The U.S. Census Bureau has faced declining public participation in its surveys and an erosion of trust in government for decades. But current and former bureau employees highlight a new challenge in the agency’s efforts to gather sufficient responses for essential national statistics.
The Trump administration’s controversial data management practices have raised privacy concerns, inspiring investigations and lawsuits that claim violations of data protections. These issues have left many Americans apprehensive about sharing their information in ongoing government surveys.
A former Census Bureau field representative, who declined to be named, reported that many families questioned the safety of their data, expressing worry that the information might be sold or mishandled. They recounted experiences of encountering skepticism from households they visited for interviews, with some respondents specifically referencing concerns about influential figures like Elon Musk, who has been linked to the Trump administration’s controversial data strategies.
A current field representative echoed these sentiments, stating that their comfort level in conducting surveys has diminished compared to previous years. Individuals who had previously been willing to share their data now express significant concern about how their privacy is protected during the data-collection process.
Trust is fundamental to the Census Bureau’s operation, and the current atmosphere of distrust has left agency employees disheartened. The field representative lamented the level of skepticism among the public and expressed deep concern over the possible misuse of the data they collect as well as the effectiveness of privacy assurances they provide.
Nancy Bates, a former senior researcher in survey methodology at the Census Bureau, has observed a decline in public confidence in the census since the 1990s. She explained that federal law prevents the agency from releasing identifiable information about individuals or businesses to outside parties, including law enforcement agencies. However, a report Bates contributed to noted that 28% of respondents in a survey conducted in 2018 expressed high levels of concern regarding their confidentiality with responses provided in the upcoming 2020 census.
Bates remarked that, even prior to controversies surrounding the Trump administration, the Census Bureau was grappling with significant public mistrust regarding privacy. She noted that unauthorized access to data has only increased public worry after having seen recent instances of data breaches and misuse.
The legal issues surrounding the Trump administration and claims of data privacy violations have contributed to a general unease about the potential for government misuse of personal information. Critics fear that the administration’s efforts could result in compromised government data systems, leading to unauthorized data leaks and increased vulnerability to identity theft.
While there has been no direct evidence implicating the Census Bureau in these matters, the public’s perception of the Bureau could suffer as a result. Bates pointed out that many individuals may not distinguish between different federal agencies, leading them to assume that data access problems stemming from one agency, such as the DOGE initiative, also apply to the Census Bureau.
White House spokesman Kush Desai responded to these concerns by downplaying the issue, suggesting that the number of individuals refusing to engage with Census representatives is not unprecedented, and emphasizing that linking widespread census mistrust to the DOGE initiative is overly simplistic. Meanwhile, Ron Jarmin, acting director of the Census Bureau, reiterated the agency’s commitment to deliver accurate and timely data while embracing modern technology and data science to enhance efficiency and uphold statistics quality.
Experts outside the Census Bureau caution that lingering public unease regarding the Trump administration’s data practices could have detrimental long-term effects on the crucial statistics needed for political representation, economic monitoring, allocation of public service funds, and a better understanding of societal needs.
Concerns regarding trust in government could also manifest in biased statistical outcomes. Raghunathan, a statistician at the University of Michigan, voiced apprehensions that nonresponse bias could increase in federal surveys if certain communities perceive government data collection as a threat, particularly for immigrant populations fearing enforcement of immigration laws.
He explained that if members of specific communities opt out of surveys due to distrust, it could significantly distort the data’s representativeness, which is essential for informed policymaking.
The ongoing challenges faced by federal statistical agencies in accurately counting marginalized populations, such as Black, Indigenous, Latino, and Asian communities, have been highlighted for years. The Census has historically undercounted people of color, resulting in skewed demographic data that complicates funding and resource allocation.
As fears about government surveillance and data access grow, so do the barriers to collecting comprehensive responses from those already marginalized. These concerns, voices like economist Katharine Abraham, who has served multiple presidential administrations, underscored that as worries intensify, the ability to collect accurate data from marginalized communities could worsen.
Another implication of the current administration’s data handling practices is that it may hinder efforts to utilize existing government records to address declining survey participation. Concerns surrounding the fixed purposes of data collection and its protection from misuse could erode trust vital for compliance with future surveys.
The push for data pooling by DOGE sheds light on the difficulty of ensuring that data is used strictly for statistical purposes. Some experts argue that while administrative data might alleviate some burdens of direct data collection, the mistrust engendered by the current political landscape underscores the urgency of clarifying the boundaries of data accessibility.
Abraham noted the troublesome parallels between DOGE’s data initiatives and historical proposals, including a failed suggestion for a national data center that provoked fears about privacy. The proposed national data center in 1965 sparked significant backlash and ultimately led to the creation of the Privacy Act in 1974, which remains relevant in ongoing litigation against recent initiatives.
Current experts convey a similar, albeit worried, sentiment that if attainable safeguards are not implemented, backlash to the administration’s data strategies could make crucial statistical analysis more problematic. Johnson also stressed that the current climate presents a significant risk to the argument that government records can be accessed confidentially and solely for statistical purposes.
Moreover, state officials managing their office records are apprehensive about federal data-handling. This could complicate future collaborations the Census Bureau seeks to establish when attempting to access state records to enhance the 2030 census operation. Reporting from demographer Jeff Hardcastle revealed varied enthusiasm for collaboration among states, potentially leading to discrepancies in census counts, which poses challenges for equitable resource distribution.
Casting a long shadow over the Census Bureau’s future, Bates analyzed the urgency of the situation. She highlighted that employees will have significant challenges as they prepare for both the upcoming major field test and the 2030 census, while simultaneously dealing with ongoing surveys amidst a backdrop of public distrust.
“It’s akin to a tsunami, pushing public sentiment towards greater mistrust levels towards the government,” Bates mused. “I fear it could take years to rebuild the trust that once existed.”
image source from：https://www.npr.org/2025/06/04/nx-s1-5397191/us-census-bureau-labor-statistics-doge-data
