- Author: The Fresno Bee by Christian Arana
No phrase better defines the American experience than the clear directive: No taxation without representation. With one set of words, a nation's value system is captured and guided into the future, giving every single resident a voice.
You'd think we would do everything in our power to protect and preserve that which makes just representation possible — like making sure the decennial census count is accurate, right?
Let's take a moment to look at lessons learned. When the British Parliament ruled this land and passed a series of taxes on stamps and sugar without consent, this phrase became the rallying call among colonists demanding fair political representation. Give us a seat at the table or forfeit your right to govern, it declared.
We know what happened next. The movement led to a series of acts of resistance — from the Boston Tea Party to the First Continental Congress — and eventually transformed into the American Revolution, giving birth to the representative democracy we see today.
Yet here we are, 243 years later, with the United States of America bordering on reneging that sacrosanct American guarantee with an undercount of Latinos in the 2020 Census.
The U.S. Census is designed to count all residents regardless of where they live or how many people are in a given household. From that count, seats in the U.S. House of Representatives are apportioned to the states, and critical federal dollars are allocated for schools, hospitals and roads.
Clearly, the numbers matter, especially in California where billions of federal monies could be lost due to an inaccurate tally. In a state where Latinos make up nearly 40 percent of the population and contribute to its thriving economy, we need to get this right or the 2020 Census could shape up to be one of the most disastrous threats to our democracy since our founding.
A series of factors could be credited with a potential undercount. To start, this will be the first census to move online. An online census sounds ideal for reduced costs, but considering that only 54 percent of Latinos in California access the internet through broadband, compared to 69 percent of all Californians, this move will prove difficult for counting the Latino population.
The Trump administration's attempt to add a citizenship question to the census was dealt a legal blow this month when a U.S. district judge ruled adding such a question violates federal statute. But since the administration promises not to quit the threat to add the question, the mistrust that officials are breeding stands to scare immigrant and Latino communities from participating, which could lead to an even greater undercount of these populations and prevent states from their rightful share of representatives in the U.S. House.
This hits home hard in California, where more than 15 million Latinos work and live, including close to 3 million undocumented immigrants. Since California is the most populous state in the union, constitutionally speaking, it should also possess the maximum share of political representatives at the federal level. Because Latinos and immigrants were counted in the 2010 Census, California obtained the most number of members in the U.S. House at 53.
This seems like a big number, but even 10 years ago Latinos were undercounted, including more than 100,000 Latino children ages 0-4.
The Latino Community Foundation, a statewide foundation in California focused on unleashing the political power of Latinos, continues to call for a fair and accurate count of Latinos, and planning ways with like-minded groups to do so. LCF began in early 2018 to actively engage Latinos up and down the state with a roadmap to prepare for the 2020 Census.
California is also stepping up, issuing an application for community-based organizations to help conduct critical education and outreach for getting the census count right. Organizations must apply by Feb. 15 to be considered for dollars that both former Gov. Jerry Brown and current Gov. Gavin Newsom budgeted to achieve a successful count.
There is still hope in achieving a complete count, but time is getting tight. It's on us, the 57 million Latinos who live in this country and who are yearning to be politically represented.
Like our founding fathers who said that a true representative democracy derives from the will, and the taxes, of the people, it's time to view counting in the census as an act of resistance. For to resist, we must exist. The census is the mechanism to make sure all voices are represented.
Christian Arana is policy director with the Latino Community Foundation in San Francisco.
Source: Published originally on FresnoBee.com, The importance of counting Latinos in the 2020 Census, by Christian Arana , January 30, 2019.
- Author: Pewresearch.org by Jeffrey S. Passel & D’Vera Cohn
Births to unauthorized immigrants accounted for about one-in-three births (32%) to foreign-born mothers in the U.S. in 2014, according to the estimates.
The decrease in births to unauthorized immigrants from 2009 to 2014 contrasts with the trend for the U.S. unauthorized immigrant population overall, which has stabilized. The number of births and the total population both generally rose through the 1990s and 2000s, peaked in 2006 (births) or 2007 (population), and then declined as the recession of 2007-2009 lingered.
About 11.1 million unauthorized immigrants lived in the U.S. in 2014, according to a Pew Research Center estimate. They made up 3.5% of the nation's total population, but accounted for a higher share of births because the immigrant population overall (lawful and unauthorized) includes a higher share of women in their childbearing years and has higher birthrates than the overall U.S. population.
These estimates are based mainly on data from the U.S. Census Bureau's Current Population Survey and its American Community Survey, using the widely accepted residual methodology employed by Pew Research Center for many years. These new estimates update and revise previous estimates for 2012 (310,000 previously; now 305,000) and 2013 (295,000 previously; now 290,000) based on more detailed data sources.
A separate Pew Research Center report released earlier, which examines trends in births to all foreign-born women, finds that these births are driving growth in U.S. births overall. The report also looks at characteristics of immigrant mothers, and finds that a rising share of births to immigrant mothers are to those who are married.
However, views differ by political party, and the gap between supporters of the two parties on this question has widened. By 75% to 23% in the 2015 survey, Democrats opposed changing the Constitution to ban birthright citizenship. Republicans were more split: About half (53%) favor amending the Constitution, while 44% are opposed.
In 2014, there were 4.7 million U.S.-born children younger than 18 living with unauthorized-immigrant parents. There also were 725,000 children younger than 18 who were unauthorized immigrants themselves and lived with unauthorized-immigrant parents. These totals do not count U.S.-born children of unauthorized immigrants who do not live with their parents.
The share of children of unauthorized immigrants who are U.S. born has been increasing over the past two decades. This likely is related to the fact that long-term residents constitute a rising share of unauthorized immigrants. In 2014, two-thirds of adult unauthorized immigrants had lived in the U.S. for a decade or more, compared with 41% in 2005.
Source: Published originally on PewResearchCenter, Number of babies born to unauthorized immigrants in U.S. continues to decline, by Jeffrey S. Passel and D'Vera Cohn, October 20, 2016.
- Author: Rice University Office of Public Affairs by Amy Hodges
The study, “Gender, Acculturation and Smoking Behavior Among U.S. Asian and Latino Immigrants,” examines smoking prevalence and frequency among Asian and Latino U.S. immigrants. The research focuses on how gender differences in smoking behavior are shaped by aspects of acculturation and the original decision to migrate. The study was published recently in the journal Social Science & Medicine and is available online.
“We know that after migrants come to the U.S., their health behavior and health status changes the longer they live in the United States,” said Bridget Gorman, chair and professor of sociology at Rice and the study's lead author. “Our study examined how time spent in the U.S., along with other aspects reflective of acculturation to the U.S., relates to smoking behavior among Asian and Latino migrants.”
The study found that smoking prevalence among Asian immigrant men was more than four times that of Asian immigrant women (30.4 percent and 7.1 percent, respectively); among Latino immigrants, men's smoking prevalence was more than twice that of women's (29.5 percent and 12.6 percent, respectively). For smoking frequency, Asian men on average smoked 2.5 more cigarettes per day than Asian women, compared with 1.5 more cigarettes per day that Latino men smoked than Latino women.
In addition, their analyses also showed that smoking increases with duration of U.S. residence among Asian immigrants (both prevalence and frequency) and among Latino immigrants (frequency only). However, the study also found that independent of time spent in the U.S., “immigrants who form strong connections to the U.S. through English-language proficiency and citizenship acquisition benefit in terms of reduced smoking.” Gorman said this may be because the stresses associated with adapting to the U.S. have declined; but since both English-language proficiency and citizenship are associated with higher socio-economic standing, this might also indicate that smoking is lower among the most economically well-off migrants.
Gorman also noted that although there “tends to be an uptick in unhealthy behaviors like smoking after migration, patterns differ across ethnic groups and between men and women. In particular, women's smoking behavior tends to increase more after migration to the U.S. than men.” Gorman said the uptick in smoking among women may be due to differences in smoking stigma that exist for women in Latin America and especially Asia. She said that the smoking stigma for women is significantly less in the U.S., so when gender differences in smoking between the native and foreign-born are compared, gender gaps tend to be much larger among migrant populations living in the U.S.
The current study found that accounting for gender differences in aspects of acculturation (including time spent in the U.S., citizenship status, and English-language proficiency) explained gender differences in smoking frequency for both Asian and Latino migrants.
The study used a sample of 3,249 Asian and Latino migrant adults aged 18 and older. The study examined how smoking behavior relates to age at migration, citizenship status and length of time in the U.S., how frequently they visit their home country and how proficient they are in their native language and in English.
Source: US immigration is associated with rise in smoking among Latinos and Asians, Rice University Office of Public Affairs by Amy Hodges, August 11, 2014.
- Author: National Council of La Raza
Latinos continue to be among the most unbanked ethnic minorities in the United States. The report highlights the challenges confronted by the unemployed, differences in financial engagement by citizenship status and the use of bank technology by participants.
The report found an important link between naturalization (citizenship) and increased usage of financial systems—noncitizen Latinos were less likely to engage in banking practices. The report also found that 73 percent of the participants managed to put away some savings despite the down economy and that good customer service was paramount to deciding where to bank.
“As the Senate debates how to overhaul our nation’s immigration system, it is interesting to note the link between immigration status and engagement in our financial institutions,” stated Janet Murguía, President and CEO of NCLR.
“Many eligible immigrants have been unable to naturalize because of the cost prohibitive fees, while others may be struggling with finding a way to fully legalize their status under current law. There is no doubt that Hispanics are an increasingly critical consumer base, particularly in times of economic recovery when their full participation helps to stimulate the economy through purchases and savings. The more engaged and fully participating in our financial services they are, the more they and the nation benefit.”
The survey also delved into the use of technology for banking purposes, finding that younger Latinos were more likely to use mobile banking technology when compared to older Latinos. Those who had a bank account were more likely to have access to the Internet than Latinos without a bank account and were more likely to have performed a financial transaction using this medium. Those who demonstrated reluctance to using the internet for this purpose were primarily concerned with the security of personal information.
The report details a body of recommendations to increase Latino financial engagement, including expanding citizenship and economic integration, increasing account ownership through goal-based outreach and product development, promotion of personal savings and bridging the tech divide with trusted partners that can help assuage fears of privacy violations.
“Bringing Latinos into the practice of engaging financial institutions to create savings, make purchases and manage their personal finances will be of huge benefit not just to their long-term success, but to the nation’s short- and long-term economic growth and stability. We are encouraged that through building the right partnerships and engaging in purposeful outreach and educational efforts, we will be able to effectively reach the underserved Latino community,” concluded Murguía.
Source: Originally published on National Council of La Raza as Latino Financial Access and Inclusion in California, June 6, 2013
- Author: Pew Research Center for the People and the Press
Majorities across all demographic and political groups say there should be a way for illegal immigrants who meet certain requirements to stay in the U.S. legally. Among those who favor providing legal status, the balance of opinion is in favor of allowing those here illegally who meet the requirements to apply for citizenship. However, no more than about half in any demographic group supports permitting illegal immigrants to apply for citizenship.
In 2011, there were about 40 million immigrants in the United States. Of that total, 11.1 million, or 28 percent, were in this country illegally.
Thinking about immigrants generally, 49 percent of Americans say they strengthen the country because of their hard work and talents, while 41 percent say they are a burden because they take jobs, health care and housing. In a June 2010 poll, 39 percent said immigrants strengthened the country while 50 percent said they were a burden.
In addition, more Americans think that the growing number of newcomers in the United States strengthens society than believe that they threaten traditional American customs and values. About half (52%) say the growing number of newcomers in the U.S. strengthens society, while 43% say the influx of newcomers threatens traditional American values and customs.
Broad Support for Legal Status for Illegal Immigrants
Support for granting legal status to illegal immigrants is wide ranging. Eight-in-ten non-Hispanic blacks (82%) and Hispanics (80%) say those in the United States illegally should be allowed to stay if they meet certain requirements; about half of blacks (52%) and Hispanics (49%) say illegal immigrants should be able to apply for citizenship.
Two-thirds of non-Hispanic whites (67%) say illegal immigrants should be allowed to stay in the country legally, while 31 percent say they should not. Four-in-ten whites say people in the United States illegally should have the chance to apply for citizenship if they meet certain requirements.
Among whites with no college degree, 61 percent favor allowing those in the U.S. illegally to stay legally, while 37 percent disagree. There is more support among white college graduates for permitting illegal immigrants to stay in the country legally (81% say they should, while just 17 percent say they should not).
The partisan differences over providing some form of legal status for illegal immigrants are modest: 76 percent of Democrats, 70 percent of independents and 64 percent of Republicans say illegal immigrants should be allowed to stay in the United States if they meet certain requirements.
Whites in both parties are divided along educational lines over how to deal with illegal immigrants in the United States: Among white Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents, 92 percent of college graduates favor allowing illegal immigrants to stay in the U.S. legally if they meet certain requirements; support falls to 68 percent among white Democrats and Democratic leaners who have not completed college. Similarly, there is a 20-point education gap among white Republicans and GOP-leaning independents (75% of college graduates vs. 55% of non-college grads).
Racial, Ethnic, Partisan Differences in Views of Immigrants
While majorities across all groups support legal status for illegal immigrants, there are sharp differences in opinions about the impact of immigrants on the country. Opinions about immigrants have become somewhat more positive among most groups since 2010.
Fully 74 percent of Hispanics say that immigrants strengthen the country because of their hard work and talents. About half of blacks (52%) also say that immigrants strengthen the country, compared with just 41 percent of whites.
College graduates express far more positive opinions about the impact of immigrants than do those with less education. Fully 67 percent say immigrants strengthen the country, compared with 41 percent of those with no more than a high school education.
Opinions about whether the growing number of newcomers to the United States strengthens society or threatens American values break down along similar lines. Whites are divided (45% vs. 49%). Majorities of Hispanics (67%) and blacks (62%) say the growing number of newcomers strengthens American society.
Religion and Views of Immigrants
Majorities of all major religious groups say there should be a way for immigrants who are currently in the U.S. illegally and who meet certain requirements to stay in the country.
For the most part, those who favor legal status for illegal immigrants say they should be allowed to apply for citizenship.
Opinions among major religious groups are more divided when it comes to the impact of immigrants on the country.
A majority of white evangelical Protestants (55%) say that immigrants are burden because they take jobs, housing and health care, while about as many (58%) say they threaten traditional American customs and values.
Other religious groups have less negative views of the impact of immigrants. These differences in opinions, however, are largely the result of underlying differences between religious groups in race, political ideology, party identification and other factors; after controlling for these factors, the independent impact of religion is minimal.
Source: Originally published in Pew Research Center for the People and the Press as Most Say Illegal Immigrants Should Be Allowed To Stay, But Citizenship Is More Divisive, March 28, 2013.