Administration Delays Decision On Race, Ethnicity Data For Census

From National Public Radio:

A major decision on the way the U.S. government collects information about race and ethnicity through the census and other surveys was expected to be announced last week by the Trump administration.

But the White House's Office of Management and Budget, which sets standards for this type of data for all federal agencies, was silent on Friday, which OMB had said was the deadline for an announcement.

A spokesperson for OMB could not provide any information about the delay.

Under consideration by the White House are proposals introduced during the Obama administration that would fundamentally change how the government counts the Latino population. Another proposal would create a new checkbox on census forms and other federal surveys for people with roots in the Middle East or North Africa. If approved, the policy changes could have significant implications on the upcoming 2020 census, as well as legislative redistricting, civil rights laws and health statistics.

"[The delay] tells me the new administration has taken an interest in the possible changes ... and wants to way weigh in," says Terri Ann Lowenthal, a former staff director of the House oversight subcommittee for the census who now consults on census issues.

Visualization: Measuring Race and Ethnicity Across the Decades: 1790-2010

This interactive visualization allows users to understand how race and ethnicity categories have changed over time since the 1790 Census. Internet address: <http://www.census.gov/population/race/data/MREAD_1790_2010a.html>. For more information, see Random Samplings  Blog post.

Why the country’s youth are abandoning religious conservatism

From SALON. This article originally appeared on AlterNet.

There’s been a lot of media attention recently to the changing demographics of the United States, where, at current rates, people who identify as “white” are expected to become a minority by the year 2050. But in many ways, the shift in national demographics has been accelerated beyond even that. New data from the American Values Atlas shows that while white people continue to be the majority in all but 4 states in the country, white Christians are the minority in a whopping 19 states. And, nationwide, Americans who identify as Protestant are now in the minority for the first time ever, clocking in at a mere 47 percent of Americans and falling.

Study: Both Public, Police View Black Kids As Older, Less Innocent Than Whites

According to research published by the American Psychological Association, Black boys as young as 10 are proven to not be given the same presumption of childhood innocence as their White peers. Instead, they’re considered to be much older than what they are, perceived to be guilty, and face police violence if accused of a crime.

The study, published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, sought to examine the extent to which the racial bias exists and how significant the consequences are. Speaking on the report, Phillip Atiba Goff, PhD, explained, “Children in most societies are considered to be in a distinct group with characteristics, such as innocence and the need for protection. Our research found that Black boys can be seen as responsible for their actions at an age when White boys still benefit from the assumption that children are essentially innocent.”

More from News One.

Mixed race couples

Some race of spouse data:

2012 Pew study

Mapping Interracial/Interethnic Married-Couple Households in the United States: 2010

What else is there that described mixed-race couples?

How the War on Drugs Damages Black Social Mobility

The social mobility of black Americans has suffered collateral damage from the “War on Drugs.” Being convicted of a crime has devastating effects on the employment prospects and incomes of ex-felons and their children... These findings are often used to motivate efforts to reduce criminal behavior. They should also motivate changes in our criminal justice system, which unfairly punishes black Americans—often for victimless crimes that whites are at least as likely to commit.

An estimated one-third of black male Americans will spend time in state or federal prison at some point in their lifetime – more than double the rate from the 1970s and over five times higher than the rate for white males.

What’s driving the imprisonment of black men? Arrest data show a striking trend: arrests of blacks have fallen for violent and property crimes, but soared for drug related crimes. As of 2011, drug crimes comprised 14 percent of all arrests and a miscellaneous category that includes “drug paraphernalia” possession comprised an additional 31 percent of all arrests. Just 6 percent and 14 percent of arrests were for violent and property crimes, respectively.

More from Brookings.

50th Anniversary of the Civil Rights Act: July 2

On July 2, 1964, President Lyndon Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 into law. This landmark law prohibits discrimination on the basis of race in public accommodations, in publicly owned or operated facilities, in employment and union membership and in the registration of voters. To mark the anniversary, the U.S. Census Bureau has gathered key statistics that measure changes in some characteristics of different race groups to date. Note: This analysis uses the closest available year for each race/ethnic group to the historic act. Analysis is limited because of limited historical data for all racial and ethnic groups.

Population

1964

20,671,914 — The total estimated black population in the United States.

10.8% — The estimated percentage of the U.S. population that was black.

2013

41,623,897 — The total estimated black population in the United States.

13.2% — The estimated percentage of the U.S. population that was black.

1970

9.6 million — The total estimated Hispanic population in the United States.

4.7% — The estimated percentage of the U.S. population that was Hispanic.

2013

54.1 million — The total estimated Hispanic population in the United States.

Asians Fastest-Growing Race or Ethnic Group in 2012

The U.S. Census Bureau announced Asians were the nation’s fastest-growing race or ethnic group in 2012. Their population rose by 530,000, or 2.9 percent, in the preceding year, to 18.9 million, according to Census Bureau annual population estimates. More than 60 percent of this growth in the Asian population came from international migration.

By comparison, the Hispanic population grew by 2.2 percent, or more than 1.1 million, to just over 53 million in 2012. The Hispanic population growth was fueled primarily by natural increase (births minus deaths), which accounted for 76 percent of Hispanic population change. Hispanics remain our nation’s second largest race or ethnic group (behind non-Hispanic whites), representing about 17 percent of the total population.

These statistics are part of a set of annual population estimates released by race, Hispanic origin, age and sex. They examine population change for these groups nationally, as well as within all states and counties, between July 1, 2011, and July 1, 2012.

Native Hawaiians and Other Pacific Islanders (climbing 2.2 percent to about 1.4 million), American Indians and Alaska Natives (rising 1.5 percent to a little over 6.3 million), and blacks or African-Americans (increasing 1.3 percent to 44.5 million) followed Asians and Hispanics in percentage growth rates.

Six More Counties Become Majority-Minority

The nation’s total minority population increased by 1.9 percent and was 116 million, or 37 percent, of the total population in July 2012. (The minority population includes people in any category other than non-Hispanic white alone.) More than 11 percent (353) of the nation’s 3,143 counties were majority-minority as of July 1, 2012. Six of these counties became majority-minority populations since July 1, 2011: Mecklenburg, N.C. (Charlotte); Cherokee, Okla.; Texas, Okla.; Bell, Texas; Hockley, Texas; and Terrell, Texas.

The population of children younger than 5 is close to becoming majority-minority nationally, standing at 49.9 percent minority in 2012.

“The proportion of young children that is minority has been increasing since the 2010 Census and if this proportional growth continues, we expect that the crossover to majority-minority for this group will occur within the next couple of years,” Mesenbourg said.
Nation Ages, But Some Parts Become Younger

The nation’s median age climbed to 37.4 years in 2012, up from 37.3 one year earlier. There were some areas of the country, however, that became younger over the period. Six states experienced a decline in median age, led by North Dakota, where it fell by 0.5 years, from 36.6 to 36.1. The other states or equivalents with a drop in median age were Hawaii, Alaska, the District of Columbia, Kansas and Oklahoma. Likewise, median age declined for 382 counties, with Williams, N.D., experiencing the largest decrease, 1.7 years, from 36.6 to 34.9.

In 2012, there was a greater than 13-year difference between the states with the highest median age (Maine at 43.5) and lowest (Utah at 30.0). Among counties, the contrast is far more stark: about two generations. Sumter, Fla., with a median age of 64.8, stood at one extreme, and Madison, Idaho, at 23.0, was at the other. There were 53 counties where the median age was greater than 50, and 68 counties where it was less than 30.

Highlights for each race group and Hispanics, as well as minorities as a whole, age groups, and both sexes, at the national, state and county levels follow:

Hispanics
--California had the largest Hispanic population of any state on July 1, 2012 (14.5 million), as well as the largest numeric increase within the Hispanic population since July 1, 2011 (232,000). New Mexico had the highest percentage of Hispanics at 47.0 percent.
--Los Angeles County had the largest Hispanic population of any county (4.8 million) in 2012 and the largest numeric increase since 2011 (55,000). Starr County — on the Mexican border in Texas — had the highest share of Hispanics (95.6 percent).

Blacks
--New York had the largest black or African-American population of any state or equivalent as of July 1, 2012 (3.7 million); Texas had the largest numeric increase since 2011 (87,000). The District of Columbia had the highest percentage of blacks (51.6 percent), followed by Mississippi (38.0 percent).
--Cook, Ill. (Chicago) had the largest black or African-American population of any county in 2012 (1.3 million), and Harris, Texas (Houston) had the largest numeric increase since 2011 (20,000). Holmes, Miss., was the county with the highest percentage of blacks or African-Americans in the nation (83.1 percent).

Asians
--California had both the largest Asian population of any state (6.0 million) in July 2012 and the largest numeric increase of Asians since July 1, 2011 (136,000). Hawaii is our nation’s only majority-Asian state, with people of this group comprising 56.9 percent of the total population.
--Los Angeles had the largest Asian population of any county (1.6 million) in 2012 and the largest numeric increase (25,000) since 2011. At 60.9 percent, Honolulu County had the highest percentage of Asians in the nation.
American Indians and Alaska Natives
--California had the largest American Indian and Alaska Native population of any state in 2012 (1,057,000) and the largest numeric increase since 2011 (13,000). Alaska had the highest percentage (19.5 percent).
--Los Angeles County had the largest American Indian and Alaska Native population of any county in 2012 (232,000), and Maricopa, Ariz., the largest numeric increase (4,000) since 2011. Shannon County, S.D. — on the Nebraska border and located entirely within the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation — had the highest percentage (93.5 percent).

Native Hawaiians and Other Pacific Islanders
--Hawaii had the largest population of Native Hawaiians and Other Pacific Islanders of any state (364,000) in 2012. California had the largest numeric increase since 2011 (6,000). Hawaii had the highest percentage (26.2 percent).
--Honolulu had the largest population of Native Hawaiians and Other Pacific Islanders of any county (238,000) in 2012. Los Angeles County had the largest numeric increase since 2011 (1,100). Hawaii County had the highest percentage (34.3 percent).

Non-Hispanic White Alone
--California had the largest non-Hispanic white alone population of any state in 2012 (15.0 million). Texas had the largest numeric increase in this population group since 2011 (78,000). Maine had the highest percentage of the non-Hispanic white population (94.1 percent).
--Los Angeles had the largest non-Hispanic white alone population of any county (2.7 million) in 2012. Maricopa County, Ariz., had the largest numeric increase in this population since 2011 (24,000). Leslie County, Ky., comprised the highest percentage (98.4 percent) of non-Hispanic whites.

Minorities
--Five states or equivalents were “majority-minority” in 2012: Hawaii (77.2 percent minority), the District of Columbia (64.5 percent), California (60.6 percent), New Mexico (60.2 percent) and Texas (55.5 percent).
--Maverick, Texas, had the largest share (96.8 percent) of its population in minority groups of any county, followed by Webb, Texas (96.4 percent) and Starr, Texas (96.1 percent).

Age Groups
--Two groups of children saw their population decline between 2011 and 2012: those under age 5 (from 20.1 million to just under 20 million) and high school-age children (age 14 to 17) — from 16.9 million to 16.7 million. In contrast, the number of elementary school-age children — age 5 to 13 — rose from 36.9 million to just over 37 million.
--Nationally, the 65-and-older population grew 4.3 percent between 2011 and 2012, to 43.1 million, or 13.7 percent of the total population.
--Florida had the highest percentage of its total population age 65 and older in 2012 (18.2 percent), followed by Maine (17.0 percent) and West Virginia (16.8 percent). Alaska had the lowest percentage (8.5 percent), followed by Utah (9.5 percent) and Texas (10.9 percent).
--Among the nation’s counties, Sumter, Fla., had the highest proportion of its population age 65 and older (49.3 percent), followed by Charlotte, Fla. (36.0 percent) and La Paz, Ariz. (34.9 percent). Chattahoochee, Ga. (3.6 percent) was at the other extreme.
--The 85-and-older population grew by about 3 percent from 2011 to 2012, to almost 5.9 million. The number of centenarians grew to almost 62,000.
--Utah had the highest percentage of its total population under age 5 at 9.0 percent, and Vermont (4.9 percent) the lowest. Among counties, the respective extremes were claimed by Shannon, S.D. (11.6 percent) and Sumter, Fla. (2.2 percent).
--In 2012, there were 197 million working-age adults (age 18-64), representing 61.6 percent of the total population, an increase of about 736,000 people from 2011.
--New Hampshire experienced the largest increase in median age among states from 2011 to 2012, from 41.6 to 42.0. Among counties, the honor belonged to Lake, S.D., whose median age rose 1.4 years to 42.8.

Gender
--There were only 10 states where males made up the majority of the population on July 1, 2012. Alaska had the highest percentage of men at 52.1 percent, followed by Wyoming (51.1 percent), North Dakota (50.8 percent), Nevada (50.4 percent) and Hawaii (50.4 percent).
--The District of Columbia had the highest percentage of females of any state or equivalent at 52.3 percent, followed by Rhode Island (51.6 percent), Maryland (51.6 percent), Delaware (51.5 percent) and Massachusetts (51.5 percent).

Blacks Voted at a Higher Rate than Whites in 2012 Election

About two in three eligible blacks (66.2 percent) voted in the 2012 presidential election, higher than the 64.1 percent of non-Hispanic whites who did so, according to a U.S. Census Bureau report released today. This marks the first time that blacks have voted at a higher rate than whites since the Census Bureau started publishing statistics on voting by the eligible citizen population in 1996.

These findings come from The Diversifying Electorate — Voting Rates by Race and Hispanic Origin in 2012 (and Other Recent Elections), which provides analysis of the likelihood of voting by demographic factors, such as race, Hispanic origin, sex, age and geography (specifically, census divisions). The report draws upon data from the November 2012 Current Population Survey Voting and Registration Supplement and looks at presidential elections back to 1996. Using the race definitions from 1968 and the total voting-age population, whites voted at higher rates than blacks in every presidential election between 1968, when the Census Bureau began publishing voting data by race, and 1992.

Blacks were the only race or ethnic group to show a significant increase between the 2008 and 2012 elections in the likelihood of voting (from 64.7 percent to 66.2 percent). The 2012 increase in voting among blacks continues what has been a long-term trend: since 1996, turnout rates have risen 13 percentage points to the highest levels of any recent presidential election. In contrast, after reaching a high in 2004, non-Hispanic white voting rates have dropped in two consecutive elections. Between 2008 and 2012, rates for non-Hispanic whites dropped from 66.1 percent to 64.1 percent. As recently as 1996, blacks had turnout rates 8 percentage points lower than non-Hispanic whites.

Overall, the percentage of eligible citizens who voted declined from 63.6 percent in 2008 to 61.8 percent in 2012.

Both blacks and non-Hispanic whites had voting rates higher than Hispanics and Asians in the 2012 election (about 48 percent each).

“Blacks have been voting at higher rates, and the Hispanic and Asian populations are growing rapidly, yielding a more diverse electorate,” said Thom File, a sociologist in the Census Bureau’s Education and Social Stratification Branch and the report’s author. “Over the last five presidential elections, the share of voters who were racial or ethnic minorities rose from just over one in six in 1996 to more than one in four in 2012.”

Between 1996 and 2012, blacks, Asians and Hispanics all had an increase in their shares of the voting population, with the Hispanic share increasing by about 4 percentage points and the black share by about 3 points.

The number of blacks who voted rose by about 1.7 million between the 2008 and 2012 elections. Likewise, the number of Hispanics who voted increased by 1.4 million and the number of Asians by 550,000. At the same time, the number of non-Hispanic white voters declined by about 2 million ─ the only such drop for any single-race group between elections since 1996. The figures for blacks and Hispanics are not significantly different from each other.

Gender and Age Differences

The report also shows that the “gender gap” in voting persists. In every presidential election since 1996, women have voted at higher rates than men. In 2012, the spread was about 4 percentage points. The gap was especially wide among black voters, among whom it reached 9 percentage points in 2012. Asians are the only race or Hispanic-origin group that showed no significant gender gap.

There were large declines in youth voting among all race groups and Hispanics in 2012. Non-Hispanic whites age 18 to 24 and 25 to 44 showed statistically significant voting rate decreases, as did young Hispanics 18 to 24 years of age. The only race/Hispanic-origin/age combinations showing voting rate increases in 2012 were blacks ages 45 to 64 and 65 and older.

Other highlights:
--Voting rates increase with age: in 2012, the percentage of eligible adults who voted ranged from 41.2 percent for 18- to 24-year-olds, to a high of 71.9 percent for those 65 and older.

--Although blacks voted at higher rates than non-Hispanic whites nationally in 2012, this result was not uniform across the country. In the East North Central, East South Central, Middle Atlantic, and South Atlantic divisions, blacks voted at higher rates than non-Hispanic whites. In the Mountain and Pacific divisions, non-Hispanic whites voted at higher rates than blacks. In the New England, West North Central and West South Central divisions, voting rates for the two groups were not significantly different from each other.

Results From 2010 Census Race and Hispanic Origin Alternative Questionnaire Research

The U.S. Census Bureau released research from its 2010 Census Race and Hispanic Origin Alternative Questionnaire Experiment, which provides a comparison of different census questionnaire design strategies for collecting census data on race and Hispanic origin.

The Census Bureau follows federal standards for collecting and presenting data on race and Hispanic origin established by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in October 1997. This research tested questionnaire strategies with the goal of increasing the reporting in the race and ethnic categories as defined by OMB, decreasing nonresponse, increasing the accuracy and reliability of the results and eliciting responses for detailed race and ethnic groups.

The results will guide further research on the collection of race and ethnicity throughout the decade, informing OMB and Congress.

“The U.S. Census Bureau is committed to improving the accuracy and the reliability of census results by expanding our understanding of how people identify their race and Hispanic origin,” Census Bureau Director Robert Groves said.

This research is the largest quantitative effort ever on how people identify their race and ethnicity to start off the planning cycle for the once-a-decade census. The study mailed experimental questionnaires to a sample of 488,604 households during the 2010 Census, reinterviewed respondents and conducted 67 focus groups across the United States and in Puerto Rico with nearly 800 people.

Findings

The study tested several versions of an experimental combined question on race and Hispanic origin. The current OMB classification treats race and Hispanic origin as two separate and distinct concepts. During the 2010 Census, most households received a census form with separate questions for Hispanic origin and race in accordance with these guidelines. A sample of households received questionnaires with an experimental, combined question.

The results showed that a higher number of individuals were more likely to respond to a combined race and Hispanic origin question than to separate questions. The experimental combined questions had an item nonresponse rate, meaning the percentage of respondents leaving that question blank, of roughly 1 percent, compared with 3.5 percent to 5.7 percent for the race question and 4.1 percent to 5.4 percent for the Hispanic origin question.

The research also aimed to increase reporting in the OMB race and ethnicity categories. The “Some Other Race” category was created to be a small residual category, but as shown in the 2010 Census, “Some Other Race” alone was the third largest race group, after “White” alone and “Black” alone, with respondents of Hispanic origin comprising the vast majority of all people classified as “Some Other Race” alone. The population reporting “Some Other Race” alone was as high as 7.1 percent on the separate race question and roughly 0.2 percent on the combined questions. However, the percent of the population who identified as Hispanic was not significantly different across questionnaires, indicating that the total proportion of Hispanics was not reduced in a combined question approach.

Additionally, another major finding was that removal of the term “Negro” from the “Black, African Am., or Negro” response category did not change the distribution of the black population across the experimental questionnaires. Although 2000 Census results indicated that this term was still relevant to some respondents, this relatively small portion of respondents continues to decrease and, thus, the removal of the term did not have a negative impact on black population estimates.

Other Findings:

--The population reporting two or more responses was significantly larger with a combined question, in general, than with a separate question. Reinterview findings suggest that respondents may have been able to more clearly understand the opportunity to report more than one response in the combined format, thus increasing multiple-response reporting. Alternatively, focus group research suggests that the combined question respondents may have been interpreting the question as asking for race and origin.

--The experimental combined questions included write-in lines for all race groups. For the first time, people who answered “white” and “black” could further specify their origin. As much as 50 percent of people who reported as white gave detail when provided with a write-in line compared with only 1 percent to 2 percent in all other questionnaires. Similarly, of black respondents, more than 76 percent reported detail on each of the experimental combined questionnaires, compared with only 3 percent to 6 percent of all other questionnaires.

There was a decrease in Asian and Hispanic respondents providing more detailed responses on the combined questions that did not have checkboxes for specific origin groups. Detailed Asian reporting was 96.6 percent or higher on all other questionnaires, but as low as 92.6 percent when no checkboxes were provided. Detailed Hispanic origin reporting was 86.4 percent to 88.9 percent when specific origin checkboxes were provided within the combined question, but was lower on combined questionnaires that did not contain the specific origin checkboxes (77.7 percent to 80 percent). Detailed Hispanic origin reporting on separate questions was 92 percent or higher.

--There was no change in how people reported within the Asian, Other Pacific Islander, and Hispanic origin examples when different examples were used.

“The findings from this research provide promising strategies to address the challenges and complexities of race and Hispanic origin measurement and reporting issues in our rapidly diversifying society,” Groves said. “This is another step in an ongoing discussion about how we can better understand the changing diversity of our nation. The results will guide upcoming research as the Census Bureau looks toward the 2020 Census.”

Next Steps

These findings will serve as the basis for further research and for a wider discussion among statistical agencies.

2010 Modified Race Summary File

This downloadable file, summary table and documentation show the results of modifying the 2010 Census population from census race categories (which include “some other race”) into those consistent with the Office of Management and Budget standard categories (white, black or African-American, American Indian and Alaska Native, Asian, and Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander). Release includes information for counties by Hispanic origin, 31 race groups and five-year age groups.

Characteristics for selected race, Hispanic origin, tribal, and ancestry populations

The Census Bureau has released 2 new American Community Survey products. This is the first time this level of statistical detail has been available for groups since the Census 2000.

Also, The Population With a Bachelor’s Degree or Higher by Race and Hispanic Origin: 2006–2010.

New American Community Survey Data: Race, Tribal, Hispanic and Ancestry Group Data

This is the first time this level of statistical detail has been available for groups since Census 2000. The tables compile five years of data to produce detailed estimates at multiple levels of geography for hundreds of race, Hispanic origin, ancestry and tribal groups.

2006-2010 ACS 5-Year Selected Population Tables:
• Estimates of characteristics for selected race, Hispanic origin, tribal, and ancestry populations
• Based on sample data collected from January 1, 2006 to December 31, 2010

2006-2010 ACS 5-Year American Indian and Alaska Native (AIAN) Tables:
• Estimates of characteristics for selected American Indian and Alaska Native tribal populations
• Based on sample data collected from January 1, 2006 to December 31, 2010

Progress and Pitfalls of Diversity on Wall Street

The Center for Urban Research's latest report is The Progress and Pitfalls of Diversity on Wall Street, prepared by Richard Alba, Acting Director of Center for Urban Research, and Joseph Pereira, of the CUNY Data Service. The report considers the financial industry centered in and around New York City as a crucial site for examining one of the major economic challenges for the nation during the next quarter century: the collision between the growing diversity of the college-educated workforce and the historical recruitment and promotion patterns focused on white men. (The report is based on an analysis of census data from 2000 and the 2005-2009 ACS.)

Some key findings include:

1) The white-male share of the core Wall St. workforce is declining over time. For instance, white men were two-thirds of older workers (45 years and older) with high-status occupations in 2000, but they were only 46 percent of younger workers (30 and younger) in 2005-09. The shift has not been altered by the layoffs associated with the economic downturn.

2) In ethno-racial terms, the bulk of diversity on Wall St. is due to the rapidly growing share of Asian workers, who have gone from 5 percent of older core workers in 2000 to 19 percent of younger ones in 2005-09. Latinos have increased their share as well, but African Americans have not.

3) Women are increasing only modestly their presence in the Wall St. workforce, and they remain distinctly underrepresented by comparison with their proportion of the college educated.

4) White men take home the lion’s share of earnings from Wall St. Especially among workers older than 30, ages when earnings can be very high, white men’s median earnings exceed those of other groups by margins that frequently approach or even surpass 2-to-1.

The report notes two possible classes of explanations for the group disparities evident in the Wall St. workforce: minorities and women may differ in the human-capital characteristics required for career trajectories oriented towards top positions, and/or they may be excluded by discrimination, institutional or individual, from these trajectories. Census data cannot tell us which kind of explanation is more important; deciding between them requires other kinds of data, which currently do not exist.

For further information about the report, contact
• Richard Alba at ralba@gc.cuny.edu or 212-817-8773 (cell: 518-727-3475) or
• Joseph Pereira at jpereira@gc.cuny.edu or 212-817-2032

Peak Affluence, Cell Phones and What It Takes to be Middle Class

American Consumers Newsletter

1. Hot Trends: PEAK AFFLUENCE, HOUSING VALUES, SELF-EMPLOYMENT, VOTING, CELL PHONES, AND MORE
2. Q & A: WHAT DOES IT TAKE TO BE MIDDLE CLASS?
3. Cool Links: HOUSEHOLD INCOME INDEX; DEMOGRAPHIC CHARTBOOK; 2010 CENSUS REPORTS: BLACKS AND WHITES
4. Reference Tools: AMERICAN HOMES, AMERICAN MARKETPLACE, WHO WE ARE: ASIANS, BLACKS, and HISPANICS

Census Bureau Releases

Estimates of Same-Sex Married Couples
Federal Aid to States for Fiscal Year 2010 [PDF]
Intercensal Population Estimates: 2000 - 2010
Race, Ethnicity, & Education (REE) Data Release

Education Impacts Work-Life Earnings 5 Times More Than Other Demographic Factors

According to a new U.S. Census Bureau study, education levels had more effect on earnings over a 40-year span in the workforce than any other demographic factor, such as gender, race and Hispanic origin. For example, a worker with a professional degree is expected to make more than a worker with a eighth grade education or lower.

Some groups, such as non-Hispanic white males, Asian males and Asian females, benefit more from higher levels of education than other groups over a 40-year career for those with a professional degree. White males with a professional degree make more than double (about $2.4 million more) than that of Hispanic females with the same level of education.

(Note: Hispanics may be any race. All references in this news release to race groups such as black or white exclude Hispanic members of the race group in question; that is, all are “non-Hispanic.”)

Many factors, such as race and Hispanic origin, gender, citizenship, English-speaking ability and geographic location do influence work-life earnings but none had as much impact as education. The estimated impact on annual earnings between a professional degree and an eighth grade education was about $72,000 a year, roughly five times the impact of gender, which was $13,000.

These findings come from the report Education and Synthetic Work-Life Earnings [PDF], which looks at the economic value of educational attainment by estimating the amount of money that people might earn over the course of a 40-year work-life given their level of education. The report also looks at the effect of other factors, such as race and gender groups and other characteristics with regard to this relationship.

“This analysis shows that there is a clear and well-defined relationship between education and earnings,” said Tiffany Julian, an analyst in the Census Bureau’s Housing and Household Economic Statistics Division. “The overall economic value of educational attainment in this report supports the belief that higher levels of education are well-established paths to better jobs and higher earnings.”

Other highlights:
Overall, white males had higher earnings than any other group at every education level, with the exception of those with a master’s degree, which was topped by Asian males, and those with a professional degree, where Asian males were not significantly different from white males.
In general, women in the most economically advantaged race groups usually earn less than men in the most disadvantaged race groups. For example, a white female with master’s degree is expected to earn $2.4 million over a 40-year work-life. In comparison, a Hispanic male with a master’s degree is expected to earn $2.8 million.

For Asian, black and Hispanic groups whose highest education completed is high school, the difference between each group’s work-life earnings was not large compared with the differences between these groups when they had higher levels of education.
Asian men and women with a bachelor’s degree or higher had greater returns on higher education than blacks or Hispanics of either gender. For example, an Asian female with a professional degree made $3.7 million in work-life earnings compared with $2.3 million for a Hispanic female with a professional degree.

Naturalized citizens saw a small yearly increase in earnings over the native-born population ($1,210), but those who were not citizens made $2,446 less a year than the native-born.

Language spoken at home had an effect on earnings: those who spoke a language at home other than English saw a decrease in annual earnings after considering all other factors. Even those who speak English “very well” saw a decrease of $989 in annual earnings compared with English-only speakers.

Geography impacted earnings, showing higher earnings in the Pacific states and in New England and lowest earnings in East South Central states.

Data for this research comes from the 2006-2008 3-year American Community Survey. All estimates are presented in 2008 dollars and represent the amount of estimated money that one can expect to earn from ages 25 to 64.

Wealth Gaps Rise to Record Highs Between Whites, Blacks and Hispanics

The median wealth of white households is 20 times that of black households and 18 times that of Hispanic households, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of newly available government data from 2009.

These lopsided wealth ratios are the largest since the government began publishing such data a quarter century ago and roughly twice the size of the ratios that had prevailed between these three groups for the two decades prior to the Great Recession that ended in 2009.

The Pew Research Center analysis finds that, in percentage terms, the bursting of the housing market bubble in 2006 and the recession that followed from late 2007 to mid-2009 took a far greater toll on the wealth of minorities than whites.

More from Pew Research.

Pew Analysis of Census Data Demonstrates Wealth Gaps

From APDU

A recently released Pew Research Center analysis of data from the Census Bureau’s Survey of Income and Program Participation demonstrates that the median wealth of white households is 20 times that of black households and 18 times that of Hispanic households. Access the report, Twenty-to-One: Wealth Gaps Rise to Record Highs Between Whites, Blacks, and Hispanics, and associated coverage in The Washington Post.

What Congress Would Look Like If It Really Represented America

From http://www.good.is/

America is getting more and more diverse — for instance, our Hispanic population grew by 43 percent in the past decade alone — but you'd never be able to tell it by looking at our Congress. Here's what the House and Senate look like today, and what they would look like if they were demographically representative of our nation.

One thing not noted on this infographic is that, besides being nothing like America in terms of race, sex, or religion, our senators and representatives are also wholly different from most Americans in terms of wealth.