Skip to main content

Missing Minorities? The Phases of IRCA Legislation and Relative Net Undercounts of the 1990 vis-à-vis 2000 Decennial Census for Foreign-born Cohorts

Abstract

The quality of the decennial census of the United States is compromised by population undercount, which often misses immigrants and racial/ethnic minorities, thereby diminishing federal resources allocated to such groups. Using a modified version of demographic analysis and informed by the latest contributions of emigration scholarship, this research estimates net undercount for the 1990 census relative to the 2000 census by age, sex, year-of-entry, and place-of-birth cohorts. Ordinary least squares estimates suggest that males, recent arrivals, and cohorts aged 15–44 had higher relative net undercount for 1990 compared with 2000. Much higher relative net undercount was found for cohorts from Africa, Latin America, and the Caribbean (excluding Cuba and Puerto Rico) who were ineligible for amnesty under the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (i.e., those fitting the profile of an undocumented immigrant). Larger implications of these findings suggest that the political climate in which a person is embedded—particularly for persons who may feel threatened or marginalized by the government and/or the public—affects that person’s willingness to respond to the census.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1

Notes

  1. Puerto Ricans are excluded in this analysis.

  2. Correlation error of a capture-recapture study refers to the tendency for persons who are missed in census enumeration (the “capture” phase) also to be missed in the recapture phase.

  3. Ages 15–44 (vs. 18–49) are selected based on preliminary explorations of the data.

  4. By the end of 2000, an estimated 2.7 million immigrants were granted legal permanent residence through IRCA legislation (U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service 2002). In comparison, Passel and Woodrow (1987) estimated that 2,093,000 undocumented residents over the age of 13 were captured in the Current Population Survey in April 1983. Although Passel and Woodrow (1987) provided an imperfect measure of all undocumented immigrants eligible for amnesty, it is reasonable to assume that a majority of eligible immigrants were legalized under IRCA.

  5. Any one absence could not exceed 45 days, and the total absences could not exceed the sum of 180 days.

  6. Van Hook et al. (2006) and Passel et al. (2006) (referred to here as “Van Hook” and “Passel,” respectively) assumed that total non-follow-up (NFU) in the CPS was equal to the sum of NFU resulting from emigration, internal migration, death, and “other reasons.” Internal migration was estimated using the “residence one year ago” item on the CPS. Deaths were estimated using the National Health Interview Survey (Van Hook) or life tables (Passel). For Van Hook, NFU for “other reasons” for native-born persons was solved for by subtracting NFU for deaths and internal migration (emigration was assumed to be 0), and this rate was assumed to be identical for foreign-born persons. For Passel, NFU for “other reasons” was a function of matching-processing error and was estimated using a multivariate model. Emigration rates were thus solved for as the remaining probability that makes up total NFU, which was then adjusted using estimates of circular migration (based on Massey et al. (2002)).

  7. Schwabish (2009) used three linked administrative data sources provided by the Social Security Administration (i.e., the Detailed Earnings Records, Numerical Identification System, and Master Beneficiary Record) to identify foreign-born work histories. Workers who reported earnings for at least one year and subsequently have had at least two years of non-employment were assumed to have died or emigrated from the country. Although Schwabish (2009) estimated emigration rates for the documented foreign-born, the total emigration rate did not differ between the documented and undocumented populations when one controls for emigration rates by year of entry. Using separate emigration rates for undocumented residents and total emigration rates by year of entry (Passel et al. 2006), assuming that the counted undocumented population in 1990 was 2,176,000 (Woodrow-Lafield 1995) and that the number of undocumented who have entered before 1980 are negligible, I find that the rate of emigration for undocumented persons is nearly identical to that of all emigrants (2.1 vs. 2.08; results not shown).

  8. Because circular migrants are more likely to report a more recent year of entry upon their return to the United States (Redstone and Massey 2004), circular migrants (who are also more likely to be undocumented) are more likely to report a year of entry more recent than 1990 on the 2000 census. This will result in deflated counts in 2000 relative to 1990 for the cohorts of interest and work against the central hypothesis. Sensitivity analyses that follow account for circular migrants who were absent for the 1990 census but returned for the 2000 census.

  9. Cubans who establish permanent residence in another country lose all rights to reside in Cuba (see Cuba’s Ley No. 989/1961), and repatriation is restricted to select minors and persons over the age of 60 (with a few exceptions). Because of these limitations, it is assumed that only the proportions of Cuban cohorts who did not naturalize (drawing from U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service 1997, 2002) who entered after 1960 are at risk of emigration. That is, the ratio of naturalizing Cubans to all Cuban entrants (by decade) is multiplied by the sizes of the corresponding Cuban cohorts to estimate the Cubans at risk of emigration. Additionally, it is assumed that 1980 entrants are at risk of emigration as a result of the repatriation of the 1980 “Marielitos.”

  10. This approach is not negatively affected by cohorts with few or zero members.

  11. A total of 18 projected cohorts are not matched on all parameters for the corresponding observed cohorts. Because nonmatches are exclusive to older cohorts, nonmatches are presumably a product of age misreporting, and ages are adjusted such that matches could be made.

  12. When these dummy variables and their interaction effects are grouped to replicate Model 5, the error sum of squares is not significantly decreased in comparison with the larger model that includes separate (nongrouped) dummy and interaction variables.

References

  • Ahmed, B., & Robinson, J. G. (1994). Estimates of emigration of the foreign-born population: 1980–1990 (Population Division Working Paper No. 9). Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.

  • Anderson, M. J., & Fienberg, S. E. (1999). Who counts? The politics of census-taking in contemporary America. New York: Russell Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Breiman, L. (1994). The 1991 census adjustment: Undercount or bad data? Statistical Science, 9, 458–475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Couper, M. P., Singer, E., & Kulka, R. A. (1998). Participation in the 1990 decennial census: Politics, privacy, pressures. American Politics Quarterly, 26, 59–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de la Puente, M. (1992, March). An analysis of the underenumeration of Hispanics: Evidence from Hispanic concentrated small area ethnographic studies. Paper presented at the Bureau of the Census 1992 Annual Research Conference, Arlington, VA.

  • Fay, R. E., Bates, N., & Moore, J. (1991). Lower mail response in the 1990 census: A preliminary interpretation (Research Report Series, Survey Methodology #2010-13). Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.

  • Freedman, D. A. (1991). Adjusting the 1990 census. Science, 252, 1233–1236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garcia, V. (1992). Counting the uncountable, immigrant and migrant, documented and undocumented farm workers in California: Results from an alternative enumeration in a Mexican and Mexican-American farm worker community in California and ethnographic evaluation of the behavioral causes of undercount (Ethnographic Evaluation of the 1990 Decennial Census Report #12). Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.

  • Groves, R. M., & Couper, M. P. (1998). Nonresponse in household interview surveys. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hillygus, S., Nie, N. H., Prewitt, K., & Pals, H. (2006). The hard count: The political and social challenges of census mobilization. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoefer, M., Rytina, N., & Baker, B. C. (2011). Estimates of the unauthorized immigrant population residing in the United States: January 2010 (Population Estimates 2011). Washington, DC: DHS Office of Immigration Statistics.

  • Hogan, H. (1993). The 1990 Post-Enumeration Survey: Operations and new results. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 88, 1047–1060.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iversen, R. R., Furstenberg, F. F., & Belzer, A. A. (1999). How much do we count? Interpretation and error-making in the decennial census. Demography, 36, 121–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kintner, H. (2004). The life table. In J. Siegel & D. Swanson (Eds.), The methods and materials of demography (pp. 301–340). Boston, MA: Elsevier Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahler, S. (1993). Alternative enumeration of undocumented Salvadorans on Long Island. (Ethnographic Evaluation of the 1990 Decennial Census Report Series, Report No. 26). Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.

  • Massey, D., Durand, J., & Malone, N. (2002). Beyond smoke and mirrors: Mexican immigration in an era of economic integration. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDevitt, T., O’Connell, M., & Joyce, C. (2001). Evaluating the components of births and deaths used in demographic analysis. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montoya, M. D. (1991). Ethnographic evaluation of the behavioral causes of undercount: Rural Marion County, Oregon. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mulder, T. J., Guzmán, B., & Brittingham, A. (2001). 1980–1990 legal foreign-born emigrant population estimates (Demographic Analysis-Population Estimates Project Statement of Findings, Task Team 6). Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.

  • Mulder, T. J., Guzmán, B., & Brittingham, A. (2002). Evaluating components of international migration: Foreign-born emigrants (Population Division Working Paper Series No. 62). Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.

  • Mule, T. (2012). Census coverage measurement estimation report (Summary of Estimates of Coverage for Persons in the United States). Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.

  • Mulry, M. (2007). Summary of accuracy and coverage evaluation for Census 2000. Journal of Official Statistics, 23, 345–370.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mulry, M. H., & Spencer, B. D. (1993). Accuracy of the 1990 census and undercount adjustments. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 88, 1080–1091.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nguyen, P. (1996). Census undercount and the undercount of the black population. The Western Journal of Black Studies, 20, 96–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palloni, A., & Arias, E. (2004). Paradox lost: Explaining the Hispanic adult mortality advantage. Demography, 41, 385–415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Passel, J. S., Van Hook, J., & Bean, F. D. (2004). Estimates of the legal and unauthorized foreign-born population for the United States and selected states, based on Census 2000 (Immigration Studies Whitepapers). Warrington, PA: Sabre Systems, Inc.

  • Passel, J., Van Hook, J., Bean, F., & Zhang, W. (2006, September). Emigration: Measurement issues and new estimates. Paper presented at the Evaluating Immigration Projections Workshop, Institute for the Study of International Migration, Georgetown University, Washington, DC.

  • Passel, J. S., & Woodrow, K. A. (1987). Change in the undocumented alien population in the United States, 1979–1983. International Migration Review, 21, 1304–1334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Redstone, I., & Massey, D. S. (2004). Coming to stay: An analysis of the U.S. Census question on immigrants’ year of arrival. Demography, 41, 721–738.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, J. G. (2001). ESCAP II: Demographic analysis results (Executive Steering Committee For A.C.E. Policy II Report No. 1). Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.

  • Robinson, J. G., Adlakha, A., & West, K. K. (2002, May). Coverage of population in Census 2000: Results from demographic analysis. Paper presented at the Population Association of America, Atlanta, GA.

  • Robinson, J. G., Ahmed, B., Gupta, P. D., & Woodrow, K. A. (1993). Estimation of population coverage in the 1990 United States Census based on demographic analysis. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 88, 1061–1071.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodriguez, N., & Hagan, J. S. (1991). Investigating census coverage and content among the undocumented: An ethnographic study of Latin tenants in Houston, Texas (Ethnographic Evaluation of the 1990 Decennial Census Report #3). Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.

  • Romero, M. (1992). Ethnographic evaluation of behavioral causes of census undercount of undocumented immigrants and Salvadorans in the Mission District of San Francisco. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruggles, S., Alexander, J. T., Genadek, K., Goeken, R., Schroeder, M. B., & Sobek, M. (2010). Integrated Public Use Microdata Series: Version 5.0 [machine-readable database]. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.

  • Schwabish, J. (2009). Identifying rates of emigration in the United States using administrative earnings records (Working paper). Washington, DC: U.S. Congressional Budget Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, E., Mathiowetz, N. A., & Couper, M. P. (1993). The impact of privacy and confidentiality concerns on survey participation: The case of the 1990 U.S. Census. Public Opinion Quarterly, 57, 463–482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skerry, P. (2000). Counting on the census? Race group identity, and the evasion of politics. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, M. L. (1990). An ethnographic study of the number of persons in household in selected New York City Neighborhoods. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swanson, D., & Walashek, P. (2011). CEMAF as a census method (Vol. 1). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer, B.V. Press.

  • U.S. Census Bureau. (1988). Methodology for developing estimates of coverage in the 1980 census based on demographic analysis: Birth and death statistics, 1935–1980 (1980 Census Preliminary Evaluation Results Memorandum Series 112). Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.

  • U.S. Census Bureau. (2012). Statistical abstract of the United States. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service. (1997). Statistical yearbook of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, 1996. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service. (2002). Statistical yearbook of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, 2000. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Hook, J., Zhang, W., Bean, F., & Passel, J. (2006). Foreign-born emigration: A new approach and estimates based on matched CPS files. Demography, 43, 361–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Velasco, A. (1992). Ethnographic evaluation of the behavioral causes of undercount in the community of Sherman Heights, San Diego, California. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walashek, P., & Swanson, D. (2006). The roots of conflict over US Census counts in the late 20th century and prospects for the 21st century. Journal of Economic and Social Measurement, 31, 185–206.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woodrow-Lafield, K. A. (1995). An analysis of net immigration in census coverage evaluation. Population Research and Policy Review, 14, 173–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Thanks to David Swanson, Vanesa Estrada-Correa, Augustine Kposowa, J. Gregg Robinson, Robert Bozick, Trey Miller, Megan Beckett, Peter Brownell, Tori Velkoff, Michael Rendall, and Demography’s anonymous reviewers.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Matheu Kaneshiro.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Online Resource 1

(DOCX 28 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kaneshiro, M. Missing Minorities? The Phases of IRCA Legislation and Relative Net Undercounts of the 1990 vis-à-vis 2000 Decennial Census for Foreign-born Cohorts. Demography 50, 1897–1919 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-013-0212-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-013-0212-6

Keywords

  • Undercount
  • Census
  • Foreign-born
  • IRCA
  • Demographic analysis