriad other indicators of the nation’s social health. They provide the
empirical basis for analyses aimed at improving service, facilitating business decisions,
and otherwise keeping our democracy functioning well. Many of these indicators allow
comparisons across time and geography and permit valid assessments of government
programs’ efficiency and efficacy.
With a few exceptions, programs within research agencies such as the Census Bureau
and the National Institutes of Health are facing flat or declining budgets. Potential impacts
are numerous but include data central to
research and evaluation. Tight fiscal
constraints are manifest by program
reductions for FY 2007 and beyond, and
the result has been a flood of “Action
Alerts” to members of the academic
research and public advocacy communities,
spawning a deluge of letters to Members of
Congress who must act on the President’s
budget by fall 2006. (See ASA’s action alert
at www.asanet.org/page.ww?section=Advocacy&name=Save+SIPP.)
On the Chopping Block
A key example is the Census Bureau’s proposed elimination of SIPP (the Survey of
Income and Program Participation), the nation’s only large-scale, representative survey
designed to assess a range of federal programs focused on the well-being of American
families. Begun in 1984, this $40-million annual longitudinal survey tracks families over
time and quantifies, among other important issues, factors such as immigration, child care,
and family structure. It helps assess whether federal programs like Temporary Assistance
for Needy Families, Medicaid, Social Security, and unemployment insurance are helping
families meet basic needs and move upward economically. In short, SIPP allows public
accountability for social programs involving several hundred billion tax dollars.
SIPP data underlie thousands of scholarly publications as well as government and
independent policy reports on poverty, income mobility, job stability, and health care
coverage, according to a letter to Congress from the Center for Economic and Policy
Research. With questions on 70 income sources collected quarterly from about 40,000
households, SIPP is the only large-scale dataset that allows before-and-after comparisons
of policies affecting social and economic dynamics.
Sociologists’ SIPP Research
ASA members have used SIPP to produce cutting-edge, award-winning research.
Among the best known is path-breaking work by Melvin Oliver and Thomas Shapiro,
Black Wealth/White Wealth, winner of the 1995 C. Wright Mills Award. This work shows that
demographic and socioeconomic characteristics, such as occupation and education,
explain relatively little of the differences in Americans’ net worth. The authors concluded
that about 70 percent of the wealth gap between African Americans and whites is explained
by race. Other award-winning SIPP-based work is that of Lynne M. Casper and
Suzanne M. Bianchi, Continuity and Change in the American Family: Anchoring the Future
(winner of ASA’s 2002 Otis Dudley Duncan Award for Outstanding Scholarship in Social
Demography). Sociologists also use SIPP effectively in the classroom. Philip Cohen at the
University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill has used SIPP data for seven years in undergraduate
teaching because of their unique comprehensiveness, reliability, and adequate
sample size for demographic research. He considers the data indispensable for undergraduate
sociology.
The Census Bureau maintains that it can do a better job less expensively by using
administrative records from public agencies. While zeroing out SIPP, the Bureau has
budgeted $9.2 million for this new administrative records-based survey, the Survey of
Income and Wealth Dynamics. However, as researchers know: (1) Relying on administrative
records of people who participated in federal programs cannot provide comparable
information on people who do not participate, so we cannot evaluate the effect of programs
on economic and social well-being; (2) For federal programs such as unemployment
insurance, administrative records provide no information on family structure; (3) Linking
administrative data to other datasets such as the Current Population Survey or the
American Community Survey will raise privacy-law issues that may limit researchers’
access to the linked datasets; and (4) There is always uncertainty when there is no longterm
financing or plan for developing the administrative records-based surveys.
More than 400 individuals, including sociologists, signed a March letter to Congress,
urging full funding for SIPP. ASA also is among the scientific organizations that have
urged preservation of this integral component of government policy assessment. Without
SIPP, it will be more difficult to know the impact of the recent budget cuts to domestic
programs. The social science community must actively work to preserve important federal
data. Long-standing data systems are not perfect, and sociologists often lament their
imperfections, but new or improved federal data systems are not likely to be forthcoming
while the nation faces severe federal budget cuts and deficits. .
Sally T. Hillsman, Executive Officer