Quantifying Populations- A Necessary Evil
In the Navarro article, the issue of race and identity as it relates to Latinos and the Census is discussed. One big problem with the Census is that it asks for one’s race, however, things are not always as black and white as the government would like them to be. This, and the fact that Latinos identify more with their Hispanic culture as opposed to a given race, leaves many Latinos questioning which box corresponding to race to check.
This article placed an emphasis on this distinction between race and culture in the Census, but I believe the premise as to why this issue hasn’t been resolved was undermined. Navarro includes the closing line, “It comes down to what yields the largest numbers for which group.” Ultimately, having greater numbers accompanies having a greater political influence. Depending on the issue at hand and which side you talk to, one group might want a higher Latino count, whereas other wouldn’t. This is more than just an issue with the Census, but shows how our political system encourages quantity over quality. We often see politicians focusing their campaigns on areas where their victory is feasible, but not guaranteed. No matter how genuine a politician’s interests are, they still need votes to win. Having political power is needed to actually implement change, which is why being able to quantify populations and population densities based on culture and race is so important.
With that being said, this issue of identifying populations- this time based on economics- is brought up in the Rampell article. It discusses the pros and cons of the American Community Survey, a longer, randomly distributed survey that asks questions which may seem intrusive.
Like the first article, the Rampell article brings up a good point- how far can the government go to obtain information if it benefits the greater good? Having the economic data that the survey provides is important for the growth of businesses and balancing our financial system. I believe this overpowers the intrusiveness of the survey. Within a country, especially one that is split on how much power government should hold in an individual’s life, some compromises have to be made, and this is simply one of them.
9 Comments
Ben
April 12, 2016Being of Hispanic origin myself, I was able to identify with the Navarro article. Though I consider myself to be Peruvian (or just hispanic is fine) in a cultural sense, race-wise I am white more than anything else. Considering hispanics make up such a large and growing portion of the American population, it’s surprising that there aren’t more inclusive choices in most inquiries about race/ethnicity. Likewise, as you pointed out, it is an unfortunate truth that our political system focuses primarily on quantity rather than quality leaving a large number of hispanics/latinos who don’t fall under the typical race categories feeling underrepresented. A more quality based form of representation would surely benefit a big chunk of Hispanics/Latinos.
Alasdair McLean
April 12, 2016I think you brought up some really interesting points in your post, Tala. It’s interesting (if not a little sad) that so much of our government focuses on such black and white categorizations of its’ people. I think one of the main issues that we have to address with politics is exactly what you were discussing- how do we break away from the quantity over quality emphasis in politics towards something that doesn’t necessarily look as nice on paper? It’s difficult to approach given that elections are based, similarly, on checkboxes- even if somebody felt equally happy with two candidates, but felt that a third candidate did not represent their political interests whatsoever, they would be forced to pick between one of the two politicians they like, hurting one of the politicians they like equally as much as the third candidate. Ironically, it’s exactly the same issue with the census boxes- perhaps a person identifies as two ethnicities but does not identify whatsoever with a third- that person would be forced to pick one over all; Although not an earth-shattering human-rights issue, it still feels wrong in some ways to force a person to self-categorize into very distinct categories with no leeway.
woo seok choi
April 12, 2016To be honest, I didn’t expect this to be a problem at all. As far as I was concerned, the race categories were white, black, hispanic, asian. I was shocked to hear that being hispanic wasn’t considered a race. I also don’t understand why the census can’t simply put in a hispanic category.
I agree that it’s important to change the census to be more inclusive. The line that struck me was, “When you sit on the subway, you just see a black person, and that’s really what determines the treatment.” We seem to overlook ethnic background a lot because it’s not as apparent as superficial traits. This disparity needs to be bridged in order to better represent the populations.
I also agree that the American Community Survey is necessary. I think that better understanding how rich or how poor different people are is needed in order to implement effective government plans.
Revital
April 19, 2016You brought up a great point that the census asks questions that aren’t black and white. I feel the same way, and the current census tries to pigeon hole people into narrow categories. Religion, culture and race are no longer multiple choice questions. People can’t fit themselves into groups, and then the “other” section isn’t representative of them. For those reasons, i think the census doesn’t need to know the breakup of the population. Is there a reason to keep categorizing ourselves into a race? Should it be better to consider us all a mixed race, or some sort of American race? I wonder if doing that would solve some of the racist issues in our country.
However, the census race issues are really important, as you mentioned, for economic issues. A store has to know their target populations to sell them what they need. It’s very easy to see how different stores in neighboring communities can sell extremely different things. For example, one store can sell predominantly Russian food, while the one across the street will sell Asian food. But if a store has no knowledge of the community and opens a South American store in a prominently white neighborhood, that might not go well for them.
I think the census needs to have a facelift to better adjust to the norms of society today. We need to have more wiggle room with the question, and try to get information without making it seem like the government is prying into the depths of your life, even thought they probably know all of the answers already.
Kevin M Call
April 19, 2016I agree with many of the comments made and the post, they were all insightful but they also express an idealized situation in which, a) if we continue to collect race data, allowing more specific categories to accommodate the American people, there would be an innumerable number of categories that would not achieve the main purpose of the current categorizations which is efficiency in quickly accessing and analyzing data, b) if we completely reject the collection of race data there are certain indicators that can show improvement overtime of certain groups of people that have been neglected by many of you.
It is not fair to say that politicians in favor only collect race data to access communities they can campaign to in hopes of winning them over. This race data can be used to determine if government programs are having the same effect across the races (taking also in consideration classes based on annual incomes). That being said, a low income black family should be improving over time at the same rate at a low income white family, if not this data can be utilized to fine-tune the system to correct these potential racial biases.
The census bases this not on culture, but on racial background and origin because over generations of time people generally stray from the culture of their ancestors and assimilate to a more Americanized culture. Racial background and origin does not change and with other collected data it can be determined if these groups of people have improved over time at the same rate as other groups of people. By people marking “other” this data over time is lost.
kevincall
April 19, 2016I agree with many of the comments made and the post, they were all insightful but they also express an idealized situation in which, a) if we continue to collect race data, allowing more specific categories to accommodate the American people, there would be an innumerable number of categories that would not achieve the main purpose of the current categorizations which is efficiency in quickly accessing and analyzing data, b) if we completely reject the collection of race data there are certain indicators that can show improvement overtime of certain groups of people that have been neglected by many of you.
It is not fair to say that politicians in favor only collect race data to access communities they can campaign to in hopes of winning them over. This race data can be used to determine if government programs are having the same effect across the races (taking also in consideration classes based on annual incomes). That being said, a low income black family should be improving over time at the same rate at a low income white family, if not this data can be utilized to fine-tune the system to correct these potential racial biases.
The census bases this not on culture, but on racial background and origin because over generations of time people generally stray from the culture of their ancestors and assimilate to a more Americanized culture. Racial background and origin does not change and with other collected data it can be determined if these groups of people have improved over time at the same rate as other groups of people. By people marking “other” this data over time is lost.
tamarnagel
April 19, 2016Tala, I really liked how you approached the articles and got to the root of what they were talking about. You pointed out the fact that Navarro wrote that, “It comes down to what yields the largest numbers for which group.” The status of so many Americans is perhaps left deliberately ambiguous so each group can skew the data the way they want. I also like how you pointed out the difference between race and culture. It definitely gave me some food for thought.
tanvirislam7
April 19, 2016I really liked the argument that you brought up of race vs culture in certain communities. This is something that’s definitely important for ethnic families because as generations span, there are instances where descendants do not feel as cultured as their ancestors before them and opt to view themselves as a race more than a culture because they become more “westernized”. Interestingly, by introducing the fact that Hispanic people have a preference for being known for their culture instead of being known for their race, you show the importance as well as the divisions and implications that categories on the census have. As a result, the data from the census can be questioned on how effective it is in helping cultural communities.
tanvirislam7
April 19, 2016I also liked the closing notion that you had about the importance of sacrificing some data to the government for the improvement of a process. Nowadays with the fear of being inspected by the government, many people believe that the government is encroaching on personal freedoms. Although that may be the case in some occasions, for the purposes of the census, the government is able to use the data collected to improve underprivileged neighborhoods and communities. Often hospitals like North shore LIJ use census data in understanding patient communities and in improving patient healthcare. This highlights the importance that the census and other public forms of quantitative data have.