ON BEING NATIVE IN THE 21ST

CENTURY: New Meanings, New Data

C. Matthew Snipp

Department of Sociology

Stanford University

Being Indian in America

• A category of civil status– The sovereign rights of tribal governments– The rights of tribal membership– The substance of law and politics

• A category of race and/or ethnicity– The substance of demographic research– How White people (and others) know us…..

The evolving meaning of race

• An out-group designation– Jews during the Spanish Inquisition

• A category of civil status– The United States Constitution

• A biological concept– Carl Linnaeus 1735– Johann Friedrich Blumenbach 1776

• A social construct– Ashley Montagu 1942

• Genomic research and continental origins

Race as out-group

• Construction of “others”

• Demonization and the making of aliens– Heathen infidels– Noble savages

Race as “civil status”

United States ConstitutionArticle I, Section 2

“Representatives and direct Taxes … shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.”

“The actual Enumeration shall be made …. within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct.”

Race as Biology

• Early classifications– Linnaeus (1735): “Americanus Rubenscens”– Blumenbach (1776): “American”

• 19th & 20th century race science– The search for homogeneous gene pools– Accumulating genetic markers

• Modern biology and the human genome project

“PRINCETON, N.J., Jun. 15, 2005 - Orchid Cellmark Inc. (Nasdaq ORCH), a leading worldwide provider of identity DNA testing services, today announced the launch of a new service that allows Native American tribes to confirm the genetic lineage of individuals seeking tribal enrollment.”

“This new service can confirm the familial relationship of specific individuals to existing tribal members, in addition to determining their percentage of Native American-associated DNA.”

“Each tribe has its own criterion with respect to the degree of relatedness a person must establish to be eligible for enrollment. Because DNA testing can establish genetic relatedness with exceptional accuracy, it is a powerful tool to confirm the biological relationships of prospective tribal members.”

PRESS RELEASE

Scientific attempts to define race

• 150 years of failure• The emergence of the concept of “ethnicity”

– Group designation based on common culture, behavior, social organization

– Julian Huxley and Charles Haddon 1936– Ashley Montagu 1942

• American Indians as multiethnic

Race as a Social Construct

• Ashley Montagu 1942

• Administrative definitions as social constructs– Bureaucratic mandates– Political interest groups

Administrative Definitions for American Indians

• Blood Quantum

• Tribal membership– American Indian Self-Determination and

Educational Assistance Act (PL 93-638) 1975.

• Self-definition

Blood Quantum

• Lewis Henry Morgan

• Ely S. Parker 1828-1895– Military secretary to U.S. Grant 1863-66– Commissioner of Indian Affairs 1869-71

• Measuring progress to “civilization”

• Commissioners of Indian Affairs set ¼ blood quantum in 1933

• IRA (1934) tribal constitutions

Tribal membership

• Inclusive tribes– Oklahoma Cherokee– Some Ojibwe bands

• Exclusive tribes– Some Pueblos

• Multiplicity of criteria established by tribal governments

Self-definition

The source of most data about race and ethnicity in the United States

Some historical background about racial classification in the United States

• Before 1977• 1977: OMB Directive No. 15• 1990 decennial census• Post-1990 OMB review• 1997 Revision of Directive No. 15• 2000 decennial census

Racial classification circa 1977

• Absent standards, lack of consistent records– White, Non-white– White, Black, Other

• 1977 OMB Directive No. 15– American Indian or Alaskan Native– Asian or Pacific Islander– Black, not of Hispanic origin– Hispanic origin– White, not of Hispanic origin

“These classifications should not be interpreted as being scientific or anthropological in nature…..” (OMB Directive 15).

Implementation of Directive 15

• ALL federal agencies, grantees and contractors

• 1980 census

• 1990 census– a turning point in racial measurement

Triangulating Race and Ethnicity in the 1990 Census

Protests against the 1990 Census

• Omitted groups– Arabs

– Taiwanese

– Native Hawaiians

• Inter-racial family organizations– e.g. Atlanta-based RACE (Reclassify All Children

Equally)

• Congressional inquiries– Rep. Tom Sawyer (D-OH)

OMB Revised Standard

• Issued October 30, 1997

• Effective January 1, 2003

• Modified categories

• Modified instructions

OMB Revised Categories

• American Indian or Alaskan Native (including Central and South America)

• Asian

• Black or African American

• Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander

• White

• Hispanic-Latino/a a category of “ethnicity”

OMB Revised Instructions

Respondents shall be offered the option of selecting

one or more racial designations. Recommended

forms for the instruction accompanying the multiple response question are "Mark one or more" and

"Select one or more."

First Implementation of Revised OMB Standard: 2000 Census

Being Multiracial in America: historic precedents

• Pocahontas and John Rolfe• Sacagawea and Toussaint Charbonneau• Sally Hemmings and Thomas Jefferson• Loving v. Virginia 1967

Colonial Mexico:admixture classification

• Spanish-Indian: mestizo

• Mestizo-Spanish F: castizo

• Spanish-Castizo F: spanish

• Negro-Spanish F: mulatto

• Spanish-Mulatto F: morisco

• Spanish-Morisco F: albino

• Spanish-Albino F: torna atras

• Indian-Torna Atras F: lobo• Lobo-Indian F: zambaigo

• Zambaigo-Indian F: cambujo

• Cambujo-Mulatto F: albarazado

• Albarazado-Mulatto F: barcino

• Barcino-Mulatto F: coyote

• Indian-Coyote F: chamiso

• Mestizo-Chamiso F: coyote mestizo

• Coyote Mestizo-Mulatto F: ahi te estas

Projected United States Population by Single and Multiple Origins, 2000 to 2100 (in millions)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100

Single Origin Multiple Origin

Source: Barry Edmonston et al. “Recent Trends in Intermarriage and Immigration and their Effects on the Future Racial Composition of the United States.” Pp. 227-225 in J. Perlman and M.C. Waters (eds.)The New Race Question: How the Census Counts Multiracial Individuals . New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 2002. Table 9.8.

Projected United States Multiple Origin Population by Race/Ethnic Group, 2000 to 2100

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100

AIAN API Black Hispanic White

Source: Barry Edmonston et al. “Recent Trends in Intermarriage and Immigration and their Effects on the Future Racial Composition of the United States.” Pp. 227-225 in J. Perlman and M.C. Waters (eds.)The New Race Question: How the Census Counts Multiracial Individuals . New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 2002. Table 9.8.

Ten Most Common Multiracial Combinations by Race and Hispanic Origin, 2000 Census and 2004 American Community Survey (000s)

2000 Census 2004 ACS Percent Difference

1) Hispanic White and Other Race 1434.1 713.2 -50.3

2) Non-Hispanic White and AIAN 1119.0 1201.9 7.4

3) Non-Hispanic White and Other Race 829.1 92.6 -88.8

4) Non-Hispanic White and Asian 721.7 808.6 12.0

5) Non-Hispanic White and Black 694.8 974.7 40.3

6) Non-Hispanic Black and Other Race 293.5 38.6 -86.9

7) Non-Hispanic Asian and Other Race 196.1 40.1 -79.6

8) Non-Hispanic Black and AIAN 183.9 190.6 3.6

9) Hispanic Black and Other Race 166.4 102.1 -38.6

10) Non-Hispanic Asian and NHOPI 122.6 80.6 -34.3

Change in the Number of Persons in the Largest Multiracial Combinations Consisting of “Legacy” Races (000s)

2000 Census 2004 ACS Percent Difference

2) Non-Hispanic White and AIAN 1119.0 1201.9 7.4

4) Non-Hispanic White and Asian 721.7 808.6 12.0

5) Non-Hispanic White and Black 694.8 974.7 40.3

8) Non-Hispanic Black and AIAN 183.9 190.6 3.6

10) Non-Hispanic Asian and NHOPI 122.6 80.6 -34.3

Total 2842.0 3256.4 14.6

Percent of Married Persons 18 Years and Older in the Ten Largest Multiracial Groups in the 2004 American Community Survey

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

NH White &AIAN

NH White &Black

NH White &Asian

Hisp White& Other

NH Black &AIAN

Hisp White& Black

Hisp White& AIAN

Hisp Black& Other

NH White &NHOPI

NH White,Black,AIAN

Percent Educational Attainment of the Ten Largest Multiracial Groups in the 2004 American Community Survey, Persons Age 25 and Older

Years of School

Non-Hispanic

White & AIAN

Non-Hispanic

White & Black

Non-Hispanic

White & Asian

Hispanic White &

Other

Non-Hispanic Black & AIAN

Hispanic White &

Black

Hispanic White & AIAN

Hispanic Black &

Other

Non-Hispanic White & NHOPI

Non-Hispanic Black,

White & AIAN

Less than High School

16.1 9.5 5.7 21.4 16.8 26.9 22.4 12.5 8.8 9.8

High School

31.0 29.2 18.8 27.9 20.8 38.8 28.0 20.0 36.3 17.2

1 to 3 Years College

35.4 36.1 33.0 30.9 43.5 20.3 34.9 43.2 27.4 38.2

4 or More Years College

17.5 25.3 42.5 19.8 18.9 13.9 14.7 24.3 27.6 34.7

Percent of Persons 18 Years and Older in the Civilian Labor Force in the Ten Largest Multiracial Groups in the 2004 American Community Survey

56

58

60

62

64

66

68

70

72

74

76

NH White &AIAN

NH White &Black

NH White &Asian

Hisp White& Other

NH Black &AIAN

Hisp White& Black

Hisp White& AIAN

Hisp Black& Other

NH White &NHOPI

NH White,Black,AIAN

Distribution of American Indian and Alaska Natives by Type of Land Area: 1990, 2000 Alone, 2000 Multiracial

Reservations

OK TSAs

ANVs

ANRs

Other Land

1990

2000 Alone

2000 Multiracial

Source: Indian and Native AmericanTraining Coalition, 2004, Table 1

Unemployment Rates for AIAN Alone and AIAN Multiracial Populations by Land Area, 2000 Census

0

5

10

15

20

25

Reservations OK TSAs ANVs ANRs Other Land

AIAN Alone AIAN Multiracial

Source: Indian and Native American Training Coalition, 2004, Table 3.

Poverty Rates for AIAN Alone and AIAN Multiracial Populations by Land Area, 2000 Census

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Reservations OK TSAs ANVs ANRs Other Land

AIAN Alone AIAN Multiracial

Source: Indian and Native American Training Coalition, 2004, Table 3.

California Health Interview Survey, 2001

Multiple questions about race

Percent Age Distribution of American Indian and Alaska Native Women, California Health Interview Survey, 2001

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Any Mention AIAN Only DOF UCLA

18-49

50-64

65+

Source: Swan et al. 2006, Table 4

Percent Distribution of Education of American Indian and Alaska Native Women, California Health Interview Survey, 2001.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Any Mention AIAN Only DOF UCLA

LT HSHSSome CollegeBA+

Source: Swan et al. 2006, Table 4

Percent Distribution of Usual Source of Care, American Indian and Alaska Native Women, California Health Interview Survey, 2001

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Any Mention AIAN Only DOF UCLA

Yes, IHSYes, OtherNo USC

Source: Swan et al. 2006, Table 4

Percent Distribution of American Indian and Alaska Native Women Age 65 and Younger with IHS Coverage, California

Health Interview Survey, 2001

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Any Mention AIAN DOF UCLA

Source: Swan et al. 2006, Table 4

Percent Distribution of Current Smokers Among American Indian and Alaska Native Women, California Health Interview

Survey, 2001

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Any Mention AIAN DOF UCLA

Source: Swan et al. 2006, Table 4

Percent Distribution of American Indian and Alaska Native Women with a Body Mass Index Greater Than or Equal to 30

(Obese), California Health Interview Survey, 2001

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

Any Mention AIAN DOF UCLA

Source: Swan et al. 2006, Table 4

Percent Distribution of Recent Cancer Screening Tests Among American Indian and Alaska Native Women, California Health

Interview Survey, 2001

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Any Mention AIAN DOF UCLA

Colo-Rectal Papanicolaou Mammogram

Concluding Comments

• Heterogeneity and Instability of Racial Data– Diversity amid Diversity

• The Complexity of Racial Measurement

• The importance of community engagement