The Multiracial Advocate

This site has been created to promote practical initiatives of importance to the multiracial community. You will find position statements on each page accessible via the toolbar above. These position statements have been thoughtfully crafted by Multiracial Americans of Southern California (MASC), a non-profit corporation serving the multiracial community for over 25 years. The multiracial community includes racially mixed people, interracial couples, and transracially adoptive families. To learn more about MASC visit our website www.mascsite.org. Email us at: [email protected]

[multiracialadvocate-blog]

CA Advisory Group: Aggregation=Colorblindness

UPDATE TO ORIGINAL POST BELOW: The bill was signed by Governor Brown.  See story HERE.

A bill is currently moving through the California legislature known as AB1726 also known as Accounting for Health and Education in API Demographics Act (AHEAD).  The basic purpose of this bill is to require racial demographic data collection in California to include detailed collection of Asian nationalities (such as Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese, Thai, etc.) as part of the larger Asian data collection. This is known as “disaggregation” of Asian data.  For an interesting recorded discussion on this bill please visit the site HERE.

One of the purposes of this bill is to dispel the myth of the “Model Minority” that, while seemingly complimentary of Asians (hard working, high achieving, non-combative, etc.), is actually quite damaging to the Asian community.  It rationalizes biases against Asians, stereotyping, education and work tracking, and misses the fact that not all Asian sub-set populations are performing the same.

Some definitions would be helpful.  Aggregation can be thought of as a Venn diagram where the largest circle represents all people in the United States.  Within that circle can be imagined a smaller circle that represents all Asians in the country.  Then within that circle several small circles that represent all kinds of Asians: recent immigrants vs. later generations, different nationalities, mixed race Asians. Aggregating the data is like erasing the circles that represent these smaller groups within the larger group, essentially rendering these groups invisible.

In this way aggregation is much like colorblindness.  Colorblindness, in racial terms, refers to the willful denial of different racial categories and in so doing, the inability to see examples of systemic discrimination.  When race is removed from the field of view, then discrimination becomes individualistic and patterns disappear.  Common phrases that reflect colorblindness include the obvious “I don’t see race.” But it also appears in the misinterpretation of Martin Luther King, Jr’s quote “…[to] not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character” as a set of instructions rather than a vision of the future.  Or more recently, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court John Roberts’s quote, “The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.”

We shouldn’t be afraid to acknowledge the diversity that exists in our society.  This diversity is a source of strength and innovation for our nation.  It is not diversity that causes division among our people; it is the context in which it exists that is the problem.  When inequality intersects with diversity, then diversity takes on a negative connotation.  We will never be able to end inequality if we choose not to see it.

Lawmakers would be well served to have a vetted advisory committee to provide insight on legislation. And the general public would also be served to hear the same advice.  In the absence of such a committee, the shadow of special interests and conspiracy taint the process.  Yet another reason why we advocate for the State of California to convene such a body of advisers.

Thomas Lopez, MASC President

���>�^

[multiracialadvocate-blog]

Corp. Respect: Old Navy, Old Story

Kudos to Old Navy for their recent advertisement featuring an interracial couple and their child.  Sure, some speculation has been tossed around about whether the white male in the picture is actually a step-father, but c'mon, this is an advertisement, not a documentary.  Whatever the intended familial relationship was supposed to be in the ad, the message is clear: inclusion and normalization of the mixed experience.

Of course, no sooner do they post this picture when racist trolls jumped on the comments section to leave their racist vindictives, reminiscent of an earlier occurence that happened to Cheerios and their video featuring a mixed race family.  Fortunately, the community has been overwhelmingly positive shutting down the haters with the sheer size of their response.  But we have to be left wondering: why this ad?  Why now?  Surely there have been a number of ads including racially diverse families.  There is "post that will never die" on the Mixed Race Studies Facebook group that is a running collection of mixed race advertising.  Any one of these ads could be a source for trolling.

Recent studies have shown that the rate of interracial marriages (and presumably other couplings) are on the rise.  Also, surveys show the approval rating of interracial marriage is at an all time high.  And yet we still see these events happening.  It might be interesting to conduct a test where different combinations of interracial families are presented in essentially the same poses and then gage people's reactions.  Would we find some couplings are more accepted than others?

It is important to note, that while attitudes seem to be changing for the positive, interracial marriage and dating is still a minority of couplings. Yes, we have come a long way as a nation, but we still have a long way to go.

Thomas Lopez, MASC President

[multiracialadvocate-blog]

Misc.: The Diversity Oscar Award

Quite a big deal has been made about the lack of diversity in the nominations for actor and film in this past year’s Oscar awards celebration and rightfully so.  The #OscarsSoWhite hashtag has been a viral sensation.  And the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has recognized this problem but has appeared powerless to change it.  After all, the nominations are made by popular vote and if the members select non-diverse nominees then the Academy must allow it.  

To be fair, the Academy has attempted to diversify its membership in the hopes they will vote for more diverse talent.  But there is a lack of diversity in the film industry in general making it difficult for voters to select a diverse slate, even if they wanted to.  And then there is the old stigma facing any diverse nominee that they became a nominee as an affirmative action action and for some reason that makes them less qualified.

So rather than leaving diverse nomination up to chance or try to force it in and risk compromising critical integrity, why not simply make diversity its own award.  In other words, recognize those filmmakers that create diverse storylines, casts, and even crews by offering a Diversity Oscar Award.

This is not an affirmative action Oscar, because no existing category is being diversified on purpose.  Rather, diversity is the actual award itself.  This creates an incentive to produce more diverse films because now there is an opportunity to receive critical acclaim for this choice in filmmaking.  Simply nominating a film brings it extra attention and marketability.

The Academy could even go one better to encourage diversity and make it extremely competitive.  For example, anyone that wins the Diversity Oscar then gets to have a “superdelegate” status in voting for the next year’s nominees in certain categories or even for the next several years.  These “superdelegates” will receive higher voting weight, say 1% of the total vote, rather than their fractional share of the total number of voting members.  While this award may risk becoming a “segregated” award, the “superdelegate” system will help push diversification faster than simply leaving it up to current member voting.

Browbeating the Academy certainly draws attention to the issue, but “more carrot” and “less stick” will likely earn more converts without the pitfall of perceived compromised standards.

[multiracialadvocate-blog]

Misc.: Civil Rights, The Cold War, and Terrorism

A short time back I was watching a documentary on Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, KS, and they raised an interesting point.  The success of the Civil Rights movement of the '50's and '60's was due in part to the Cold War.  To win the hearts and minds of third world countries, the Soviet Union was emphasizing the racist policies of the United States and by extension the evils of capitalism and democracy.  To combat this narrative, the US had to implement civil rights legislation leading to a strange alliance between liberals and conservatives.

Today, civil rights legislation has largely stalled and levels of inequality have actually increased.  If only we had a common enemy like we did a generation ago to unite people behind a cause.

If there is a common enemy these days it is probably international terrorism.  Like the Cold War narrative spun by the Soviet Union, Islamic terrorists try to paint the US as being anti-Muslim as a way to win recruits.  It doesn't help that some political leaders in this country have taken that bait hook, line, and sinker.  Just as leaders advanced civil rights to combat communism, we would do well to advance religious tolerance to thwart terrorism, not the other way around.

Still, there are few bona fide existential threats to the US to which racial equality would be a meaningful deterrent.  This perhaps explains the lack of unity in our country on this issue.  Could we link climate change to racial equality somehow?  However this shakes out, unless we can convince those with privilege in society that their fate is linked with the fate of those without privilege, there will be no progress.

by Thomas Lopez, MASC President

[multiracialadvocate-blog]

For Multiracial People Too, Race Still Matters

By Kathleen Odell Korgen

In her new book, Sharon Chang reveals that almost half of the 75 multiracial children of the couples she interviewed experienced racial discrimination before they turned six years old.  These children are part of the booming multiracial population in the U.S. Ten percent of babies born in the U.S. in 2013 had parents of different races (Pew Research Center 2015). However, as a group, multiracial people remain legally unprotected from racial discrimination (Leong 2010, Botts 2016). In fact, many Americans see them as a sign that we live in a post-racial society that no longer needs race-based policies.

Multiracial children attend schools with teachers and curricula that tend not to acknowledge their existence or understand the racial issues they face in the classroom and in the schoolyard (Tutwiler 2016 ). Even many parents of multiracial children do not talk to their children about race, leaving them unprepared and defenseless when faced with racial discrimination (Rockquemore and Laszloffy 2005,Chang 2016). Having crossed racial barriers with their relationship, they mistakenly believe that race no longer matters.

New books such as Sharon Chang’s Raising Mixed Race: Multiracial Asian Children in a Post-Racial World, Sandra Winn Tutwiler’s Mixed-Race Youth and Schooling: The Fifth Minority, and my own edited book, Race Policy and Multiracial Americans all make strong cases that race still matters and that racism impacts multiracial as well as monoracial minorities. They rightly encourage policy makers, teachers, and parents to recognize these facts and to act on them.

The growing multiracial population itself is evidence that race relations have changed, but it does not indicate the disappearance of either race or racism. As issues of racial inequality (e.g., housing, income, and wealth, treatment by police, and hiring practices) and outright bigotry (e.g., Donald Trump’s rants against Mexicans and Muslims and his hesitancy to denounce the former KKK leader David Duke) continue to make headlines, more and more Americans recognize that racial discrimination still remains a problem. For example, between 2014 and 2015—even before Trump’s equivocation about David Duke—the percentage of White Americans who said that “the country needs to make changes to give Blacks equal rights” jumped from 39% to 51% (Pew Research Center 2015).

This renewed recognition of racial inequality should make it clear that multiracial people are not a panacea for racism. Racial discrimination still exists—and multiracial, as well as monoracial, minorities deserve race policies that work to protect them from it.

 Kathleen Odell Korgen is the author and editor of numerous books on racial identity and race relations. Her latest edited book is Race Policy and Multiracial Americans (Policy Press, 2016).

The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the writer and not necessarily those of MASC.  Posting this article is not to be interpreted as an endorsement or criticism of any political candidate or party.

[multiracialadvocate-blog]

Misc.: New Book “Why Race Policy must include Multiracial Americans”

I have not yet read this book by I have a copy on its way.  In the meantime, read more about from the lead author Kathleen Odell Korgen.

Click HERE for her blog.

[multiracialadvocate-blog]

Misc.: You’ve Been Dis-served

‘”The multiracial community lobby” point to increasing numbers of people checking the “multiracial” box on the U.S. Census but “haven’t shown a history of multiracial discrimination.”  Focusing on the multiracial status of the plaintiff “dis-serves the needs of multiracial people experiencing discrimination,”’ said Fordham University professor of law Tanya K. Hernandez as reported by Marty Levine of the University Times.

For a video of the lecture click here.

For a quick read but decent summary of the lecture click here.

This lecture and subsequent reporting contained so many errors and vagaries that it demanded a response.

To begin my critique I must begin with the obvious error and that is a reference to a multiracial box on the U.S. Census.  There is no multiracial box on the U.S. Census and there never has been.  It is true that such a box was proposed in the early 1990′s, but when considering the impact this change would have had on the enforcement of civil rights legislation it was abandoned by multiracial activists for a compromise solution.  Instead what was implemented was a “Mark One Or More” races option and today people that mark “Two or More” races are often referred to as multiracial.  This is important because it demonstrates the genuine interest of multiracial activists to support existing civil rights legislation.  It is also important that if such an obvious error was made by Ms. Hernandez then what other errors were also made, especially on more subtle issues such as the law?

Ms. Hernandez also referred to “multiracial identity scholars” and “the multiracial community lobby” and “a new set of multiracial laws.”  Unfortunately, no mention of who these scholars and lobbyists were by name nor what particular laws were proposed.  Personally, I have been active in the multiracial movement for over 25 years and probably know most leading scholars and leaders in the movement personally.  In all that time, I haven’t been aware of any proposed legislation beyond simply recognizing mixed identity, usually by marking one or more boxes and not special class protection.  By not being specific in her comments she invites the imagination to conceive all sorts of potential legislation that is entirely hypothetical and thus without any true merit.

Ms. Hernandez is extremely dismissive of the multiracial experience claiming bias “is not novel or particular to multiracial persons,” but that doesn’t mean it is invalid.  Bias is not novel or particular to any minority group in this country.  Should we remove protections from all minority groups for this reason?  And even if the bias is due to “non-whiteness” rather than multiraciality, it doesn’t make a lawsuit invalid.  According to Hernandez, most cases are based on the plaintiff’s blackness and not their mixed identity, but that doesn’t mean this form of discrimination won’t change in the future, especially as the multiracial population grows as a percentage of the population.  Latest Census statistics place us at just under 3% of the U.S. population and about half of that population is under eighteen years of age.  So it is no wonder there are so few multiracial discrimination cases.

Until the recognition of multiracial people, either through a multiracial box or marking two or more races, becomes more ubiquitous we won’t be able to even see the discrimination multiracial people experience.  It is for this reason that the multiracial movement hasn’t been pushing for special class protection as much as we have been pushing for basic multiracial recognition.  If Ms. Hernandez believes it is recognition that is invalid then she is being hypocritical since no group is any more valid than another for recognition, neither black, white, Latino or multiracial.

Finally, Ms. Hernandez claims multiracial people are doing themselves a dis-service seeking multiracial status in the courts.  Well, shouldn’t multiracial people be the ones to decide if they are being dis-served?  And even if the courts decide discrimination was due to their blackness (or other singular minority identity) rather than their multiraciality, then no dis-service has been done so long as the courts still rule in their favor.  It is just a matter of time before the courts catch up with multiracial identity and multiracial discrimination cases become more and more common.  Ms. Hernandez never made a valid argument where listing multiracial as a class alongside other protected classes would do damage.  It is impossible to know all laws that exist at all levels of government, but it only makes sense that if some races get a protected status then multiracial people should get protected status along with them.

Thomas Lopez, MASC President

Thanks to Steven F. Riley for assistance researching this.

[multiracialadvocate-blog]

Misc.: How to Really Kill Affirmative Action or Why Abigail Fisher Ain't Rachel Dolezol

Abigail Fisher was a mediocre high school student applying to the University of Texas (UT).  She couldn't get in based on her grades and test scores alone so she was put into a pool of students that would be considered for admission based on alternative factors meant to diversify the campus student body.  Most of the students admitted from this pool were white like Fisher, but a small number were racial minorities.  Any number of factors may have been the basis for a discrimination law suit but Ms. Fisher chose to sue for racial discrimination all the way to the Supreme Court.  This has been a tactic tried numerous times to chip away at affirmative action programs, but there is another strategy yet to be tried that would probably kill it for good yet for some reason no one has attempted.

Applications for college are much like the Census in that they provide the opportunity for self-identification.  Since the end of Jim Crow in official legislation, the government has been accepting self-identification as the means for collecting racial demographic information more and more.  So what is stopping someone from identifying as a racial minority and taking advantage of affirmative action programs?  Could someone be sued for racial fraud in this case?

Early last year the nation was captivated by Rachel Dolezol, a woman that originally identified as white but came to identify as black. Overtime, she eventually failed to mention it to people anymore so everyone just assumed she was black.  Her decision to choose this identity did not seem to warrant her any particular benefits. She did secure positions in the NAACP and in a police oversight commission, but these were unpaid volunteer positions for the purpose of furthering civil rights.  Regardless of her intents, when her full ancestry was revealed many people of color pounced upon her anyway and she lost her positions, even her paid job at a local college.  So obviously the court of public opinion would not look kindly on someone taking this action, but what would the legal courts actually do if faced with this issue?

It is interesting to note that, to my knowledge, this has not happened in the post-segregation era.  What does a white person have to lose?  If they are forced out of school, then they are no worse off than if they never went.  In fact, at least they received an education if not the actual credentials. It seems that Abigail Fisher would rather not go to college and keep her whiteness than get an education by becoming black.  Is whiteness more valuable than education?

Thomas Lopez, MASC President

[multiracialadvocate-blog]

Mixed Latinos: Census Deadlines

So what is up and coming with the Census and why do we need to do advocacy now? In the lead-up to the next Census in 2020 there are several milestones to achieve along the way.  The Census Bureau has published an operational plan that can be found here.  Several tests are currently in the works to try and "improve" the Census.  And per the operational plan:

"The goal is to finalize the content of the questionnaire and other mailing and field materials for the 2020 Census so that the 2020 Census topics can be submitted to Congress by April 2017, with the final questionnaire wording submitted by April 2018."

So Congress will need to approve proposed changes.  Currently those changes are quietly percolating as they go through tests and only the close Census watchers, such as yours truly, is paying close attention.  However, once these recomendations hit Congress it will become a matter of public debate and will become highly politicized.  Our window of opportunity to influence the proposed changes, or at least express an opinion on them, is rapidly closing.  So check out the content on this blog and sound off your opinions.

[multiracialadvocate-blog]

Mixed Latinos: The DUH Factor

Between the Pew and the Census Bureau and all the studies they have conducted, not once has someone considered keeping the two question format but revising the Latino ethnicity question to allow for multiple responses.  Why does such an obvious idea go un-tested?  It is also known that multiple response data is collected and kept for research purposes, by why is it not made public?  In the October 1997 Feder Register, the Census Bureau stated two reasons why multiple responses were not allowed on the Census but neither quite hit the mark: it was never tested when the "mark one or more" race question was tested, and not enough comments from the public came in to suggest interest in the issue.  Really?  We as a community need to do better to defend the interests of mixed race people, including Latinos of Mixed Ancestry.

[multiracialadvocate-blog]

Mixed Latinos: What do they do with multiple responses?

Since we know the Census does not allow multiple Latino identification, one might ask what the Census does with responses that mark off multiple categories.  Note there is no clear instruction to mark only one or one or more, so a mixed person may not know how to deal with the question.

In a Census report with the title “ITEM NONRESPONSE, ALLOCATION, AND DATA EDITING OF THE QUESTION ON HISPANIC ORIGIN IN THE AMERICAN COMMUNITY SURVEY (ACS): 2000 TO 2007″ a detailed description for pre-2010 is given that goes something like this.  Part Hispanic is Hispanic with non-Hispanic. Multiple Hispanic is more than one Hispanic group. Then the results are ultimately recoded as follows: "1) assign Hispanic origin if there is a Hispanic response to the race question; 2) if Hispanic origin cannot be assigned from the race question and the respondent has a Spanish surname, then origin is assigned based on the original Hispanic responses to the origin question; and 3) if the respondent does not have a Spanish surname then an origin is obtained by random selection of the reported origins."  Note that the Census Bureau maintains a list of Hispanic surnames with which to compare.

But immediately after this section is the instructions for future surveys beginning in 2010.  Multiple responses will still be collected but then "A single origin will be randomly selected from the original reported origins for Multiple Hispanic or Multiple Non-Hispanic responses. On the other hand, Part-Hispanic responses will be edited differently -- all Part-Hispanic responses will be coded as Hispanic."

So in summary, there will be no official recognition of mixed Latino identity and the typical "default" will be towards Latino rather than non-Latino.

[multiracialadvocate-blog]

Mixed Latinos: The Alternative Questionnaire Experiment

In 2020, 1 in 10 white people will cease being white and the multiracial population will double in size.  How? See below.

In 2010, the Census Bureau tested a series of proposed changes to the Census.  The results were published in 2012 known as the "2010 Alternative Questionnaire Experiment" or AQE for short.  There were 15 different versions of Census questions, known as "panels," and two control panels.  Among the 17 different panels, four panels tested a combined Latino ethnicity question with the race question.   This has been one of the most significant changes ever considered.  In other words, they asked what would happen if Latino became a race?

First, its important to mention what didn't happen and that was a drop in Latino population.  The four combined versions were a statistical tie to the control group so there was no reduction in the size of the Latino community.  Also, most Latinos ceased to mark the "Some Other Race" box.  In the full Census, 37% of Latinos marked "Some Other Race" making it 6% of the total population.  In a combined format this dropped to less than 2%. Also the rate of un-answered questions (known as the “item non-response rate”) went from as high as 5.7% to about 1% in the combined format.  So, in summary, one can say that Latinos found a "racial home" in the Census.

However, there were some additional significant changes.  The white population dropped 8 total percentage points or about an 11% within-group drop because many Latinos stopped marking white.  As for the multiracial population, it jumped from about 3% to almost 7%!  How? By allowing Latinos to mark off two or more boxes in combination with Latino.  Approximately 20% to 25% of Latinos took advantage of this option.  These changes are under serious consideration by the Census Bureau.  Should they go through, be ready for major changes in the United States.

[multiracialadvocate-blog]

Corp. Respect: Mixed Race in Medicine

This is an interesting article highlighting some of the problems that occur when people are forced to mark only one racial identifier.  In particular, this focuses on healthcare.  This topic also speaks to the Government Recognition initiative we propose since most healthcare agencies receive some form of government funding.  If they were forced to comply with federal standards, then this wouldn’t be a problem.

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2015-10/uoia-hcr101215.php

[multiracialadvocate-blog]

CA Adv. Group: Cops and “Perceived” Race

http://www.latimes.com/local/crime/la-me-brown-reax-20151005-story.html

California just passed a law that is:

"...mandating that California law enforcement agencies collect — and make public — data on the racial makeup of all those encountered by police."

I'm not sure if I agree with the police officials in this story, but I do wonder how the police will identify the race of the individuals they encounter, especially mixed race people. Per the article, cops will need to document what they “perceive” the race of the person with whom they interact.  Won’t this lead to “eyeballing?”  

In some ways this is makes sense since it is cop’s perception of the person being stopped that defines what happens.  But when the data is reported, will the general public understand that that is what has been documented?  What if someone disagrees with the police’s documentation, perhaps as a cover-up, to avoid accusations of racial profiling?

For these reasons, the State of California would benefit from an advisory committee on racial identity to work out these issues before they are made law.

[multiracialadvocate-blog]

Mixed Latinos: “Mixed Yet Monoracial” Latinos

In this post HERE I described how the Census is considering making a Latino a race and the major impact of this change.  Another potential impact will be on those Latinos that haven chosen to identify with one of the monoracial groups.  The Census recognizes five racial groups (white, black, Asian, Pacific Islander, and Native American) with an additional catch-all group of Some Other Race. In 2010, 53% of Latinos marked white and 37% marked Some Other Race.  But if Latino were to become a race then Latinos will have to choose if they will continue to identify with the six monoracial groups, or be Latino, or mark one or more.

For some groups this may be a minor point.   For example, rates of Latino-only identity are highest among Mexican and Central Americans which combined make up about 70.9% of the Latino population.  However, for other groups that are used to considering their Latino identity as more of an ethnicity and less as a race then this may be something of a shock.  For example, Cuban Americans identify strongly as white at 85.4% and Dominicans identify strongly as black at 12.9% (highest of all Latinos).

If these latter Latinos mark two or more boxes then they will likely be considered multiracial or mixed race.  Does this really capture their experience? Keeping the status quo would avoid this dilemma but it would also mean sacrificing the identity choice of most Latinos.  Rather than negatively impact so many Latinos, perhaps it is up to the multiracial population to be sensitive to the identity choices of these "mixed yet monoracial" Latinos.  The "Two Or More" population may diversify in ways not yet imagined.

Thomas Lopez, MASC President

[multiracialadvocate-blog]

Mixed Latinos: The 2010 Alternative Questionnaire Experiment

Driven by a low response rate from Latinos and high number of people marking "Some Other Race," the Census Bureau has begun experimenting with combining the Hispanic ethnicity question and the racial identity question.  In other words, they have been asking what if Latino became a race.  They found major impact not only for Latinos but white and multiracial people as well.

The greatest experiment they conducted was in 2010 called the Alternative Questionaire Expriment (AQE).  Many things were discovered during this test but for starters the number of Latinos stayed about the same while the number of Some Other Race dropped below 2% suggesting that Latinos found their "racial home" on the Census.  

However, what also made this test unique was that it was the first time Latinos could mark one or more race in combination with Latino.  The end result of this was that between 20% and 25% of Latinos marked two or more races.  In other words, the multiracial population is about the twice the size as originally thought and mostly Latino.

Also unlooked for was an 11% drop in the white population.  When Latinos had to choose between being white and Latino, most chose to identify as Latino only. 

No final decision has been made on the final format but the Census appears to be leaning in this direction. All these things will have a major impact on how we see ourselves as a society.  Political district  boundaries at all levels will need to be redrawn.  Turns out Latinos are even more integrated into society as we thought.  

Thomas Lopez, MASC President

[multiracialadvocate-blog]

CA Adv. Group: The Fall of the Latino Population

In this post HERE I illustrated how the California Department of Finance (CADOF) manipulated Census data to produce a Latino plurality in California at the expense of all other racial groups including multiracial people.  They did this to produce a Latino racial group in spite of the Census not counting Latino as a race.

However, changes are afoot at the Census Bureau to do just that.  Tests are currently uder way to see what would happen if Latino became a race.  This poses a bit of a blessing and a curse for the CADOF.

If Latino were to become a race on the Census, then no data manipulation would be necessary to “racialize” Latinos because the work would have already been done for them.  They simply need to read the number of people that marked Latino in California.

However, those Latinos that marked two or more races will present a problem.  The CADOF created a multiracial category made of people that marked two or more races.  So if Latinos mark two or more races will the CADOF count them as mixed race?

The 2010 Alternative Questionnaire Experiment (conducted by the Census Bureau) presented that between 20% and 25% of Latinos will mark two or more races.  If the CADOF counts them as mixed race then the Latino population in California will DROP significantly.  Will the CADOF stand for this?  Will they sacrifice the multiracial population to maintain a Latino plurality?  Is any of this even necessary?

Perhaps the CADOF should convene an advisory committee now, before its too late, to work out these issues ahead of time.

Thomas Lopez, MASC President