A common negative stereotype of Latinos is that they are criminals and gang members.  This stereotype is attributed to some extent by perceptions that some are here illegally and also to their participation in crime and gangs which is perpetuated by the mass media.  Figure 1 depicts non-Latinos’ support for the stereotype that Latinos are criminal versus law abiding.  As reflected in the figure, most have neutral views toward Latinos, though more non-Latinos view Latinos as law abiding than criminal.  When comparing non-Latinos’ views toward Latinos relative to views of blacks and whites, other analyses reveal that non-Latinos regard whites as more law abiding than blacks and Latinos, and Latinos as slightly less criminal than blacks.

How do non-Latinos compare in their perception of Latinos as law abiding by television exposure of this group as criminals?  The results in Figure 2 illustrate that regardless of exposure to Latinos as members of gangs or criminals, most non-Latinos do not view Latinos as law abiding or criminal.  Yet, interestingly, those who are never exposed to Latinos as lawbreakers are almost three times more likely to believe that they are not criminal than those who often see Latinos as criminals on television shows.  Additionally, a staggering zero percent of non-Latinos who are not exposed to the negative stereotype believe that Latinos are criminals.  This is clear evidence that media portrayals of Latinos have influence on how this population is perceived.

Since we know that those exposed to images of Latinos as gang members/criminals can differ in their opinions of Latinos from those who are not subjected to Latinos in a negative light, to what extent does social interaction condition the relationship between seeing Latinos as criminals and believing that they are delinquents?  The social contact hypothesis has been tested extensively in the racial and ethnic politics research, and numerous studies have found that increasing social contact with an outside group depresses one’s adoption of negative stereotypes toward that group.  Further, we know that direct, equal status and continuous contact (see Allport 1954) is not always necessary for social contact to counteract negative attitudes (Pettigrew 1998; Welch, Sigelman, Bledsoe and Combs 2001; Oliver and Wong 2003).  Preliminary analyses (not presented here) reveal that non-Latinos who see Latinos as delinquents on television are significantly more likely to believe that they are not law-abiding citizens.

What is more, among those who have no interaction with Latinos, exposure to Latinos in a negative light coincides with believing that Latinos are delinquents.  Figure 3 further explores these relationships and illustrates how social contact and exposure to Latinos as criminals influence non-Latinos’ belief that Latinos are lawbreakers (1). The results in Figure 3 reveal that among Latinos who are exposed to Latinos as lawbreakers and gang members, greater social interaction with them results in a decline in believing that they are criminals.  Other analyses examining the extent that positive contact with Latinos moderates the relationship between seeing Latinos as criminals and believing that they are criminals illustrate analogous results.  Clearly, for non-Latinos who see Latinos in a negative light, social contact (positive and considerable) depresses their inclination to regard Latinos adversely.

Another negative attitude often attributed to immigrants, particularly Latinos, is that they are taking jobs from Americans.  While we have not reached a complete consensus as to whether this is so (McClain et al. 2007; Telles, Sawyer, Rivera-Salgado 2011), news media has focused on this topic for several decades and continues to do so today.  Figure 4 presents non-Latinos’ views as to whether Latinos provide Americans an employment disadvantage by reliance on liberal and conservative media sources.   The results in the figure reveal that some differences in the belief that Latinos take jobs exist between avid MSNBC (more liberal) viewers and devoted Fox News (more conservative) viewers.  Interestingly, the percentage of committed Fox News viewers who believe that “Latinos take jobs from Americans” describes Latinos somewhat well is more than double the percentage of MSNBC viewers.

In order to further examine the relationship between media and attitudes toward Latinos, I analyze the effects of exposure to Fox News and social contact with Latinos on non-Latinos’ belief that Latinos pose an employment threat to Americans.  Preliminary analyses illustrate that there is a negative relationship between social interaction with Latinos and belief that they are taking jobs among those who are not exposed to Fox News.  That is, for those who are not avid Fox News viewers, increasing social contact with Latinos decreases beliefs that Latinos pose an employment threat to U.S. residents.

Figure 5 also presents some intriguing results(2).  Among non-Latinos with no contact with Latinos, those who have little to no exposure to Fox News media adopt slightly more support for the idea that Latinos take jobs from Americans than those who mostly watch Fox News shows.  Additionally, among those who mostly rely on Fox for their news, increased social interaction with Latinos coincides with a stronger belief that Latinos pose an employment threat to Americans.  This finding suggests that the unfriendly Latino rhetoric presented by the network is not counteracted by greater social contact with Latinos.  Actually, watching Fox News on a regular basis and being surrounded by Latinos may actually result in greater resentment toward Latinos.  As to the moderating effects of positive contact with Latinos on the relationship between exposure to Fox News and believing that Latinos take jobs, I find limited comparable results.  Still, among non-Latinos who are not devoted Fox News viewers, increasing positive contact with Latinos results in lower levels of people believing that Latinos pose an employment threat to Americans.

What do all of these results mean?  As presented by the 2012 LD/NHMC survey report, news and entertainment media matter when it comes to non-Latinos’ (primarily whites) attitudes toward Latinos.  Non-Latinos’ negative stereotypes of Latinos are greatly structured by media portrayals of Latinos and media sources.  What is more, social contact and positive interactions also matter.  Significant and positive contact with Latinos have positive effects on attitudes toward Latinos for those who are greatly exposed to media portrayals of Latinos as criminals and for non-Fox News viewers.  Awareness of media biases and understanding of the power of contact is critical for improved race relations today.

Betina C. Wilkinson is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Wake Forest University.

The commentary of this article reflects the views of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Latino Decisions. Latino Decisions and Pacific Market Research, LLC make no representations about the accuracy of the content of the article.

References:

Allport, Gordon. 1954. The nature of prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

McClain, Paula D., Monique L. Lyle, Niambi M. Carter, Victoria M. DeFrancesco Soto, Gerald F. Lackey, Kendra Davenport Cotton, Shayla C. Nunnally, Thomas J. Scotto, Jeffrey D.

Grynaviski, and J. Alan Kendrick. 2007. “Black Americans and Latino Immigrants in a Southern City: Friendly Neighbors or Economic Competitors?” Du Bois Review 4(1): 97-  117.

Oliver, J. Eric, and Janelle Wong. 2003. “Inter-group Prejudice in Multiethnic Settings.”American Journal of Political Science 47 (4): 567–82.

Pettigrew, Thomas. 1998. “Intergroup Contact Theory.” Annual Review of  Psychology 49:65-85.

Telles, Edward, Mark Q. Sawyer, and Gaspar Rivera-Salgado. 2011. Just Neighbors? Research on African American and Latino Relations in the United States. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Welch, Susan,  Lee Sigelman, Timothy  Bledsoe, and Michael Combs. 2001.  Race and Place:Race  Relations  in  an American City. New York: Cambridge  University Press.

Notes:

¹ The figure presents predicted probabilities associated with the belief that Latinos are criminals for different values of variables measuring social contact with Latinos and exposure to Latinos as delinquents.  I generate the predicted probabilities holding other variables (age, gender, education) constant at their means.

² The figure presents predicted probabilities associated with the belief that Latinos are taking jobs from Americans for different values of variables measuring social contact with Latinos and exposure to Fox News.  I generate the predicted probabilities holding other variables (age, gender, education) constant at their means.

Rhetoric and Position Taking: Individual and Party Reward/Blame

The survey finds strongly worded public statements from GOP Senators Cruz[1] and Sessions[2] against the bill diminish the party’s standing — not just their own individual political prospects — within the Latino electorate (72% less favorable). At the same time, statements from Senator Rubio[3] and Senator Menendez[4] supporting the pathway to citizenship provision improved both their personal and party evaluations among Latino voters.

Respondents were provided with recent statements these four senators have made (see end notes for quotes) about the immigration bill, then asked whether the statement made them more or less favorable toward the Senator. Another set of respondents heard the same quote and was asked whether the statement made them more or less favorable toward the senator’s party. A point on methodology – the sample was split, in keeping with social science research standards, such that respondents were randomly assigned either one of the evaluation questions. No one person received both individual and party favorability questions.

The results demonstrate that there is no “distancing from the party” when it comes to the immigration reform bill and associated position-taking. It is perfectly reasonable that Latino voters view elected officials as spokespeople for their party, and either reward or blame them in similar proportion.

Bi-partisan Legislative Reform vs. Executive Order

We presented a new scenario to evaluate how the Latino electorate would respond if Congressional Republicans block this immigration reform bill, leading President Obama to issue an executive order to provide some form of legal status to undocumented immigrants. Should this happen, Republicans would lose a significant opportunity with the Latino electorate, and Democrats would continue to gain favor.

Over half of Latino voters, 53% become less favorable toward the Republican if they block the bill and the President issues an executive policy solution. Democrats would win favor with 63% of the Latino electorate, which makes sense. If policy advocacy only comes from one party, then (of course) Latinos will not distribute their votes evenly across the two. The Republican party can make inroads with Latino voters on immigration only if the reforms arrive with their participation and support in the legislative effort.

Immigration: Make or break issue to Latino vote

Finally, we examined whether passing this current immigration reform bill is enough to sway Latino voters to the Republican side. We asked those who do not identify (self-identified GOP partisans will continue to support) as Republicans:

“Some people we talk to don’t agree with the Republican Party on a variety of important issues, and even if the Republicans supported immigration reform with a path to citizenship, it would not change their opinion of the party. Other people say that while they might still disagree on some issues, if the Republicans support immigration reform with a path to citizenship they would be more favorable towards the party. How about you?”

The results could not be more clear. Over half of Latino voters say they would be more favorable to the party if only they pass immigration reform. It is so important that CIR now trumps all other issues and partisanship (note 47% of Democrats also say they would be more favorable) for a significant segment of the Latino electorate.

In combination these results tell us that Republicans have a unique opportunity to re-build relationships with Latino voters. Should they squander the moment by blocking the bill, they will effectively concede the majority of the Latino vote for many election cycles to come.

[1] Senator Cruz: “I have serious concerns about any legislation that would create a pathway to citizenship for those who are here illegally. I think doing so is profoundly unfair to the millions of legal immigrants who have followed the rules. We should prohibit all federal, state and local benefits for those who are here illegally, and ensure that illegal immigrants are not given a path to citizenship.”

[2] Senator Sessions: “Citizenship for illegals will not help balance our budget. In fact, a large-scale amnesty is likely to add trillions of dollars to the debt over time because illegal immigrants will put enormous strain on our public-assistance programs. Illegal immigrants need government aid and can’t take care of themselves. We can never support this immigration reform bill.”

[3] Senator Rubio “The American people are the most compassionate people on earth; they have proven that over and over again. The question now is we have 11 million people in the country that are here illegally. We recognize we’re not going to round up 11 million people and deport them.”

[4] Senator Menendez: “The time has come for farm workers and fruit pickers, students and DREAMERS, cooks and maids, hotel workers and housekeepers, landscapers and construction workers, and non-citizen soldiers fighting to protect all of us, to have a chance to raise their hand and take the oath of citizenship. We must support immigration reform today.”

Sylvia Manzano is a senior analyst at Latino Decisions.

Latino voters were also asked about provisions of the bill related to the incorporation of undocumented immigrants including fines, waiting periods, citizenship status, and LGBT family unification. More than three-quarters oppose the option of providing legal status only without a path to citizenship, and a majority oppose excessive fines on undocumented immigrants.  A resounding 86% say the appropriate waiting period to apply for citizenship if 5 years.

In addition, 61% of Latino voters want to see LGBT family unification included in the immigration reform bill.  As the Williams Institute has noted, nearly 270,000 undocumented immigrant adults identify as LGBT and could be penalized and not allowed to sponsor their spouses for residency or citizenship under the current bill.

Finally, Latino voters were asked how much news and information they had heard about some of the specific border security provisions in the bill, and on this topic information has been slow to reach Latino audiences.  While overall, over 80% of Latino voters say they have followed news about the immigration debates in Congress, large pluralities have not heard about the border security provisions.  A majority, 54% say they have heard little or nothing about the proposed $6.5 billion spending on additional border control enforcement, while 47% say they have heard little or nothing about provisions to increase the number of border patrol agents on the U.S-Mexico border. Clearly more attention is needed on this components of the bill for a more open debate to unfold.

About the poll.  Latino Decisions interviewed 500 Latino registered voters nationwide from May 25-June 1, 2013.  The survey margin of error is +/- 4.4%.  Respondents were contacted by landline, cell phone, or online and allowed to answer the questionnaire in English or Spanish, at their discretion.

Perhaps one of the most important findings from the poll was that all major actors in the immigration debate stand to gain or lose, based on their positioning on the current immigration bill. For example, when half our sample was asked if they approve of President Obama’s handling of immigration policy 28% said strongly approve.  However, the other half of our sample was randomly read a statement that Obama had pressed Congress to move quickly on immigration reform and directed his staff to work hard on making sure the immigration bill passes.  Respondents who learned about the President’s advocacy on the immigration bill gave him a 52% strongly approve rating, a 24 point increase over the control group which received no information and were just asked for basic approval.  The same finding held for Congressional Democrats and Congressional Republicans.  Democrats saw a +23 point boost in Latinos who “strongly approve” when respondents learned that all 10 Democratic Senators on Judiciary voted in favor of the bill.  Republicans saw a +26 point increase in overall approval (from 27 to 53) when Latinos learned that 3 Republican Senators joined Democrats on Judiciary in voting yes and helped move the bill forward.

 Finally, the poll demonstrated once again that support for a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants can directly effect Latino voting patterns.  When asked if they would be more likely, or less likely to support a Republican candidate who took a leadership role in support immigration reform, 45% of all Latino voters said they would be more likely to vote Republican.  Even among Latinos who self-identify as Democrat, 44% say they would consider voting for a Republican who took a leadership role in advocating for the path to citizenship.  If Republicans back away and the bill becomes a “mostly Democratic” effort then the Democrats can improve, even increasing the 2012 support among Latinos.  Overall 63% said they would be more likely to vote Democrat if the Democrats lead on the immigration issue, including 1 out of 4 Latino Republicans, who said they would be more likely to vote Democrat next time around if the Dems are the ones pushing the immigration bill.

• Download full topline results of poll
• Download June 6 Webinar slide deck

If Republicans overplay their hand, a new Latino Decisions poll to be released on Thursday shows that Latino voters won’t buy it.  Full poll results will be released Thursday June 6, 2013, but here we provide a quick a preview: when asked whether or not Congress should focus only on border security first or address both a path to citizenship and border security together?

Some in Congress say that providing undocumented immigrants with a pathway to citizenship must wait until after the border is fully secure, while others say we should provide a path to citizenship and deal with border security at the same time.  How about you? Do you think we should focus only on border security first, or we should address both a path to citizenship and border security together?

• 81% said do both together — including 66% of Latino Republicans —
• while only 13% said do border security first

Matt Barreto, Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Washington and Principal at Latino Decisions, explains:

“The poll results will make clear that the Republican Party can gain substantial Latino votes by supporting immigration reform, however they will not gain any votes, and more likely will lose votes if they sideline the path to citizenship in favor of border enforcement.”

According to Frank Sharry, Executive Director of America’s Voice:

“The Republicans need to solve a political problem with Latinos – and failure to do so just won’t cut it.  They won’t get credit for an effort that falls short and they will get blamed if the bill holds citizenship hostage to unreasonable enforcement demands.  The only way for the Republican Party to avoid the demographic cliff they are in danger of hurtling over is to share credit in passing immigration reform with a clear path to citizenship.”

“The centerpiece of reform is a path to citizenship.  The path is what binds comprehensive reform together.  Though many keep using enforcement excuses as rationale to change or derail the bill, the Senate legislation already devotes unprecedented resources toward both a southern border that already has met most of the security metrics from the 2007 immigration bill and also establishes the mandatory use of an electronic employment verification system to hold employers accountable and end illegal hiring in the workplace.  Together, these amount to the largest enforcement increase in American history.  It’s safe to say, enforcement is baked in the cake.  What Latino voters want to know is how the rest of the plan will work.  When and how will the path to citizenship take shape?  That’s the missing link—and the key to the reform they want to see in Congress.”

The full set of results from this new poll are set to be released on a press call/webinar this Thursday.  Polling experts from Latino Decisions and immigration advocates will analyze how immigration influences the way Latino voters view the two political parties, and what Republicans and Democrats stand to gain or lose depending on how the debate unfolds.

 Latino Decisions interviewed 500 Latino registered voters nationwide from May 25-June 1, 2013.  Surveys were conducted in English or Spanish at the discretion of the respondent. The overall margin of error is +/- 4.4.  This poll follows a previous survey released in March 2013 – data available here and here).

To join the June 6 Webinar at 12:30pm ET:

To Listen: 877-888-4319; Passcode: LATINO VOTE
To View the Visual Presentation: https://www.livemeeting.com/cc/connexevent/join?id=LATINOVOTE&role=attend&pw=ATTEND
Meeting ID: LATINOVOTE
Entry Code: ATTEND

Is lack of ACA information consistent across the Latino population?

The main finding from the two studies was that Latinos reported very low knowledge levels of the ACA and expressed that the new law is “confusing” and “complicated”. The Latino population is incredibly diverse which has motivated several to question whether levels of knowledge vary in any important ways across the various sub-groups of the Latino community. To address this question I have provided break-outs for one of our main measures of ACA knowledge across several demographic indicators. As you can see in the figures below, while there are some differences across sub-groups, overall we see Latino knowledge of the ACA to be rather consistent.

For example, while English speaking Latinos are more likely to express that they are informed about the ACA than Spanish speakers, a large segment (42%) of English dominant Latinos report that they are uninformed. This is similar to the differences based on nativity, with foreign-born Latinos showing slightly lower levels of ACA knowledge than their native-born counterparts. Somewhat surprisingly knowledge levels of the ACA do not vary much across age and educational attainment among Latinos.

Knowledge levels of the ACA increase with educational attainment, with college graduates expressing greater knowledge of the new health care reform law. However, even 39% of Latino college graduates are either “not at all” or “not that” informed about the ACA. Outreach to Latinos must be comprehensive in nature, as even the highly educated segments of the population have found it difficult to become well informed and knowledgeable about the important legislation.

What Approaches Should be Utilized to Engage Latinos in the ACA?

In my opinion the most valuable information provided in these two surveys is the blue-print that it provides to those interested in engaging the Latino community with the new law. With low knowledge levels consistent across the Latino population, the natural next question is what specific approaches should be utilized to better inform Latinos about the health care law? While we have released a lot of information pertinent to this question already on the blog, I have added some fresh content here to hopefully shed some new light on the subject. In the nationally focused survey we tested a series of messages intended to interest Latinos in learning more about the ACA. As you see in the figure below, all of these messages linked with a specific element of the new law generates a positive response among Latinos. However, some messages such as increasing access to health care through expanding the number of local community health centers and increased availability of medical services such as OB-GYN visits and testing for HIV/AIDS test better than credits for small business.

We also included multiple measures focused on the potential effectiveness of specific messengers in the ACA outreach effort. As depicted in the figure below, all of the messengers we showcase here have a lot of traction with the Latino community. Tapping into social networks for outreach will be key given the high number of Latinos who report that they would be more likely to enroll if encouraged by family members and friends. Utilizing Latino doctors will also be key, as they are only outperformed by family members among messengers tested in the survey. Latino teachers however are a group that are not as obvious, but who could be very valuable to increasing Latino engagement with the ACA given the trust and respect Latino families have in this group of potential messengers.

Among potential messengers who did not perform are local small business owners, Latino celebrities, and professional athletes. For example, 40% of Latinos in the national survey reported that they would be less likely to enroll if they were approached by Latino actors or musicians. Entities interested in increasing Latino participation in the ACA will have to think carefully about who they enlist as spokes-people, as utilizing celebrities may have a suppressing effect for Latinos.

How Important will language be in ACA Outreach?

The final aspect of this discussion focuses on the important role that language will play in the effectiveness of outreach efforts to Latinos. We have already reported that a large percentage (36%) of Latinos report that they prefer information about the ACA be provided in both English and Spanish, along with another 27% who prefer Spanish. However, I am providing the variation to this item by various demographic factors to illustrate that bilingual messaging is important to just about all sub-groups.

For example, while the majority of US born Latinos prefer ACA information to be provided in English, 35% of this segment of the Latino community indicate that they would like information in both English and Spanish. Similarly, although desire for English focused information increases with educational attainment, even 42% of Latino college graduates indicate that they would like ACA focused information in both English and Spanish. A final indicator of the salience of language to Latinos is the finding that 80% of Latinos in the national sample indicate that they would like to learn more about the ACA after hearing that the new law could increase the number of health care professionals who speak Spanish.

Gabriel R. Sanchez is an Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of New Mexico, Interim Director of the RWJF Center for Health Policy at UNM and Research Director for Latino Decisions. Professor Sanchez has published multiple articles and blog posts on Latino health care attitudes.

A new poll of Latino/Hispanic adults in the state of Colorado strongly suggests that the United States federal government needs to do much more outreach to Latinos regarding the Affordable Care Act (ACA). The poll, commissioned by Adelante con la Salud: Latino Health Care Engagement Project and administered by Latino Decisions, queried 401 Latino/Hispanic adults living in Colorado regarding their knowledge of the new health care law and their personal health care status, their trust levels of potential messengers for ACA information, and a specific focus on how the rising costs of health care impacts the lives of Latinos in Colorado. In addition to this blog post you can access the slide deck from a recent webinar presentation utilizing this data hosted by Latino Decisions and Adelante con la Salud here.

Clear Need for More/Better Outreach

Overall, the results from this poll indicate that there will need to be not only more outreach to the Latino community regarding the new law, but information that directly targets this population. When asked about their general knowledge regarding the new law, only 13% of Latino adults feel very informed about the ACA (see figure below) compared to a combined 47% who feel either “not all that” or “not that” informed.

This is reinforced by an overwhelming majority (69%) of Latino adults in Colorado who say that the ACA is “confusing and complicated” (see figure below) compared to only 22% who feel that they are “well informed.”This perception of the new law is consistent across all sub-groups of the Colorado Hispanic population, including 67% of college graduates from this population who feel that the ACA is “confusing and complicated”.

When asked to provide the names of different parts of the new law a majority  (54%) of the sample indicated that they “did not know.” The most commonly referenced policies within the ACA were the need to “pay a fine if you don’t have insurance” (19%) and the “mandate” to purchase insurance (18%). As a result, there is a need exists for broad communication on the aspects of the new law that are projected to benefit Latinos in Colorado.

As a final mechanism to assess knowledge of the ACA, we asked respondents to indicate whether they felt undocumented immigrants would be able to purchase private health insurance through the state health exchanges. Only 25% of the sample correctly identified that undocumented immigrants would be “restricted from purchasing insurance through the exchanges”, with 50% believing that they would be able to participate in the exchanges, and another 25% indicating that they did not know. Interestingly, a strong majority (61%) of Latinos in Colorado believe that regardless of how the law is currently structured, undocumented immigrants “should be able to access benefits” through the ACA.

 The Survey Provides Blue-Print For How to Engage Latinos in Colorado About ACA

Based on the results that show a need to provide targeted education and outreach to Latinos in Colorado about the ACA, a major focus of this poll was to query respondents about what messages would be most effective. For example, when asked which language they would like to receive information about the ACA, 59% of respondents indicated a preference for English compared to 14% of respondents who preferred Spanish. However, a large segment (27%) of the Latino population in Colorado prefers to receive information in both languages, including 38% of foreign-born Latinos in Colorado. This suggests that information to Latinos about the ACA will need to be in both English and Spanish with sensitivity to the bilingual nature of the Latino community in Colorado.

Latinos in Colorado also vary in their preference for terminology referring to the new health care law, with 38% preferring “Obamacare,” 29% preferring the “Affordable Care Act” and 14% preferring “Healthcare Reform Program.” There is similar variation among Spanish speakers in Colorado, as 34% of Latino Spanish speakers in Colorado prefer “Reforma de Cuidado de Salud” compared to 20% who prefer “Reforma de Seguro Medico.” Interestingly, the third most popular term for Spanish speakers is “Obamacare,” with 18% indicating that this term has traction for both groups of Latinos in Colorado.

Form of Communication and Most Trusted Messengers

The survey also queried respondents about their preferred form of communication for information about the new health care law. The most commonly identified forms of communication were “Pamphlets and Mailers” with 35% and “Television” and “the Internet” with 30% each.[1] The survey also identified the most trusted individuals and organizations to deliver information about the ACA. The data indicates that the Latino community in Colorado trusts “hospitals” (27%) and “doctors” (21%) as primary messengers; “community centers and organizations” were identified by 17% of the sample. Social networks will also be vital to outreach efforts, as family and friends combined yielded 19% among Latinos in Colorado.

The Rising Costs of Health Care are a Major Burden to Latino Families

The survey also reveals that the costs of health care is creating significant burdens on Latino families and that far too many Latino households in Colorado lack access to health insurance. The survey indicates that 31% of Latinos lacked health insurance at some point in the past 12 months with 24% of the sample indicating that they currently lack health insurance. When queried about the costs of health care nearly half (46%) of Latino adults in Colorado indicate that their health care costs have “gone up” in the past year, 75% of those who have seen their costs rise indicated that this has created a “significant financial burden”.

The costs of health care and medical bills has a tremendous impact on the lives of Latino families in Colorado and on their health seeking behavior. For example, 43% of Latinos in Colorado indicate that they have “used up all or most of their savings” because of medical bills, and another 30% of respondents to the survey said that because of medical bills, they have been unable to “pay for basic necessities like food, housing, and heat.” Indicative of the devastating impact of rising costs of health care, another 39% indicated they have had trouble paying their other bills. Finally, 31% of respondents say that because of the costs, they or a family member have skipped a recommended medical test or treatment.

Survey Methodology

Latino Decisions interviewed 401 Latino adults across the state of Colorado between April 11 – 16, 2013 from a list of randomly selected Hispanic Households, and carries a margin of error of +/- 4.9%. Interviews were conducted in English or Spanish, at the discretion of the respondent, and overall, 30% of all interviews were completed in Spanish. Respondents in both landline and cell-phone only households were interviewed by telephone, and respondents were also recruited from an online web panel of Latino adults in Colorado. Overall, the final data were weighted to match the most recent U.S. Census ACS estimates for the Latino population in Colorado, and can be interpreted as reflective of the statewide Latino population. The survey was designed by Drs. Matt A. Barreto and Gabriel R. Sanchez of Latino Decisions, national experts in Latino public opinion and health policy research.

 Space is limited

 Reserve your Webinar seat now at:

https://www4.gotomeeting.com/register/546048591

Join leaders from Adelante and Latino Decisions to discuss a new poll of Colorado Latinos awareness, understanding, and interest in the Affordable Care Act.  Panelists will unveil the results of a Latino Decisions survey in Colorado and talk about the need for more outreach and education to Latinos related to the ACA.

Matt Barreto, Latino Decisions

Gabriel Sanchez, Latino Decisions

Melanie Herrera Bortz, Adelante con la Salud

Steve Del Castillo, Adelante con la Salud

Title: Adelante con la Salud/Latino Decisions – Colorado Latino ACA Briefing

Date: Tuesday, May 21, 2013

Time: 1:30 – 2:30 PM MDT (3:30 EDT)

After registering you will receive a confirmation Email containing information about joining the Webinar

System Requirements 

PC-based attendees

Required: Windows 7, Vista, XP or 2003 Server

Mac-based attendees

Required: Mac OSX10.6 or newer

Mobile attendees

Required iPhone, iPad, Android phone or tablet

It’s no secret that the Republican Party has a serious problem with immigration.  But in this instance I’m talking about their problem with Latinos migrating out of their own party. Republicanos are trading in the elephant for the donkey, or at the very least just going without a party vehicle.

This week a high profile Latino Republican, the former head of Hispanic outreach for Florida’s RNC, publicly left the party.  For Pablo Pantoja the straw that broke the camel’s, or in this case the elephant’s, back was the Heritage Foundation’s anti-immigrant report and its co-author’s public defense of Latino’s as a group having low IQ scores.  In his public farewell letter Pantoja references the general harshness of the Republican rhetoric toward immigrants, then points to a specific racist exchange at this year’s Conservative Political Action Committee (CPAC), and concludes with a rejection of the likes of Dr. Jason Richwine (author of the Heritage study) as a voice for the GOP.  To sum up his rationale, Pantoja simply states that his former party had resorted to “intolerance and hate.”

He’s not the first and he won’t be the last.

Another high profile Republican departure occurred close to two years ago, half way across the country in Arizona.  Dee Dee Garcia Blase had helped establish the Somos Republicans.  A national organization for Latino Republicans based out of Arizona.  But in the wake of Arizona’s S.B. 1070 she also publicly rejected her party.  Though a fiscal and social conservative, she simply could not synthesize the GOP’s anti-immigrant rhetoric into her politics.  So she left the Republican Party and Somos Republicans and became officially “unaffiliated.”  Not too long after her departure the organization itself, Somos Republicans, took a similar route officially abandoning the GOP and became Somos Independents.

The departures of Pantoja and Garcia Blase made the headlines because they were public partisan figures.  However, thousands of other Latinos have taken the same path of migrating out of the GOP.  Their decision is just not public, but rather taken in the privacy of a voting booth.

The out migration is especially stark when we compare the most recent presidential election with George W. Bush’s 2004 re-election.  The 2004 election was the Republican Latino high water mark.  At that time half of Latinos identified as being Democrats, 27 percent Republican, and 24 percent Independent.  Democrats clearly were the preferred party of Latinos, but slightly more than half did not identify as Democrats.  Moreover, in his re-election, Bush received 40 percent of the Latino vote.

Fast forward to President Obama’s re-election.  In 2012 the percentage of Latinos identifying as Democrats jumped to 57 percent and the number of Republicans decreased by half with only 14 percent of Latinos claiming a GOP affiliation.  The group that had the least movement was Independents or those unaffiliated.  In 2012 they rose to 29 percent.    But the biggest shift came in presidential vote choice, with Romney receiving only 27 percent of the Latino vote.

The correlation between the GOP’s Latino communications and outreach strategy is linear.  The harsher and more racially negative the messaging, the fewer Latinos will stand by your label and vote for you.  It’s not a complicated concept.

The Republican National Committee has publicly discussed its intention to not just retain but actively recruit Latinos.  However, mixed messaging will not staunch the out migration.  Being a Latino friendly party will require all segments of the party, not just the moderate ones to put aside harsh rhetoric, or what Pablo Pantoja pointed to as intolerance.  No one wants to stick around where they’re not welcome.

Dr. Victoria M. DeFrancesco Soto is an NBC Latino and MSNBC contributor, Senior Analyst for Latino Decisions and Fellow at the Center for Politics and Governance at the LBJ School of Public Affairs at the University of Texas, at Austin.

Last month we released key findings from a Latino Decisions study of 400 undocumented Latinos in the United States, conducted in February and March 2013 on behalf of the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials (NALEO) Educational Fund and America’s Voice Education Fund.  While this data was previously released in the aggregate, the analysis here focuses on gender group differences, adding a layer of texture to the policy debate underway, and highlight the important role of our Mamás in Latino families.

Coming to America

More than 75% of undocumented Latinos identify one of two primary reasons for immigrating to the United States: economic opportunity, or to build a better life for their families. A smaller percentage (12%) came primarily to reunite with family members in the United States.

Obviously these motivations are often intertwined. For women, though, supporting or reuniting with family is the primary factor; 52% of undocumented Latinas said they came to the U.S. either to build a better life for their family, or to reunite with loved ones. They are twice as likely as their male counterparts to migrate for the purpose of reuniting with family (16% vs. 8%).

A majority of undocumented Latinas live in the U.S. with their spouse (65%), and children (88%). These figures are higher compared to undocumented Latinos (58% and 60% respectively). In addition, women are less likely to come to the U.S. alone, and more likely to arrive with children.

The vast majority of respondents to our survey have lived the U.S. ten years or more. Men are more likely to have arrived more than two decades ago, and many Latinas followed later to join spouses and other family members in the mid- to late-1990s.

Work and Family

While jobs and economic opportunities are the main reason that immigrants come to the U.S., areas of employment are fairly narrow. Perhaps not surprisingly, there are also gender differences in the types of jobs undocumented men and women hold.

Undocumented Latinas are most likely to work as childcare providers (19%) and housekeeping/house cleaners (26%), while undocumented Latinos are more likely to work in construction (33%). Gender differences are less persistent in sectors such as agriculture and manufacturing.

In terms of family relationships, undocumented Latinas have more family members who are American citizens (75% vs. 68%) or permanent residents (62% vs. 56%). Still, it is notable the majority of both sexes have close relatives who hold American citizenship.

As illustrated above, a greater share of undocumented Latinas have children who live with them in the United States (88%). More than half of these women (57%), have U.S. born children (American citizens). An additional 15% have one or more child born in the U.S. and one or more born in another country.

The vast majority of undocumented immigrants have relatives in the U.S. who are citizens (71%). Polls of Latino voters confirm the fact that mixed status families are a reality in America, and many Latino citizens have family members, relatives, and friends who would benefit from immigration reform that includes a path to citizenship for undocumented residents. There are especially close ties, and strong support among Hispanic women voters. In our February 2013 survey of Latino voters, 63% of Latinas said they know undocumented immigrants, and 75% of Latinas are following the immigration debate in Congress. Among Hispanic women voters, 74% believe it is “very” or “extremely” important that Congress passes immigration reform in 2013.

Perhaps these strong connections between theses two communities (i.e. the undocumented Latino population and the U.S. citizen Latino population) is a key reason 68% of undocumented Latinos remain optimistic that immigration reform will finally pass this year.

Blanca Guillen-Woods is a senior project manager at Latino Decisions.

About the poll: Latino Decisions interviewed 400 Latino adult immigrants self-identifying as non-citizens and not “Legal Permanent Residents” or not having any other type of visa or documentation. The poll was conducted between March 4 and March 29, 2013, and all respondents were selected at random in both landline and cell-phone only households.  The nominal margin of error is +/- 4.9%.  Interviews were conducted in Spanish and English at the subject’s discretion.  Additional data points will be released later this week.

For more information: Latino Decisions: matt.barreto@latinodecisions.com or gary.segura@latinodecisions; NALEO Educational Fund: pvalle@naleo.org; America’s Voice Education Fund ptobar@americasvoiceonline.org.