Here is a small symptom of why conservatives are, or at any rate should be, depressed.
The census is not just a useful source of statistics by which every ten years America paints a self-portrait. It is necessary so that representatives can be apportioned among, and within, the states. The Constitution mandates "an actual enumeration."
Not surprisingly, those who say the Constitution is a "living" and "evolving" document ripe for deconstructing have now got around to disregarding even this language. They say that a census restricted to "actual enumeration" — to the traditional counting of people actually found by census-takers — is unjust. They say that many people, disproportionately poor people and minorities (and likely Democratic voters), are missed. So the "living document" school of constitutionalists suggests supplementing actual enumeration with statistical sampling, which would estimate the number of persons uncounted.
A statistical sampling will be made even though the Supreme Court has held that only the numbers generated by the traditional method can be used in apportioning the House of Representatives. But Democrats and their allies want the results of statistical sampling released, primarily so that they can be used for the allocation of certain funds by federal and state agencies. So these Democrats want each presidential candidate to promise that if elected he would release the information from statistical sampling.
Al Gore and Bill Bradley have made that promise. All but two Republican candidates have refused: They favor releasing only the information from "actual enumeration."
John McCain has joined Gore and Bradley in promising to release the statistical-sampling information. George W. Bush won't say what he would do. Surprised? Neither am I.
For Mr. Will's archived columns, click here.