« The Weeds

Is Donald Trump ruining the Census?

2018-04-03

Sarah, Dara, and Matt talk about the citizenship question, funding, and the potential consequences of a botched enumeration. Plus a weedsy dive into potential redistricting mischief, and research on Jose Canseco's malign influence on Major League Baseball. References: Dara's piece on the 2020 census Carlos Waters' video on the 2020 census The baseball white paper

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This is an unofficial transcript meant for reference. Accuracy is not guaranteed.
I stood a little welcome to another episode of the weeds on the box media Pike, s networks, Matthew Glacis. We got the new power line up, Azra Buckley darling and Sarah Cliff are with me It's a it's. It's amazing ensue It is like to cross over just kids crossing over I'm excited. I I'm I'm here to talk about some white papers, it's and be great. It's gonna be be great. We got, we got a good white paper, as is is own for white papering. So we can talk about baseball, she's baseball is it. This is the most exciting possible thing that they may or may not have saved this white paper for my being on the way this guy, it's gonna, be great,
need to get rid of asthma and to talk about sports. He's like he's like the kind of person who makes a lot of sports ball jokes- and you know it's it's not it's now Fourthly, we have this isn't as us so a huge controversies brewing about the Sensus and the asking of a question about in ship on the senses and spend a lot of coverage of this, but I think you know this involves this is the weeds. I think a lot of the coverage just sort of skips pass like the real basics here right, so
they do a census every ten years, it's in the constitution, its important because that's how they divvy up how seed sense, also all kinds of federal funding formulas are based on the census count of your populations. So it's like you know, there's like grants for housing assistance as grants for all kinds of things, and they give more money to the places that have more people in them. So you know you want to know how many people there are, but there's this I get a twist right. The senses uses a method for ascertaining the population that I think one would not normally used to try to count things you I mean, I think that we tend to assume you know in the year twenty eighteen, we have sophisticated demography and sophisticated statistics, and so There are lots of ways. Social scientists have been working on for centuries to get an accurate portrait of a population without literally going up to everybody's door. The census does not allow you to use any of those,
or the official every ten years count. The constitution is, is pretty clear about an actual enumeration and sometimes there have been no challenges to the Supreme Court in the Supreme Court, is Edna now you're alive to use fancy statistics to model and sample the population for other things. But when you're do the a census. You have to go door to door to door to door to door, which means you have to a nowhere people's doors are, which is some in that reveals. Some biases against people who like live in unconventional places address, might change and you need to act. We get them to either fill out the paper for in this year go online or you answer the door when a census worker comes to try to get them to respond if they haven't responded before so,
there are obvious reasons why certain populations might be out substantially less likely than others to fill out. The former show in answer the door or to even have the census, know where they are to begin with, and the senses can't do anything about that when it has holes, it has to try to assume the characteristics of the household by imputing the characteristics of their neighbor or something like that. It's not allowed to say well, we know that we have fewer black respondents are fewer latino respondents, so we're going to reject those numbers to reflect their actual percentage, relation, and I think, one of the key things it's been changing in that space is it's getting harder to find households? This is something I am Carlos Waters whose does videos your box integrate video on,
and one of the things he notes that the cost per household has just skyrocketed in recent years and he talks to censor sparrows former directors who talk about how it's this two to three percent of the population? That's really, become more challenging to track down some of the situations they talk about people in in rural areas that can be difficult to get to that have become much more, sparsely populated. So it is more effort. You know to go out to a community where there's only maybe twenty people that might have had
your people meanwhile, and urban areas. You see, you know he actually very smartly uses a scene from on the last season of master of none where you have a taxi driver whose living in an apartment with four other taxi drivers who are each a distinct household to themselves. In she'd like there are saying the senses basically says you have to count all of those people. Also, one of the things that's happening with the census is even if you keep the funding at previous levels at all likely be under funded because of these the challenge of counting people, and because this is still a paper based product Maynard standing as there's a move towards more online senses for twenty twenty, but it has, and more challenging for Census bureau officials to get people to fill out a very lengthy paper survey when people are just you know, I think taking their mail is seriously not as willing to send back a survey to the government's that's one of the things that released.
Out to me, you're gonna. Get ready for this episode is that even if you kept the funding steady because of these challenges of finding every household in America that that have increased since the toy tendencies, since twenty twenty cents, as it still going to be under funded with steady funding yeah, this is just to clarify quickly the twenty twenty cents, as will is the first time that an online option is kind of being pushed as the primary way there are going to be theirs. There is currently a field tests being run providence right now and in Providence, people concurrently go and like go two cents, a stock of and put in their senses form, and then their goal,
send the paper forms to people who haven't already gone online, but that kind of raises its own questions about your totally changing the methodology of the census. Maybe you should just change that and not change other thing, so I want to refocus our ancestors, but just to say that as a baseline with it, a normal estimating method right where you are trying to do is have it be roughly equally likely that you are over accounting or under counting, but with the census. It's it's. The actual enumeration requirement means it's like estimating for further. This is right right where you do not get you're not going to count to many people, so in twenty ten they actually did they. They estimated that they slightly over counted because its easier to overpower households where, like the parents are divorced, and both parents have independent houses and they're, both counting there during, for example, if, even though late there's only one child in the household there,
counting him so he becomes to children. So the fact that they over counted it itself says something because it's an indication how much easier it is defined certain kinds of people in certain kinds of situations than other kinds of people. In like that We're was not consistent across ethnic groups right they over counted white people. They, still undergown aid African Americans on the Tina. Ok, so the ask you to fill out a form traditionally, they ask you to filter paper form. Now this could be an outline option and then also, if you dont, fill out the form they like try to send a census taker after you, too, to dance with questions for you. The form has a bunch of different questions on it of people who have filled out senses forms in the past. Now you know it like basically like, as you got, kids, etc. That kind of thing, and now they are going to ask are you a citizen of the United States of America seems like selling you may want to now I mean it. It. Certainly it's some
that has been asked as part of government surveys for a while. It was part of the Maine census form until one thousand nine hundred and fifty after the nineteen fifty census it got put on. What's called the long forms senses which was the kind of even longer like more detailed version that got phased out in two thousand because they were doing an annual version of it instead called the America. Unity survey. So it's something that some group of people has been asked by the United States government for demographic purposes consistently. American community service is a statistical six. Actually it's for one thing: it's a statistical sample for another thing: it simply it's like one per cent of the pot patient getting asked every year, concerns of and oh an undercurrent are much less substantial there because there's something where they can fix that model. So, among Various concerns about there being a citizenship questions about that. Like literally the senses bureau is just finalizing its questions. Now there isn't the kind of testing process
that they're usually, is four questions. There is usually years and years and Development Jeff sessions basically asked the Commerce Department to Ask about citizenship on the census last fall. He said it was important to enforce the Voting Rights ACT, this This said sure, let's go ahead with that last week about blind, citing their own advisory committees, like literally a member of their scientific advisory committee, gave a presentation last week after the announcement, where the first light of her presentation was W g h, what the hell and just talked about how they had totally blown up the census. It's not super clear whether all of these fears are necessarily justified, but in a just to give you a sense, this is absent. Leave a big curveball that these census bureau and people who Can you follow and rely on? The census have been thrown dear. I can you talk about
arguments of what is justice asking for like what is the connection to the Voting Rights ACT. What is their case for adding this question and kind of like how how you think about the argument there making their shirt? So one of the tools for the federal government to enforce voting rights is to sue states, in particular, if their drawing districts in a way that dilutes, the impact of voters of color? You know whether that's by splitting them up into districts into multiple districts where they're gonna be the minority or packing them all into it. Google district, so that there is only one representative was representing a bunch of people of color. Various courts have determined that the way they want to judge whether a district matches the population and is a good, presentation of voters of color is by the citizen voting age population in particular that they really want that statistic. That statistic is one that
they can get from. You know the american community survey, which has actually been asking about that and which is going to give you updated information. There are a couple of problems there are. One of them is that you only restrict every ten years. That's on the census timeline, but the american commune. Survey is in more of a ruling thing, but the other thing is It's you know it's. A sample of the population is not necessarily the whole thing. So sessions is saying that, in order to enforce the Voting Rights ACT, what they really need is to have an official census count of the citizen voting age population. That's not something that judges asking for something that the Justice Department has decided. They want. The concern on the left is that the Not really. The reason right is that their using that is a smoke screen, because there are plenty of people, Inv, conservative movement, the trumpet menstruation, who believe that the representation should be decided not just violate the citizen voting age population for minority
voting purposes for voting rights at purposes, but that districts should be drawn based on two hundred fifty thousand citizens, rather than to fifty thousand people which is currently how done so. Gathering that information makes it a whole bunch easier when Congress is too writing how to apportion things to various states for Congress to say well. Yeah for now has a lot of people, but a lot of them or non citizens so were actually not gonna. Give it as many congressional seats as we would have otherwise it's important to be clear about this right, because I think you have
probably heard. If you are a box fan, in particular since the twenty sixteen election, a lot of complaints from left of centre people about the ways in which their views are under waited in the american political system gerrymandering and has representatives Senate over representation of World States electoral College, letting from win one important offsetting variable on this- is that house disk are drawn to have equal numbers of residence right, and so that means that children Non citizens and even undocumented people go into that the new more eager, and so there are very different numbers of eligible voters across different house districts. This has not traditionally been a big bone of partisan contention because it inflates California, but it also inflates Texas, and
roughly offset each other, but with the Republican Party becoming more zealous in its views on immigration and also with Texas becoming less conservative, even while parts of the upper Midwest become more conservative. This is this sort of long dormant question of representation is starting to become an active saying where the sort of virtual representation of particularly hispanic, although also asian immigrants, mostly in California and Texas, do to some extent also in in Nevada and Arizona, is like an issue that that actually impacts american politics and, while like sessions is not saying, that's why they want to do this count in order.
to redo it to throw the immigrants out of the count. You would need this citizenship question and the citizenship question would have to be on the census, sweat for voting rights act purposes. If you just litigating, why there's a million things at play in Voting rights ACT but again, there's no reason. You couldn't muse American Community Survey data, for that likely you will be fine. No judge would throw that out, but if you want to change how redistricting works, it has to be on the official Sensus, and that would be a it will be a legitimate reason to do that spread like if you wanted to change the apportionment basis to citizens rather than residents. You have to count citizens and you have to count them on the official senses.
but I think there is a question of if you can even do that with the know. How quickly the administration is moving, mean away. Think one of the things that dairy mentioned as the the senses tends to have pre rigorously researched questions. They implement things on a year's long time line. Not usually you know a month on timelines or even doing something right now and twenty. Eighty two years before the senses is pretty quick. How the survey moves, I remember when they were switching, there's a whole controversy a few years ago about switching the way that they count health insurance, and this was a year's long process. There is like overlap of the two questions that you'd have continuity. You can compare the two different ones compare and I think one of the tricky things you know about asking about citizen ship that I really learned about mere explain our Dara is that it doesn't seem to be the type of question that often elicits
accurate answers, and it seems that we know this from the american community survey that you just see a lot of people who couldn't possibly see me citizens with only lived in the? U S for one year, for example, checking the day that they are a citizen and it says like the information one is going to get from this question, isn't going to be very good that there be a reason, particularly because we know from previous research, that the citizenship question doesn't always illicit the best information, and that has been done in such a rushed way. I feel like there's pretty fair reason to worry about the data that is going to create if you did want to switch to this kind of different apportionment system. I think that that's definitely fair, although I think it's probably worth noting that there is evidence that the info,
It isn't very good, but all it takes is a small portion of people answering the question and correctly to make the data useless. That doesn't necessarily mean that more of them are answering it incorrectly. Them correctly on net you know it's, maybe I'll, a more slight advantage, but it still an advantage to people who would want to change apportionment. But this gets to kind of the bigger worry that the citizenship question is raising the more me here, one which is that there is already a substantial chilling effect among immigrants, in general, especially unauthorized immigrants, but both legal and and in many cases U S. Citizen Latinos, to ask the door when the federal government is under doorstep period? They actually have found this during the pre testing the in cases where there is a really really a robust in making sure everyone knows about their rights and privacy and all of that because they're doing protesting, so they kind of have the luxury
You re not even in those cases, people were extremely wary of answering any questions that they thought were sensitive. There was a case where one woman was like in her trailer with the centre: Baker and the woman stood up and left her own trailer and just left the census. Take her alone and the trailer because she didn't want to answer any questions. People would oh lie because they didn't want to give anybody away. They were just refused to answer. They would ask a lot of questions about. How are you sure that this formation will be shared. So, even though, legally speaking, whatever government information, the Commerce Department gets on citizenship, won't be info, and that they can like hand over their eyes, and I know that there are a lot of people who are. You know who think that though this is illegal. That does mean the trumpet initiation won't do it like. Sometimes you have to just accept that. Not all risks are equal and the risk of people actually getting deported. as they checked a boxing, they were a non citizens, especially coz its non citizen. It's not what's your legal status is
lower than the risk that someone will be afraid. that will happen and therefore won't answer the senses at all. So there's a he'll concern that these fish is that are not super. Well ground. Are going to end up disenfranchises latino communities, because there will be such a massive under a spy I mean there's a there's, a secondary fear right, which is I mean it just needs to be said that, like there's a lot of bad faith hunting around here right, I mean, I think, that if anybody thought there, what was going on here was that the Trump administration really really really wanted to improve voting rights. Act: enforcement in the sense of like acting more zealously and sincerely to improve the electoral representation of racial and ethnic minorities in the United States and that they had reluctantly concluded that in order to achieve this lofty Gore, they needed to add the citizenship question to the senses
There could be a way to do this. That might work right, but to the extent that we know we perceive the downside risk here as being that Letty knows will not respond to the senses and that by not responded to the senses, thou blind up, getting less representations state legislatures for the community and less funding for the community's needs. The trumpet ministration will see there as a win so rather than pulling out. All the stops to reassure everybody that, like this is great and like this is gonna, be good for you and, like everybody, should cooperate. It's you have a situation that people are anxious about and you have an administration that is not necessarily interested in relieving those anxieties, like I don't think at all honestly that homeland security and the Senses Bureau are going a team up to completely illegally engage in this
a sharing. That would not even be really useful ties in any way. The that to me like, I understand that people are anxious about this, but it is not reasonable anxiety to have, but the Trump administration, I think, is not going to try to alleviate that anxiety. Like you, don't see, Tum Honan out there talking about how pointless it would be for him to try to illegally access census. Data that, like this, doesn't that, like a leg, it really is illegal, and you know the rule of law continues to be an effect in the United States. Finally, I would say them ready strongly only illegal, it's illegal in a way that would require lots of civil servants to go. Long with something they knew to be illegal without whistle blowing about it and given the inner given what we ve seen of the trumpet administration so far its extremely. Not to believe that a lot of sense is bureau. Employees are going to be like totally. Ok with you know, breaking the law
and not feel the need to go to the end with no upside. It would be a terrible way of trying to catch extra undocumented immigrants. It doesn't make any sense. Really you look and communities suspicious of the federal government are gonna feel suspicious of federal government, but like the reason that this particularly elevates the odds of an under count is that like there is Census Bureau director in place right now to be leading the charge to make this work right, like the president, is tweeting crazy, that I don't know stuff about caravans and you know catch and release Unlike that, that's the real issue here, it seems to me, is like, particularly because there doesn't seem to be a good reason to ask this. Is your ship question and there is a real fear that it will lead to an under count and then the whole drive is being led by people who don't mind
if there's an underground. Unlike battle, I allow you layer on top of that, a census that seems to be quite under funded. So it's like you, take that. Can change and see that doesn't have a director that doesn't seem to have enough budget to do the task it is supposed to do and then say: oh by the way. I do this other thing that you need to under the sunset with very little time- and you know that could drastically chain Thirdly, significantly change the outcomes of the data that Europe can Digg, is a glaring and on top of his senses, even before we started having the question about the citizenship eat a question that there was this concern that the citizens really wasn't going to have enough money is. Are you I think you don't have brought out a little bit in the citizens such a question? I think we have a lot to do with latino representation in the census, but we're already looking like other minor.
vulnerable group see no minority populations, people who live in rural areas, who will be less likely to be counted because of the funding for the census, hasn't really kept up with the challenge of track. Down those people. So it's not. You know. I think this citizenship question is not happening in a vacuum. It's happening in a census that is already missing a director and in dealing with the lack of funding. One thing I want to ask, though, thereof you're able to talk about this- is like how John of it deal. Is the citizenship question they notice for sure? Don't they have sex for states? Cannot do anything acres, we're the state law being out there. What's the deal with those in fear, nothing's finalize until they have printed stuff out and actually there are stories about lake. The senses question one year after many of them had been printed, but they just printed out a few versions that we're different and did some sampling magic. But it
done in so far as the executive branch has made its decision, any attempt to change it would be extraordinary measures in fear Congress can kind of exercise some kind of extraordinary oversight. In theory, the court's could just straight up rule it unconstitutional to ask about citizens I am not seeing a lot of legal experts saying that that is a likely thing to happen. It certainly- and it's it's kind of because because it's very obvious that the states that are suing our suing for political reasons, because they are the ones who would lose out That is a legitimate reason to sue, but it also makes it a political question. I think you know it's it's no worthy right. I mean it's a it's. It's a sign of the times in part, but that, like Texas, is not among the states is suing right. I mean
one traditional thing that would have blocked this. Is that, like it's true that liberals are the people who are most likely to care about this, but in a concrete way, if you under count, let he knows, but you could have you under count non citizen. Letty knows a big red stay. is gonna, lose out on federal funding streams, but we are now at like a point in american political history, where Texas Republicans are like all in on the Republican Party and conservatism and what it means now and are not gonna be engaged with anything as petty as like. We want our fair share of federal grant formulas that makes it like a harder cell. I think in some ways you know. You have just like liberal coastal states where people dont like Donald Trump yeah, and I think the other thing that makes us really hard is the census. Bureau is
saying and their correct, that there is an hard data suggesting that there's gonna be a chilling effect that would have a real effect on the senses. Count like for one thing. If people are already freaked out, it's not clear why adding a citizenship question does on the margin. For another thing, for obvious reasons, it's very high. to do social science on who is being not counted by social science. So they're they're right like this, is basically Annick Data. There isn't hard data one way or the other. Of course. The response to that that the critics have given is We would actually have better data if you had gone through these days. Process in testing this question, and maybe the fact that we don't have data is a reason not to do it, but I you want to get back to what Sarah was saying about under funding, because I think it can important to understand just where in the process we are with that for the omnibus that Congress just past gives the Census Bureau
a bunch of money more than the trumpet Ministration asked for four twenty eighteen like there. Actually there actually Kay, as far as where they should be in twenty eighteen problem is that they didn't have enough money for twenty sixteen twenty seventeen and extremely worried about money for twenty nineteen, twenty twenty Joe back in twenty ten. They did a census and the census cost about twelve point five billion dollars, which is the kind of like I don't know. This is this. Is No government stuff, like twelve point, five billion. That sounds like a lot of money. It is a lot of money. A lot of people involved, but in the skill, the federal budget, it's it's peanuts, but Republicans also took Congress in twenty ten and one of the things that they do Was it they mandated that the twenty twenty senses should also costs twelve point five billion dollars right, and so I just
for inflation. That means they have less money to do the Sensus, and yet the population has grown. So you have more people less money to count them with the most basic, like census, door, walking effort where, like you, hire some guys and they go around there like YO who lives here that for the technical counter, this is is boundless cost disease, but it's a kind of with the real cost of doing that grows overtime right when my great grandparents were being surveyed in the Bronx by guys walking round knocking on doors. The overall wage rate in the United States was extremely low. You do that in twenty twenty ride, like it cost more money to hire somebody to walk around than it used to, but people walk faster than it used to them? Response rates are declining for some other reason. Sarah was talking about right that if there is a community of a thousand people, you can probably hire a census taker from in that community to run around
knocking on the doors when rural areas start shrinking and you have communities with twenty people are thirty five people, then you have to hire somebody who doesn't live there. Drive around in the knock on the door is right, so this Lots of reasons to think that the twenty twenty census should have had more money than the twenty ten census we should be cautious normal that just like normal government agency stuff, like the budget, rises, overtime, Instead it has less, and so because its had glass, they ve, had to keep economizing on saying this over time. So one idea they had was well we're. Gonna, save money by letting people cause, the sentence has, for the two big phase is one: is people's self report by just filling out the foreman mailing it back? and then the other as they send senses takers out to catch you, so they wanted
let people self report on the internet or on phone acts, which would be even cheaper than doing it on the paper forms. So then that would save money and they could plough more money into the other stuff, but they haven't had the funds to do a lot of testing of them things, they also floated the idea of well. Maybe we should make a whole spanish census right and ensure that could address some of the undercutting problems but they couldn't run tests on that. So they had to scrap that right, and so we looked recently like we were sort of plummeting to total catastrophe. But the most recent omnibus sort of rise to the rescue and provides at least for next year or for the remit. I guess it's the remainder of this further, I examined for the summer, so that there is a reasonable amount of money coming forward for the next six months, but in the aiming phases of the senses. They have had not enough money right, so the
an idea to save money, but they haven't really tested how well it works. They had some ideas to improve. Can I could see, but they have been able to implement them. They cut the number of dress rehearsal, they're gonna have lake in o one field, testing, Euro area, one feel toughness of urban area and one feel destined urban area. They cut the rural and suburban field tests because they were going to happen back when they were getting money. In twenty seventeen, like the testing providence right now, is the first lasting only feel test the senses is going to have, and it doesn't it's not going to address that. Since that Sarah might have been raising about. How do you count? Rural people in twenty twenty right and left clear, what's going to happen in the future ready,
I mean autopilot dinner, the senses a ten year process, but it's like you spend a little money for the first five six years of that process, just kind of getting ready and that he has been a lot of money and, like the final two years to actually do the census they kind of under funded the prep stage and now there's a question is too like what's gonna happen in, time. One thing you have not see and is Jeff sessions, admit Mulvaney saying hey! We have this Ike ambitious plan to change, how the senses works and citizenship and, like we really want improved caught accuracy, so we're making like a big request for extra money so that we can test and implement this well instead their twenty seven request was for it. Ten percent cut their twenty eighteen request was for flat funding How are these budget requests and getting no word, but again as a measure of good faith like a
I welcome president probably could get a republican Congress to cough up extra census money if they like had some vision of improving senses, accuracy that they needed funding, for but they re. I think this is the thing were. This comes back to the question of differential under counting because in communities that are less likely to respond to a sense of surveys? There have been big civil society, a nonprofit efforts to get people to trust the census, to get people to us fill it out to understand why it's important those efforts work when their hand in hand with government efforts. You know there was a big big big advertising campaign on spanish language television in twenty ten that really helped to get spanish language dominant Latinos in particular. On board with the mission of the census? If you're say, though, the head of a community group in in innately, Denver
and you're, seeing this administration being so uninterested in understanding that they might have a problem with me. You know that the news into question or with chilling effect. Generally, it's worth it to ask a. Is the government going to be putting in its side of the investment and be if it's not I and my organization really going to need to make the effort to redouble our attempts just to get people to fill out the dang senses are they expect us to do their job. For them in or to make sure our communities are represented, and I think that something that a lot of community organisations are really frustrated with you. No weird way. It actually reminds me of I mean Obamacare as much more polarizing saw a similar thing happen when the Trump administration basically said we're not going to. four outrage. You know people and its great spread like they cut the advertising budget. Ninety percent the imprisoned enrollment budget, forty percent-
one of the things that actually surprised me, but I think that this might be a place where the Sensus and health insurance are very dear friend, is that I didn't have the chilling effect on health care sign up, so it that I had thought it was that it turns out when people want health insurance. They sign up for health insurance when there is still a penalty for not health insurance wheeze on Roma go down a little bed, but the sense says, is true friend you don't get anything out of filling out there. And his right leg. You don't very Amy, maybe unlike zeal but lay down the road and rail, is a form of playground. Exactly and it's hard to see, and you don't know the connection between, like the census form you felt out in twenty twenty and like the playground that showed up in your neighborhood and twenty twenty five. I think one of the reasons a programme like the senses needs a robust outreach effort. Is that it's not
sort of thing where you fill out a form and you get like a government benefit right away. You got an Amazon gift card or whatever for doing that, it does give the gains, don't seem to accrue to the person doing the work and it is. It is significant work I think anyone I feel that a census form you know knows that it sees it does take some investment of I am- and I think it's a program that does not run especially well without some kind of invested outreach, and I think that the great question you raise of United going either way. One with community groups saying like we understand the stakes are so high, so we are going to step. As you know, we are going to provide this. Actually saw some of that with Obamacare outreach local foundations by increasing their grant making to fill in this play the role that the government was in playing, but you know,
it's- that the government has a lot more flexibility with funding. It's really hard for nonprofits, for advocacy groups to step in and find that money, and you know you could see advocacy groups deciding. The task is just too daunting that they don't have the budget for it, but I think that's really. Big, an answer, question about what is a census look like and what is the role of non profit supply give if there isn't that same commitment to government outreach yeah? That- and this is just one of the many things were. None of the big questions about this census are going to be answerable until the senses already in the field or even after, and I think that that's what's really really worrying. Everyone is involved in this process. Is that the preparation they had didn't include the most controversial thing on here. You know who knows what's going to happen to funding in the next couple of years whether Congress is going to continue to ignore the tropic ministrations in our efforts to disdainful the budget of the Senses bureau
when you have to trust the count you have. You want to make sure in advance that the can't count you have an accurate and there are just so many questions about whether that's going to be the case that cannot get answered until spring of twenty twenty or later also, I've been the fact. Nobody is winning the census. Beer is relevant here I mean not nothing, there wasn't any. He had to withdraw. He was famous for arguing that that gerrymandering was a good thing, so it might not be the worst thing that he withdrew. No, I mean it's, you know it's not like go for it down like. We need you out here, but its again. It's like what it would. What are you trying to accomplish right like the fact that they have not like installed a good person as Senses bureau? director, and also I mean it's it wouldn't I mean I was speaking to as person who worked at a senior level in Commerce department, Obama, administration- and you know she's not up like senses, expert or something
just described. This is a large element of what they did. What they were concerned with the Commerce Department has a role in the trade dispute resolution, process by statute. The commission, wherein is like a mishmash of things, but she was saying that when they were running and Commerce Department in the lead up to the senses, what were more sleep focused on was the census weight. We'll be ROS is cruelly mostly focused on international trade policy disputes right. That's like that's! His that's his thing. and then just also speaks to this. It's like nobody
has been specifically put in charge of making the senses work. The budget requests do not seem aimed to make the census work. Well, the senior leadership at commerce is not focused on the census question and the Justice Department is throwing wrenches in the works rather than trying to make it go well, I think some of the takes on this from like senses keys senses, watchers seem a little alarmist to me, like the senses is definitely gonna, be disaster. Babar ion Stan. I mean it's like they're. Trying to raise a large is about this because it's it's concerning. I think you know as a realistic forecasts like we don't really know how big of a difference the citizenship thing is. We don't know what funding is going to be like. We don't really know what the implications of not having a director are. But what we can tell is that
body at the White House or at a senior political level is trying to make the census go off. Well, timed talk about baseball are accepted, moving on to other pressing matters of the day it was recently opening day. Let me I and my personal earthenware, nay, is not until Thursday because they started my not on the road. I voted to see them on Thursday. By that, yes, I'd appreciate, being able to talk about baseball and weeds, it has been two long. It's great Matt, I believe originally flagged in economics paper from twenty eleven that is broadly speaking, about the role that individual employees play in spreading bad behaviour within firms, but is actually about Jose can say so for people who are not baseball fans. You probably are dimly aware that the late nineteen nineties, early, two thousands saw
really really widespread use of steroids in baseball that that led to a lot of people who had not, he's leaving known as power had our suddenly hitting lots of home runs did this. You know immediately. Baseball has spent the last several years trying to crack down on this instituted. Mandatory drug testing strictly. In twenty three, there have been a couple of high profile busts in that time, but the impact of- steroids, iron, baseball statistics and players. Performance is like no one really knows has not. Everybody is now coming forward in saying yeah, I started using steroids and nineteen eighty four and I after using them in ninety. Ninety nine, please just missed it my metrics. Accordingly, we know the rod least speak egg, the that a lot of steroids were being used roughly in the mid too late nineties and early odds
We don't write, but we don't really right most of the players, the iron sake. I was saying that he was giving other people series added a rigorous examination of this claim until re right, so suppose I can say I was one of the few players who has not only been very forthright about saying. Yes, I use steroids in very specific about you know when and how it also has claimed that he was kind steroids, ambassador to regionally based on some ways he named in his memoirs. Several partake players who we had turned on steroids are given steroids. Those have not necessary really been corroborated, whose they can say is also a kind of night he's erratic is the most modest way I can put Blake. He can't he kidnapped a goat a couple of years ago and was tweeting about it, like talking about the most reliable narrator views it s are not necessarily taking him at his word there. Looking at the body of all baseball player,
who were on a team with Jose, can say, go at some point during Conseco's career and can make a plea for like eight differently so there are a lot of baseball players here and they look at their performance when they were playing with him and asked you're on the logic of that. If you're turning people the steroids like the who knows, you're doing that when there are on the same team. Is you, but if there, if they start using lloyd. At some point, when you're, when they're on the team with you, there probably gonna, keep using them after you and they are no longer on the same team and they find a substantial increase, especially in homer and sluggish presented, which are two extremely. statistics, to use for batting power, player Two were playing with zayigo and especially after they had been. the same team is: can Seiko compared to players were never on with us? I can say they run this. They compete this to a bunch of other kind of sluggards, who word In and around that time and five it there's, Really is a substantial can Seiko effect. That appears
in players who coincided with compared to players who coincided with say like candy, junior or bury bonds, Rafale Palmyra. There are baseball. Really but quibbles that have been raised that leg you know. I think that for one thing they make a lot of effort to try to prove that there would be improvements in other players, performance who weren't power hitters and they look like adding average there's, nothing saying that destroyed is going to make it more likely that you hit a single rather than hitting like a ground ball I am not I I would that they're trying to prove too much with that in a way that I think should put in stress on the reliability of this data, but like inject Well, they have a pretty compelling case study of when you have one person who is cutting ethical corps As for personal gain that behaviour spread among you know among other employees, at the firm if they see that that that
you're getting ahead and not getting caught and it can spread spreads until there is a clear penalty for that behaviour. Exciting one of the other things there showing as that in two thousand three, which I believe is when they started cracking down more on steroids, but correct me if I'm wrong? That's that's solid. Non baseball person did you see a drop off in some of these statistics that were improving so I think one of the aims that going away this paper feels kind of obvious. If you see someone doing something, and they are outperforming you and they're not being penalised and you think, while it wouldn't it, be nice to be as good as a hindrance and say Gower you now in other industries. You know, No? No, what other unethical behaviour like plagiarism in journalism are doing other things to cut corners there is no clear penalty for that kind of those. I go again.
Why would you not take on that kind of behavior where you could perform and seemingly face no consequences? So I thought that was another interesting part of this, that you only see the kind of things change once there's like a clear ten. They introduced into the situation. You know I mean obviously there there's something a little intuitive and obvious it and could about this. But I think it's quite well event. I mean, I think that when we think about things from some of the financial industry scandals that we ve had to questions that we have about police misconduct, it and other things that there is often a sort of a few bad apples impulse exists, one place her another and to say that look, you know. Individual acts of misconduct, like don't necessarily reflect on institutions and baseball, is, is always a fine thing to look at because it is very quantified right, so you can do lots and lots and lots of detailed statistical analysis and on what's happening.
in a way that's hard and a lot of should real world enterprises it and activities- and you know you just seeing here that, like there's a tendency for right to spread right, which it's like a crazy contention of, but like it, it is a real thing right when there is not zealous efforts at detection and punishment. This kind of wrongdoing spreads throughout organizations and it spreads and in specific ways wait. It's not just that, like in general people, starting performance, enhancing drugs, but specifically The people who work with the guy, who is breaking the world and getting away with it, started breaking the rules and getting away with it to right, and then you can see out a whole transmission mechanism as people get traded it and swap teams, and you have to detect and punish what I'm doing. It's like, okay, you know fair enough
but you know it's not something that we always do, particularly when the institutions that people work in are powerful politically financially or have a lot of cultural cloud. But dad sort of I mean I don't actually have a super strong view about performance, enhancing drugs in baseball, but for a long time that was both a sentiment that using steroids was bad, that that was like a bad problem, but also that, like baseball was good and medium like really want to give baseball hard time and like it, I don't know it, it doesn't work. I mean. I think, that the other thing to note here is- and I think this from our criminal justice percent if that's, what changed in two thousand and three wasn't necessarily that, like all of a sudden, a few high profile, people were caught and punished right or changing. Two thousand and three was the universal preventive measure.
you know they signed a new union agreement that allowed urine testing for all players for the first time since the mid eighties so Certainty of getting apprehended if you are using steroids increase, not necessarily what you had to fear if you dead and that's Worth noting, as we continue to have arguments about, do you need to increase punishments to make people less likely to do things verses? How likely are they to get caught to begin with, but I also think it's true that late, there's, only one Jose can say, go right. You can imagine a world where the people who Jose say, go talk to you, steroids, go and teach others too steroids right that, like that that you know once you see somebody in your clubhouse whose using you start using. That's not what happened. It appears that that country, go was unusually evangelical or at least unusually open and what that says to me there was still even during the steroids era, enough stigma.
Among baseball players, that lake it wasn't something. You talked openly about an clubhouses most of the time and therefore you wouldn't necessarily know. If your teammate was using much less feel comfortable approaching him about it so that actually says that there is a big difference, We are allowing something to continue quietly and allow somebody like- can sago, whose like a big boy guy, who problem?
We was not only a lake leading clubhouse figure because he was a good player, but because he's a big brash guy to be talking in semi open settings about the use of sterile, it's right cause I've. You could see another theory of transmission here where it's, the teams that are playing can Seiko in getting beating like will. What do we do? How do we act like them? How do we become better and like the infer that you could see the bad acting transferring in that way, because it would make sense, for you know the competitors going up against him to be the ones who really felt like they needed to gain whenever it vantage? Was there, so I do think you know like us earlier, like it's not surprising, when someone has a way to get ahead. Other people emulate it, but I think it is you know you could have seen this going either way who is who who is doing the emulating as at the people who are playing against, can say, go you know you're either you take it too like finances it like other banks that are trying to get a heads up on. You know the banks that are doing really well or is it the people closer to them?
person who can see first hand. You are you no kind of like on the same side who who are rooting for the same team? So I think it is interesting, Nina like Darrow saying that their there wasn't a stigma: that you didn't see, even though there would be like a pretty strong incentive for other baseball teams to adapt behaviour that could make them better competitors that it seems like you read. It really needed that, like one even alcohol steroids user around two to lead to that kind of behavior, actually changing the big brash guy factor also, of course, reminds me of Donald Trump, where I feel like this sort of an endless dialogue takes place in my social circles around you know is Donald Trump Lake, a uniquely,
terrible person in some way or has there always been like structural racism in America, an elite, corruption and powerful men, mistreating women, and then it's like, while no cause like you, so flagrant and Bala BAR and that's really different and then a kind of almost you know. I were Nestlike. No, it's better because he's like flush, the hypocrisy out of the system and like what you see you with us, I can say go is that it is more socially destructive to have the cheater be unsubtle about it. That, like we, could all look at bury bonds and be like a kind of seems like, as you say, but like that wasn't his story about it right and that that is different. That, like having people nominally uphold, the normative values of the system is restraining impulse, even if they.
treating, and I think you see in the endless low grade corruption scandals about the Trump cabinet that it's like having the president, clearly not care that he is like. Has all these business conflicts of interest sends a very different signal to the people on his tea him than if it was just that like he was in some quiet, subtle way being on the topic, but I think that the flip side of that and I'm gonna bring us back to MAX favour because man, I don't talk enough about ex vapor, but the thing about have the big brash guy style of leadership. Is it doesn't change those norms permanently rightly its tied very much too that individual? And so this is again where, like the fact that you're not seeing second order effects from the people who start in a presumably
started using steroids because they saw can say, go doing it in themselves, not necessarily talking to their teammates about AIDS. If you have one guy who can flagrantly violated the norms and get away with it and that inspires people to write his coattails if the coat tails. disappeared that doesn't necessarily inspire people too. You know, take up the cause and become the inner continue on the path forged by the leader. It's like a well that errors, I've done now. You know we now have a new leader, its makes it very difficult. Our institutions to processed which is why'd. You know bureaucrats He is a more modern sale of governance than charismatic leadership, but it does mean that if you have an aberration, the operation. You know, because it's a person eyes or goes away that things can go. aren't to would, if not normal, at least their previous level of stigmatization decision,
far from baseball to MAX labour. That is fantastic. You know, podcast thought leadership exists with both charismatic leadership. With you telling your friends and family about the weeds how much you should like it, but also through bureaucratic, rational methods need to rate ass. Itunes, Weber else, you get your pride casts door to door like your local differences. There are multiple go door to door, we are not responsible for the under represented community is might become alarmed if you show up at their door recommending by guests, but I do think you now to tell your friends, but also telling anonymous internet bureaucracies about how great the show is, is a wonderful idea So with that out, some thank our engineer. Griffin Tanner are producer, Brigitte Armstrong. We are going to do that on Friday,
Transcript generated on 2021-09-12.