Posted: Thu 10 Jul 2008 18:24 Post subject: Proposal: New U.S. Census Categories
A thought originating in a discussion about the proposed Carribean category in the 2010 U.S. Census:
Quote:
It seems to me that any group that uses race and not culture/ethnicity as a basis for categorization is going to have a difficult time wading through the quagmire of U.S. racial categorization. Why? Because a category like "Carribean" or "Arab" or even "Latino" describes people who inhabit or have cultural roots in a geographic area.
I have my issues with the Hispanic/Latino category (I just think that the way it is presented encourages people to think of Hispanics as a "race") but it does offer a possible solution to the embittered stalemate around the multiracial category.
What if Hispanics were not the only geographic/cultural block of U.S. inhabitants who were allowed to be counted? What if everyone was allowed to signify both their "race" (since the government insists on having this information) and ethnicity? What if multiracial and multiethnic people were also allowed to signify their preference to adopt one or both generic labels?
Although tribalism and nursing grudges may be a natural response to having weathered the battles for changing the current Census categories, can anyone deny that coalition-building and collaboration with groups perceived to be at odds is necessary to achieving goals?
Recent Pew research indicates that a significant minority of African Americans do not believe that Blacks are one race (I assume that "Black" and "African American" are synonyms here)
I see an opportunity to enlist many different types of people to change the way the U.S. government categorizes the races and ethnicities of its inhabitants. I think there are ways to help multiple groups see the benefit of this approach:
1. Change the language of the monoracial categories (no more nonsense like "Black or African American" or "White") to describe currently accepted genetic groups (i.e., European, Sub-Saharan African, East Asian, Native American)
2. Add the monoracial category of "multiracial" for anyone who wishes to officially recognize their admixture
3. Generate a list of geographically based cultural groups (i.e., Hispanic/Latino, Arab, Carribean, North African, Western European)
4. Add the category of "multiethnic" for anyone who wishes to officially recognize a more complex heritage
5. Allow people to opt out of both racial and ethnic categorization, but not categorization by nationality
The advantage I see is that anyone can collapse or expand categories depending on what they want to analyze. Another is that the approach mght appeal to a majority of groups and create new coalitions that the multiracial movement did not have in the 90s.
The disadvantage is that the ethnic categories could be very numerous. There might also be ardent opposition from racialists with pan-national perspectives. I also wonder whether the political parties would resist because it would make gerrymandering based on race more difficult. They could also like it, however, because it identifies more distinct voting blocs.
I'm not married to this idea and I do not pretend to have covered every base and noted every dis/advantage, but personally I am really tired of all of demonization that goes on here. If the African American political elite that opposed Census changes are losing influence, why not seize the opportunity to persuade a vast majority of people who might actually support change?
Joined: 30 Mar 2005 {Posts: 1053 } Location: New Jersey
Posted: Thu 10 Jul 2008 19:16 Post subject:
I'm no expert on this topic, but I like your solution very much, Maya. The idea of allowing for at least several geographically based cultural groups might go a long way to eradicate the idea from John Q. Public's mind that Hispanics/Latinos (or other such groups) form a "race." The only problems I can envision with this aspect of your suggestion (besides the ethnic categories being numerous) are determining what categories to recognize and where to draw the lines between various groups that have hazy boundaries (e.g. Western vs. Eastern Europeans, South vs. East Asians, etc.). Allowing people to choose multi-"racial" and multi-ethnic categories would certainly be welcome to many folks. I would add (unless you already allowed for it) that anyone choosing a multi-"racial" or multi-ethnic category would be permitted to select the actual multiple "races" or ethnicities they claim.
Maya's recommendation is similar to that of the American Anthropological Association. See http://www.aaanet.org/gvt/ombdraft.htm.
The census currently has a fill-in-the-blank "ethnicity" question on the long form. See Mary C. Waters, Ethnic Options: Choosing Identities in America (Berkeley: University of California, 1990) for an outstanding analysis of how Americans see themselves "ethnically."
Essentially, the American Anthropological Association recommends retiring the "race" and "Hispanic" questions and replacing them with a fill-in-the-blank ethnicity question on the short form.
I talked to a lady at the Office of Management and Budget that decides these groups and she said the groups are based mostly by historical discrimination. If they thought the category wasn't fully addressing a need to keep tabs on a type of discrimination then they expanded the category. Hispanic was put in place because of discrimination based mostly on xenophobia, versus race.
Quote:
For more than 20 years, the current standards in OMB's Statistical Policy Directive No. 15 have provided a common language to promote uniformity and comparability for data on race and ethnicity for the population groups specified in the Directive. They were developed in cooperation with Federal agencies to provide consistent data on race and ethnicity throughout the Federal Government. Development of the data standards stemmed in large measure from new responsibilities to enforce civil rights laws. Data were needed to monitor equal access in housing, education, employment, and other areas, for populations that historically had experienced discrimination and differential treatment because of their race or ethnicity. The standards are used not only in the decennial census (which provides the data for the "denominator" for many measures), but also in household surveys, on administrative forms (e.g., school registration and mortgage lending applications), and in medical and other research. The categories represent a social-political construct designed for collecting data on the race and ethnicity of broad population groups in this country, and are not anthropologically or scientifically based.
I talked to a lady at the Office of Management and Budget that decides these groups and she said the groups are based mostly by historical discrimination. If they thought the category wasn't fully addressing a need to keep tabs on a type of discrimination then they expanded the category.
I would dispute that. This give the impression that OMB (or the Census Bureau) decides. In fact, they have no authority to decide. They must do precisely what Congress orders them to do. And Congress decides based on what they think voters want. The OIRA (of the OMB) is simply the unit that disseminates the orders to all agencies.
I talked to a lady at the Office of Management and Budget that decides these groups and she said the groups are based mostly by historical discrimination. If they thought the category wasn't fully addressing a need to keep tabs on a type of discrimination then they expanded the category.
I would dispute that. This give the impression that OMB (or the Census Bureau) decides. In fact, they have no authority to decide. They must do precisely what Congress orders them to do. And Congress decides based on what they think voters want. The OIRA (of the OMB) is simply the unit that disseminates the orders to all agencies.
Division of Powers Frank. Congress can create an entity that sets rules but once set it is an executive power agency. They can not regulate it. It is part of the executive Branch. To overrule that Agencies decisions they have to come up with all new legislature.
An agency works within the parameters congress gave it when they create it, but they are not beholden to Congressional micromanagement. So long as they are within their parameters, they can and do make decisions.
'
FAQ
Search
Register
Log in
