Search

This report outlines the findings from a randomized experiment with treatment, placebo, and control groups to measure the effectiveness of AltaMed’s Get Out The Vote (GOTV) campaign for the presidential election of November 3, 2020.

Scholars and legal practitioners of voting rights are concerned with estimating individual-level voting behavior from aggregate-level data. The most commonly used technique, King's ecological inference (EI), has been questioned for inflexibility in multiethnic settings or with multiple candidates. One method for estimating vote support for multiple candidates in the same election is called ecological inference: row by columns (R×C). While some simulations suggest that R×C may produce more precise estimates than the iterative EI technique, there has not been a comprehensive side-by-side comparison of the two methods using real election data that analysts and legal practitioners often rely upon in courts. We fill this void by comparing iterative EI and R×C models with a new statistical package--eiCompare--in a variety of R×C combinations including 2 candidates and 2 groups, 3 candidates and 3 groups, and up to 12 candidates and three groups and multiple candidates and four groups. Additionally, we examine the two methods with 500 simulated data sets that differ in combinations of heterogeneity, polarization, and correlation. Finally, we introduce a new model congruence score to aid scholars and voting rights analysts in the substantive interpretation of the estimates. Across all of our analyses, we find that both methods produce substantively similar results. This suggests that iterative EI and R×C can be used interchangeably when assessing precinct-level voting patterns in Voting Rights Act cases and that neither method produces bias in favor or against finding racially polarized voting patterns.

This report analyzes AltaMed’s GOTV efforts of low propensity voters leading up to the 2018 primary election. AltaMed engaged in voter outreach in East Los Angeles, Anaheim & Santa Ana, Oakland, and South San Diego counties.

This first-of-its-kind report brings together political science data with public health insights on the spread of COVID-19 to conclude that the safety of in-person voting during the 2020 elections depends on expanding absentee voting, eliminating polling place congestion, and reducing wait times at polling stations. The report reviews existing medical literature on risk factors for COVID-19, political science research on congestion during voting, and evidence of the public health impacts of the 2020 primary elections to create urgent policy recommendations for the November general election.

Objectives. To examine the relationship between health care discrimination and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy attributed to fears of immigration status complications among unvaccinated Latino adults and to determine whether the association differs among immigrants and US-born individuals. Methods. After universal adult eligibility for the COVID-19 vaccine, a nationally representative sample of 12 887 adults was surveyed using online and mobile random digit dialing from May 7 to June 7, 2021. The analytic sample (n = 881) comprised unvaccinated Latino adults. We examined the association between individual and cumulative health care discrimination measures and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy assignable to immigration-related fears. Results. Using a cumulative measure of health care discrimination, each additional experience corresponded to a 28% higher odds of reporting vaccine hesitancy Because of immigration-related fears. Findings were consistent across US-born and immigrant Latino adults. Four of the 5 discriminatory experiences were positively associated with vaccine hesitancy, including the absence of optimal treatment options, denial or delayed access to necessary health care, physician communication barriers, and lack of specialist referrals. Conclusions. Findings confirm a positive association between health care discrimination and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy attributable to immigration-related fears among Latino adults, regardless of immigration status. (Am J Public Health. 2024;114(S6):S505–S509. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2024.307668) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Scholars and legal practitioners of voting rights are concerned with estimating individual-level voting behavior from aggregate-level data. The most commonly used technique, King's ecological inference (EI), has been questioned for inflexibility in multiethnic settings or with multiple candidates. One method for estimating vote support for multiple candidates in the same election is called ecological inference: row by columns (R×C). While some simulations suggest that R×C may produce more precise estimates than the iterative EI technique, there has not been a comprehensive side-by-side comparison of the two methods using real election data that analysts and legal practitioners often rely upon in courts. We fill this void by comparing iterative EI and R×C models with a new statistical package—eiCompare—in a variety of R×C combinations including 2 candidates and 2 groups, 3 candidates and 3 groups, and up to 12 candidates and three groups and multiple candidates and four groups. Additionally, we examine the two methods with 500 simulated data sets that differ in combinations of heterogeneity, polarization, and correlation. Finally, we introduce a new model congruence score to aid scholars and voting rights analysts in the substantive interpretation of the estimates. Across all of our analyses, we find that both methods produce substantively similar results. This suggests that iterative EI and R×C can be used interchangeably when assessing precinct-level voting patterns in Voting Rights Act cases and that neither method produces bias in favor or against finding racially polarized voting patterns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Prior research suggests social ties with undocumented immigrants among Latinxs may increase political engagement despite constraints undocumented social networks may introduce. We build on prior research and find across six surveys of Latinxs that social ties with undocumented immigrants are reliably associated with collective, identity expressive activities such as protesting, but not activities where immigration may not be immediately relevant, such as voting. Moreover, we assess a series of mechanisms to resolve the puzzle of heightened participation despite constraints. Consistent with prior research at the intersection of anti-immigrant threat and Social Identity Theory, we find Latinxs with strong ethnic identification are more likely to engage in political protest in the presence of social ties with undocumented immigrants, whereas weak identifiers disengage. We rule out alternative mechanisms that could link undocumented social ties with participation including political efficacy, a sense of injustice, linked fate, acculturation, outgroup perceptions of immigration status, partisan identity, conducive opportunity structures, and prosociality. Our contribution suggests the reason social ties with undocumented immigrants are not necessarily a hindrance to political engagement among Latinx immigrants and their co-ethnics is because they can draw from identitarian resources to overcome participatory constraints. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study explores Latino perceptions of commonality and competition with African Americans across the country, focusing on the South. Using the Latino National Survey (LNS), we test the existing inter-group relation theories using an original measurement approach. With the creation of relative measures of commonality and competition of Latinos toward Blacks, we find that Latinos perceive co-ethnics as a greater source of competition than Blacks when our relative measure is used to interpret Latino perceptions of competition with African Americans. Moreover, our results suggest that Latinos in the South have similar perceptions of commonality to Blacks as Latinos more generally, across both approaches that measure perceptions of commonality. Most importantly, we find that when the relative competition measure is employed, Latinos who live in Southern states do in fact have higher perceptions of competition with Blacks than Latinos at large. These trends provide a valuable addition to the extant literature focused on inter-group relations by emphasizing that not only place and context matter, but also the way perceptions of competition and commonality are measured and operationalized. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]