Empirical Evidence to Understand the 2020 Census Citizenship - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Empirical Evidence to Understand the 2020 Census Citizenship Controversy Gina Walejko, Brian Kriz, Sarah Evans, Anna Sandoval Girón, Yazmín A. García Trejo, Kyley McGeeney, & Nancy Bates AAPOR Annual Conference May 18, 2019 Toronto, Canada Disclaimer: Any views expressed are those of the authors and not those of the U.S. Census Bureau. 2020CENSUS.GOV

Outline Background Research Question Data & Methods Results Discussion & Conclusion 2 2020CENSUS.GOV

Background 3 2020CENSUS.GOV

Effect of citizenship question? March 26, 2018 – Secretary of Commerce requested Census Bureau add citizenship • question to 2020 Census One week into 2018 Census Test in Providence, RI • Too late to test effects of question during this 2020 Census dress rehearsal • Secondary data analysis attempted to estimate the effect of question on response rate • Brown and colleagues (2018) estimated a 5.8 percentage point greater drop in self-response • rates for households with any noncitizens compared to households without noncitizens; 1.7 percentage point drop in self-response in 2020 Census 2019 Census Test will examine effect of question on response (Velkoff, 2019), but results • will come after Supreme Court decision expected in late June and printing of 2020 Census forms 4 2020CENSUS.GOV

Research Question 5 2020CENSUS.GOV

How does the addition of a citizenship question affect intention to respond? 6 2020CENSUS.GOV

Data & Methods 7 2020CENSUS.GOV

2020 CBAMS 8 Survey Response Rate 2020CENSUS.GOV 100 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 0 2/20/2018 2/22/2018 2/24/2018 2/26/2018 2/28/2018 Google Trends Interest 3/2/2018 3/4/2018 3/6/2018 3/8/2018 3/10/2018 3/12/2018 Dates of CBAMS Data Collection 3/14/2018 3/16/2018 Survey Response Rate 3/18/2018 3/20/2018 3/22/2018 3/24/2018 3/26/2018 3/28/2018 3/30/2018 4/1/2018 4/3/2018 No. Focus Groups 4/5/2018 4/7/2018 4/9/2018 4/11/2018 4/13/2018 4/15/2018 4/17/2018 4/19/2018 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Number Focus Groups

Dependent Variable Variable Question Wording Values=1 If the census were held today, how likely would you be to fill out the census form? Mark (X) ONE box. □ Extremely likely Extremely likely; Intent □ Very likely very likely □ Somewhat likely □ Not too likely □ Not at all likely 9 2020CENSUS.GOV

2020 CBAMS Matching & Modeling Variables Categories Matched? Modeled? Contact Strategy Internet “First,” Internet “Choice” Yes Yes Response Mode Mail, Internet Yes Yes Civic Engagement Index Low (0-3 items), High (4-10 items) Yes Yes Race and Hispanic Origin Hispanic, White, Black, Asian, Small sample races Yes Yes Age 18-34, 35-44, 45-64, 65+ Yes Yes Sex Male, Female Yes Yes Education No college, At least some college Yes Yes Nativity Born in US, Born outside US (including Puerto Rico) Yes Yes Knowledge Index Low (0-4 correct), High (5-9 correct) Yes Yes Treatment Control (responded before announcement), N/A Yes Treatment (responded after announcement) 10 2020CENSUS.GOV

2020 CBAMS Subgroup Analysis Control Treatment Difference in Difference in Population Difference in Weight Weight Control Treatment Difference p-value difference difference of Interest difference Count Count SE p-value Hispanic 7665 2558 0.6973 0.5736 -0.12 0.0009 -0.09 0.022494 0.0001 Everyone else 3490 1428 0.6855 0.6524 -0.03 0.0275 Source: 2020 CBAMS Survey, Public Use Dataset, CBDRB-FY18-422 11 2020CENSUS.GOV

Results 12 2020CENSUS.GOV

Treatment Effect Coefficient Internet Choice contact strategy + * Internet response mode + - *** Low civic engagement Non-Hispanic, White - If the census were Non-Hispanic, Black + - ** held today, how Non-Hispanic, Asian Non-Hispanic, Other races - likely would you Ages 35-44 + be to fill out the + *** Ages 45-64 census form? + *** Ages over 65 + * Female Extremely likely & - *** No college very likely = 1 Born outside U.S. + + *** Knowledge Index – High Knowledge - *** Treatment + * Constant 15,141 Observations Note: *=<0.05; **=<0.01; ***=<0.001 Source: 2020 CBAMS Survey, Public Use Dataset, CBDRB-FY18-422 13 2020CENSUS.GOV

Evidence from “I wouldn’t answer it because ICE Focus Groups is working with a lot of different groups on deportation sweeps and stuff, and I guess it would Citizenship question as barrier to • make me feel like I’m aiding in participation was highest among those who believed: that. They’re doing a lot of illegal 1. the purpose of the question is to find stuff, and so I feel like I wouldn’t undocumented immigrants, fill out any of the questions .” 2. their information will be shared across agencies, potentially leading to - Focus group participant deportation, and 3. their ethnic group is facing an Source: 2020 CBAMS Focus Groups, CBDRB-FY19-043 inhospitable political environment. 14 2020CENSUS.GOV

Subgroup Identification Some racial and ethnic minorities : Focus group research suggests participation barrier related to how vulnerable • participants believe they and their ethnic community are to retaliatory actions based on ethnicity; focus groups with non-English speakers U.S. born & second-generation Hispanics : Research suggests U.S. born Hispanics and second-generation • Hispanics also react negatively to addition of citizenship question (Escudero & Becerra, 2018; Kissam et al. 2019) Non-citizens: Secondary data analysis suggests households with non-citizens less likely to complete a form with • citizenship question (Brown et al. 2018) Hispanic, not speak English Asian NH, not speak English Hispanic, Spanish speaker, U.S. born Foreign born 1. Are you of Hispanic, 1. Are you of Hispanic, Latino, or 1. What is your race? 1. In what country or territory Latino, or Spanish origin? Spanish origin?  Asian Indian, Chinese, were you born?  Yes  Yes Filipino, Japanese, Korean,  Outside of the United Vietnamese, or Other Asian States (print name of 2. How well do you speak 2. Do you speak a language English other than English at home? country, or Puerto Rico, 2. How well do you speak  Not well, not at all Guam, etc.)  Yes English  Not well, not at all 3. What is the language?  Spanish 4. In what country or territory were you born? 15 2020CENSUS.GOV  In the United States.

Subgroup Analysis - Intent 0 -0.02 -0.05 -0.1 -0.09*** -0.09*** -0.15 -0.14*** -0.15** -0.2 -0.21** -0.25 -0.3 Hispanic Hispanic, not Hispanic, Asian, NH Asian, not Foreign born speak English Spanish speak English well speaker, U.S. well born Source: 2020 CBAMS Survey, Public Use Dataset, CBDRB-FY18-422 *=<0.05; **=<0.01; ***=<0.001 16 2020CENSUS.GOV

Discussion & Conclusion 17 2020CENSUS.GOV

Discussion Effect of citizenship question addition on intended response greater among some • subgroups. Effect of citizenship question addition on intended response may not be limited to • those worried about direct repercussions  effect also seen in Hispanic Spanish speakers who are born in the U.S. Supports other research: • U.S. born Hispanics react as negatively to addition of citizenship question as foreign born in • Providence County, Rhode Island (Escudero & Becerra, 2018) 34 percent of second-generation Hispanic survey respondents in San Joaquin Valley said they • would no longer respond with addition of citizenship question (Kissam et al. 2019) 18 2020CENSUS.GOV

In conclusion… • After attempting to control for differences between responders before and after citizenship question announcement… • …those who responded to CBAMS after addition of citizenship question less likely to intend to respond to census. • Effect more drastic with certain subgroups. • Effect supported by focus group participants. 19 2020CENSUS.GOV

Questions? gina.k.walejko@census.gov 20 2020CENSUS.GOV

Appendix 21 2020CENSUS.GOV

Limitations • Cannot be certain respondents heard news about citizenship and – if so – how much or via what channel. Analysis represents “intention -to- treat” rather than actual treatment. • • Pre-treatment covariates may not fully explain treatment assignment. • Focus group data may not be representative of subgroups. 22 2020CENSUS.GOV