This is Reihan Salam's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following Reihan Salam's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Reihan Salam
Recent Activity
Hi Noel -- I don't see any reason to make mention of my sister. I'm responsible for what I write. On Qian & Lichter: I made two claims from Qian & Lichter. First: In 2007, Zhenchao Qian of Ohio State and Daniel T. Lichter of Cornell found that over the course of the 1990s, the percentage of Asians marrying whites, and Hispanics marrying whites, fell sharply, a development they attribute to rising immigration. Qian & Lichter wrote: The past decade has ushered in unprecedented declines in intermarriage with whites and large increases in marriage between native- and foreign-born coethnics among Hispanics and Asian Americans ... The retreat from intermarriage largely reflects the growth in the immigrant population. It's possible that you came away from the paper with a different conclusion. I drew on their language. Second, you wrote: Qian and Lichter found that the skills gap between immigrants and natives also plays a role. For example, native-born Hispanic women with a college education were more than three times as likely to be married to whites as native-born Hispanics with less than a high-school education. From Qian & Lichter: In general, rates of intermarriage go up with increasing levels of education…native-born Hispanic women with a college education were more than three times more likely to be in a marriage with whites compared to their counterparts with less than high school education. I did not "misrepresent" Qian & Lichter ... I reiterated their conclusions. As to the points you raise: First: If you classify anyone who checks off the boxes as half-white as minority — i.e., you classify people the way the 1990 census did — you would compare column (1) and column (4) and find that between 1990 and 2000 interracial marriages for native-born Asian-American men rose from 50% to 55% and for women from 58% to 67%. It is not true that the 1990 census "classified anyone who checks off the boxes as half-white as minority." That's what the 2000 census did. The 1990 census only allowed respondents to select one racial category. So the people who were mixed-race in 2000 might have been Asian in 1990, or they might have been white. Qian and Lichter took differences between the two censuses into account when arriving at their conclusion that intermarriage for Hispanics and Asians declined due to immigration. (Page 75: "We use a cohort approach to explore—at the aggregate level—how multiracial individuals in 2000 may have reported their race in the 1990 census.") Second: Nor do Qian and Lichter believe that intermarriage rates have declined for Latinos. They spell out why on page 85, where they attempt to account for confounding demographic shifts. Bottom line: “Intermarriage with whites increased significantly among native-born Asian Americans and Hispanics, by 36 percent and 13 percent, respectively. Significantly, these multivariate results are different from the modest 1990s’ declines in intermarriage reported in Table 2.” This is a bit odd. In this section, Qian and Lichter are obviously not saying that everything they have said up to this point in the paper is wrong—that, in fact, intermarriage increased for Hispanics and Asians. What they are saying is if you were to discount the impact of an array of important variables—"the changing size of each racial/ethnic group, sex ratios, and educational compositions" and so on—then you would have seen an increase in the intermarriage rate. The reason they do this is that they are trying to isolate the effect of marital selection—of individuals discriminating against potential marriage partners of a different race. People apparently became less discriminating, all other things being equal, from 1990 to 2000. But that does not mean the intermarriage rate increased for these groups. It decreased, in large part because of immigration. ///// Your characterization of my understanding of the Italian-American experience seems to reflect a misunderstanding on your part, which is fair enough. And I don't see how any of the "three conclusions" you highlight from Jiménez's work on replenished ethnicity undermine my paragraph on his excellent book. There is more to his book that his conclusion In fact, the Jiménez passages you quote seem entirely consistent with what I wrote: ethnic replenishment reinforces the salience of ethnic boundaries. (I fully expect that Jiménez does not share my policy conclusions. I would be surprised, however, if he said that the intra-ethnic dynamic he describes has only one expression.) I absolutely believe that assimilation is proceeding apace. I also believe, however, that we are witnessing segmented assimilation, and that to make generalizations about immigrants as a whole ignore stark differences in entry wages, social networks, rates of wage convergence over time, and in various cultural indicators over time across groups. Much depends on the "mode of incorporation," including whether immigrants are unauthorized or authorized. Yet it is also true that the experience of Puerto Rican migrants (US citizens) has been not entirely dissimilar to that of immigrants streams that are more heavily unauthorized, which suggests that legal status is not the only factor at work.
Reihan Salam is now following The Typepad Team
Dec 21, 2009