Americans Continue to Drop Their Landline Phones

A picture taken on October 12, 2011 in the French western city of Rennes shows (FromL) a Samsung phone, a Blackberry phone and an Iphone 4.
National Journal
Steven Shepard
Dec. 18, 2013, 8:57 a.m.

More than two in five Amer­ic­an adults live in house­holds without a land­line tele­phone, the most re­cent meas­ure of so­ci­ety’s move­ment to­ward mo­bile phones — a phe­nomen­on that con­tin­ues to roil polit­ic­al pro­fes­sion­als, par­tic­u­larly poll­sters, who rely on phone in­ter­views to de­term­ine the views of the broad­er pop­u­la­tion.

Thirty-eight per­cent of adults in the U.S. live in house­holds that have only a wire­less tele­phone, while 2.2 per­cent have no phone at all, ac­cord­ing to new data col­lec­ted by the Cen­ters for Dis­ease Con­trol and Pre­ven­tion dur­ing the first half of 2013 and re­leased Wed­nes­day. A shrink­ing ma­jor­ity of adults, 52.8 per­cent, have both a land­line and wire­less phone, while only 6.9 per­cent live in a house­hold with just a land­line phone and no mo­bile phone.

The num­ber of Amer­ic­ans abandon­ing their land­line phones con­tin­ues to in­crease. In the second half of last year, 36.5 per­cent of adults lived in wire­less-only house­holds. The change is more dra­mat­ic when viewed through a wider time win­dow: Just three years ago, 24.9 per­cent of adults lived in cell-phone-only house­holds.

The new re­port un­der­scores the dra­mat­ic changes over the past 15 years in the ways in which Amer­ic­ans com­mu­nic­ate with one an­oth­er, and it also high­lights a prob­lem for polit­ic­al con­sult­ants who rely on tele­phones — either as a means of meas­ur­ing voters’ in­ten­tions and po­s­i­tions, or a way to reach voters to spread their mes­sage.

The prob­lem isn’t just that Amer­ic­ans are abandon­ing their land­line phones, it’s that dif­fer­ent demo­graph­ic groups have made the switch at dif­fer­ent rates. The ma­jor­ity of Amer­ic­ans un­der age 35 are cell phone-only, but just 12.6 per­cent of Amer­ic­ans 65 and older are. Half of His­pan­ics only have wire­less phones, but that num­ber drops to 35.1 per­cent among whites. A whop­ping 74.7 per­cent of adults liv­ing with un­re­lated room­mates didn’t have a land­line phone at home, but just 27.2 per­cent of adults who own their home did.

Wire­less sub­sti­tu­tion also var­ies by state. Ac­cord­ing to a sep­ar­ate re­port ana­lyz­ing 2012 data, also re­leased Wed­nes­day by the CDC, more than half, 52.3 per­cent, of Idaho­ans live in wire­less-only house­holds, while just 19.4 per­cent of New Jer­sey res­id­ents do. The states with the greatest num­bers of adults in cell-phone-only house­holds tend to be more rur­al: Mis­sis­sippi (49.4 per­cent), Arkan­sas (49 per­cent), and Utah (46.6 per­cent). Mean­while, res­id­ents of North­east­ern states are the least likely to give up their land­lines: Con­necti­c­ut (20.6 per­cent), Delaware (23.3 per­cent), New York (23.5 per­cent), Mas­sachu­setts (24.1 per­cent), and Rhode Is­land (24.9 per­cent).

Poll­sters, in par­tic­u­lar, have grappled with Amer­ic­ans’ aban­don­ment of cell phones for years. Call­ing cell phones is more ex­pens­ive than di­al­ing land­lines be­cause the phone num­ber must be dialed manu­ally, per fed­er­al law. That makes auto­mated calls to cell phones il­leg­al, and it means that even those live-caller polls that use a com­puter dialer to save time can’t reach cells, either.

Be­cause dif­fer­ent demo­graph­ic groups are re­pla­cing their land­line phones at dif­fer­ent rates, call­ing too few cell phones car­ries sig­ni­fic­ant risks. For ex­ample, a re­cent auto­mated tele­phone poll in Mis­sis­sippi meas­ured voters’ opin­ions about Re­pub­lic­an Sen. Thad Co­chran’s reelec­tion bid. But that poll­ster dialed only land­line phones, which means that voters without land­lines — who con­sti­tute a sig­ni­fic­ant per­cent­age of the elect­or­ate, giv­en that roughly half of adults there live in homes with only cell phones — couldn’t be a part of the sample. (The poll­ster in Mis­sis­sippi, the Demo­crat­ic firm Pub­lic Policy Polling, is cur­rently so­li­cit­ing plans for in­clud­ing cell-only re­spond­ents.)

There are some factors that mit­ig­ate — to an ex­tent — the rami­fic­a­tions of these changes for polit­ic­al polling. It’s true that turnout rates are high­er among some of the demo­graph­ics that are more likely to have land­line phones, like seni­ors. And most poll­sters also do a pretty good job weight­ing the sample to re­flect the pop­u­la­tion they are try­ing to mod­el — wheth­er all adults or a likely elect­or­ate. (Though, some­times, the choices poll­sters make in weight­ing their samples gets them in trouble, as in PPP’s case.)

Some poll­sters have made the choice to call more cell phones. On the pub­lic side, half of Gal­lup’s in­ter­views are con­duc­ted by cell phone, and roughly half of re­spond­ents in the Pew Re­search Cen­ter’s latest poll were con­tac­ted by cell phone, too.

On the polit­ic­al side, the is­sue is more com­plic­ated. PPP works for a num­ber of out­side Demo­crat­ic groups, des­pite the fact they can’t call cell phones. Re­pub­lic­ans, stung by 2012 losses some didn’t see com­ing, launched an ex­haust­ive re­view of their polling pro­ced­ures, which res­ul­ted in spe­cif­ic re­com­mend­a­tions from the Re­pub­lic­an Na­tion­al Com­mit­tee and Na­tion­al Re­pub­lic­an Con­gres­sion­al Com­mit­tee to in­crease the per­cent­age of cell-phone in­ter­views in their sur­veys.

Some have sug­ges­ted that the an­swer to these prob­lems is sur­vey­ing people over the In­ter­net; news out­lets like the As­so­ci­ated Press and Re­u­ters have re­cently ditched their tele­phone-polling op­er­a­tions and moved on­line. But In­ter­net polls are of­ten non-ran­dom, and many poll­sters re­main skep­tic­al of the ap­proach.

There is a lack of con­sensus on a path for­ward for polit­ic­al polling, but, if cur­rent trends con­tin­ue, roughly half of adults will be un­reach­able by land­line phone by 2016.

What We're Following See More »
STAFF PICKS
When It Comes to Mining Asteroids, Technology Is Only the First Problem
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Foreign Policy takes a look at the future of mining the estimated "100,000 near-Earth objects—including asteroids and comets—in the neighborhood of our planet. Some of these NEOs, as they’re called, are small. Others are substantial and potentially packed full of water and various important minerals, such as nickel, cobalt, and iron. One day, advocates believe, those objects will be tapped by variations on the equipment used in the coal mines of Kentucky or in the diamond mines of Africa. And for immense gain: According to industry experts, the contents of a single asteroid could be worth trillions of dollars." But the technology to get us there is only the first step. Experts say "a multinational body might emerge" to manage rights to NEOs, as well as a body of law, including an international court.

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Obama Reflects on His Economic Record
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Not to be outdone by Jeffrey Goldberg's recent piece in The Atlantic about President Obama's foreign policy, the New York Times Magazine checks in with a longread on the president's economic legacy. In it, Obama is cognizant that the economic reality--73 straight months of growth--isn't matched by public perceptions. Some of that, he says, is due to a constant drumbeat from the right that "that denies any progress." But he also accepts some blame himself. “I mean, the truth of the matter is that if we had been able to more effectively communicate all the steps we had taken to the swing voter,” he said, “then we might have maintained a majority in the House or the Senate.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Reagan Families, Allies Lash Out at Will Ferrell
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Ronald Reagan's children and political allies took to the media and Twitter this week to chide funnyman Will Ferrell for his plans to play a dementia-addled Reagan in his second term in a new comedy entitled Reagan. In an open letter, Reagan's daughter Patti Davis tells Ferrell, who's also a producer on the movie, “Perhaps for your comedy you would like to visit some dementia facilities. I have—I didn’t find anything comedic there, and my hope would be that if you’re a decent human being, you wouldn’t either.” Michael Reagan, the president's son, tweeted, "What an Outrag....Alzheimers is not joke...It kills..You should be ashamed all of you." And former Rep. Joe Walsh called it an example of "Hollywood taking a shot at conservatives again."

Source:
PEAK CONFIDENCE
Clinton No Longer Running Primary Ads
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

In a sign that she’s ready to put a longer-than-ex­pec­ted primary battle be­hind her, former Sec­ret­ary of State Hil­lary Clin­ton (D) is no longer go­ing on the air in up­com­ing primary states. “Team Clin­ton hasn’t spent a single cent in … Cali­for­nia, In­di­ana, Ken­tucky, Ore­gon and West Vir­gin­ia, while” Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-VT) “cam­paign has spent a little more than $1 mil­lion in those same states.” Meanwhile, Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Sanders’ "lone back­er in the Sen­ate, said the can­did­ate should end his pres­id­en­tial cam­paign if he’s los­ing to Hil­lary Clin­ton after the primary sea­son con­cludes in June, break­ing sharply with the can­did­ate who is vow­ing to take his in­sur­gent bid to the party con­ven­tion in Phil­adelphia.”

Source:
CITIZENS UNITED PT. 2?
Movie Based on ‘Clinton Cash’ to Debut at Cannes
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

The team behind the bestselling "Clinton Cash"—author Peter Schweizer and Breitbart's Stephen Bannon—is turning the book into a movie that will have its U.S. premiere just before the Democratic National Convention this summer. The film will get its global debut "next month in Cannes, France, during the Cannes Film Festival. (The movie is not a part of the festival, but will be shown at a screening arranged for distributors)." Bloomberg has a trailer up, pointing out that it's "less Ken Burns than Jerry Bruckheimer, featuring blood-drenched money, radical madrassas, and ominous footage of the Clintons."

Source:
×