TEXT A According to reports in
major news outlets, a study published last week included a startling discovery:
the nation’s Jewish population is in shrinking. The study, the National Jewish
Population Survey, found 5.2 million Jews living in the United States in 2000, a
drop of 5 percent, or 300,000 people, since a similar study in 1990. What’s
truly startling is that the reported decline is not tree. Worse still, the
sponsor of the $6 million study, United Jewish Communities, knows it.
Both it and the authors have openly admitted their doubts. They have
acknowledged in interviews that the population totals for 2000 and 1990 were
reached by different methods and are not directly comparable. The survey itself
also cautions readers, in a dauntingly technical appendix, that judgment calls
by the researchers may have led to an undercount. When the research director and
project director were asked whether the data should be construed to indicate a
declining Jewish population, they flatly answered no. In addition, other survey
researchers interviewed pointed to other studies with population estimates as
high as 6.7 million. Despite all this, the two figures --5.2
million now, 5.5 million then --are listed by side in the survey, leaving the
impression that the population has shrunk. The result, predictably, has been a
rash of headlines trumpeting the illusionary decline, in turn touching off
jeremiads by rabbis and moralists condemning the religious laxity behind it.
Whether out of ideology, ego, incompetence or a combination of all three, the
respected charity has invented a crisis. United Jewish
Communities is the coordinating body for a national network of Jewish
philanthropies with combined budgets of $2 billion. Its population surveys carry
huge weight in shaping community policy. This is not the first time the survey
has set off a false alarm. The last one, conducted by a predecessor
organization, found that 52 percent of American Jews who married between 1985
and 1990 did so outside the faith. That number was a fabrication produced by
including marriages in which neither party was Jewish by anyone’s definition,
including the researchers. Its publication created a huge stir,
inspiring anguished sermons, books and conferences. It put liberals on the
defensive, emboldened conservatives who reject full integration into society and
alienated ordinary folks by the increasingly xenophobic tone of Jewish communal
culture. The new survey, to its credit, retracts that figure and offers the
latest survey has spawned a panic created by the last one. So
why did the organization flawed figures once again Some scholars who have
studied the. survey believe the motivation then came partly out of a desire to
shock straying Jews into greater observance. It’ s too early to tell if that’ s
the case this time around. What is clear is the researchers did their job with
little regard to how their data could be misconstrued. They used statistical
models and question formats that, while internally sound, made the new survey
incompatible with the previous one. For example, this time the researchers
divided the population of 5.2 million into two groups--"highly involved" Jews
and "people of Jewish background"- and posed most questions only to the first
group. As a result, most findings about belief and observance refer only to a
subgroup of American Jews, making comparisons to the past impossible.
We can’ t afford to wait a decade before these figures are revised. The
false population decline must be corrected before it further sours communal
discourse. The United Jewish Communities owes it to itself and its public to
step forward and state plainly what it knows to be true: American Jews are not
disappearing. When the author is talking about the Jewish Population Survey, he seems ______.
A.to believe the shrinking of the Jews in America B.to support the rejection of full integration into society C.to blame United Jewish Communities D.to be willing to tolerate the fault of United Jewish Communities