Tag: asian americans

Posted on

From APIAVote: Census Analysis of Asian American Electorate

image

June 7, 2013                                     

Asian American Voters Continue Decade-Long Trend,
Add 500,000 New Voters
 
WASHINGTON—Asian American Justice Center (AAJC), Asian and Pacific Islander American Vote (APIAVote), and National Asian American Survey (NAAS) today issued the following statement on the release of census analysis on the voting participation rates in Election 2012:
 
The latest Census analysis confirms that the Asian American electorate is on the rise. In line with our estimates from the “Behind the Numbers” report released earlier this year, the Census Bureau shows that more than 3.9 million Asian Americans voted in the 2012 elections, accounting for nearly 3% of all voters. This was an increase of more than 500,000 voters from 2008.
 
Below, we highlight three important aspects about the Asian American electorate: continued rates of rapid growth at the national level; growing electoral relevance of the population in many states; and the ongoing need for survey data with Asian language support.
 
Key findings at the national level from the report and the associated data include:
 
  • The growth of the Asian American electorate was relatively steady between 2004-8 and 2008-12 (an increase of about 589,000 and 547,000 in each period). By contrast, the number of white voters rose by about 475,000 between 2004-8, and declined by about 2 million between 2008-12.
  • The biggest growth in the Asian American electorate was between 2000 and 2004, with 723,000 new voters. However, 2004 was also a year that saw an increase of 10 million white voters, thereby muting the electoral affect of Asian American’s growth.
  • The Asian American share of the voting population has been steadily increasing, from 1.8 percent of all voters in 2000 and 2.2 percent in 2004, to 2.6 percent in 2008, and 2.9 percent in 2012.
  • Voter registration remains a significant hurdle for Asian Americans, with only 56 percent of adult citizens registered to vote in 2012. This compares to registration rates of 72 percent and 73 percent among whites and blacks, respectively, and 59 percent among Latinos.
  • Once registered, however, Asian Americans turn out in rates comparable to other groups: 84 percent for Asian Americans, 82 percent for Latinos, 87 percent for whites, and 91 percent for blacks.
State data is in line with the national data, showing that the Asian American electorate is an increasingly important voting bloc.
 
Asian American voters in California and New York, states with the two largest Asian American communities, turned out at or above the national rate. 84% of registered Asian American voters in California and more than 86 percent in voters in New York voted in 2012 election.
 
In the 15 states that APIAVote, AAJC, and other partners supported organizations to increase civic participation, Asian American voters turned out at or above 84% in almost all 15 states. Asian Americans in Georgia and Washington turned out at about 95%, nearly 93% in Ohio, above 89% in Minnesota and Florida, and above 86% n Illinois, Michigan, and Virginia. Of the 15 states, Texas had the lowest turnout at 71.6% and Nevada at 81.7%, although these are all within the survey’s margin of error.
 
While we are pleased with the latest Census Bureau analysis, we remain concerned that it may not tell the full story of the Asian American electorate because its survey is conducted only in English and Spanish. For example, in “Behind the Numbers,” where more than 40% of the Asian American and Pacific Islander registered voters surveyed responded in an Asian language, we found turnout among those who had difficulty speaking English was 9% lower (75%) than those who did not (84%).
 
“Behind the Numbers” indicated that voter turnout varied significantly by ethnicity. For example turnout among Laotians and Cambodians was lowest in 2012 at 40% and 62% while turnout was highest among Hmong and Japanese at 89%. 
 
The steady increase in new voters and the high rates of turnout among growing Asian Americans communities across the country indicate that as more Asian Americans become naturalized citizens and as their U.S.-born children enter adulthood, Asian Americans will continue to grow as an important voting bloc for future elections.

For more information on this growing electorate, “Behind the Numbers” is available at: http://www.apiavote.org/sites/default/files/btn_final_singles_FINAL_0.pdf.  

Further details from the census report can be found at http://www.apiavote.org/sites/default/files/Census%202012%20Voting%20Rates.pdf

Posted on

NY City Bar: 2011 Law Firm Diversity Benchmarking Report Released

NY City Bar: 2011 Law Firm Diversity Benchmarking Report Released

NY City Bar logo

The New York City Bar has released its 2011 Diversity Benchmarking Study. Click on the title of this entry to read the post from the City Bar’s blog. Here’s an excerpt from the report about Asian attorneys:

Asian attorneys represent the majority of minority attorneys accounting for 53.1% of minority attorneys and 54.2% of minority associates. A curious ongoing trend is the decline for Asian attorneys – vis-à-vis Black and Hispanic attorneys – as they rise to leadership positions at signatory firms declining from over half of minority associates to 45.4% of partners and 34.8% of practice group heads.

To read the report, go to http://www.nycbar.org/images/stories/pdfs/diversity/2011_law_firm_diversity_benchmarking_report.pdf

Posted on

LA Times: Asian Americans overwhelmingly backed Obama, Democrats

LA Times: Asian Americans overwhelmingly backed Obama, Democrats

Asian Americans as a Force in the 2012 Election

Back in April, I was quoted in the Wall Street Journal as stating, “It would be a shame if we weren’t able to mobilize because it is an election year and it is a chance for the Asian community to have their voice heard.” Now that the 2012 national election has come and gone, it seems that some positive gains have been made by APAs, both at the polls and in the halls of Congress. Congrats to Grace Meng and the other APAs who were voted into office on Election Day. More work needs to be done, though:

But the poll of Asian Americans suggests that there is more work to be done. More than half – 51% – said that they were never contacted by a campaign, political party or community group to register to vote.  Of those who were contacted, 55% said they were approached  by Democrats and 38% by Republicans.

Posted on

RMHC/Asia Scholarship Program

The 2013 RMHC/ASIA Scholarship Program, the largest Asian American student scholarship offered in the New York Tri-State area, is now accepting entries at http://www.rmhcnytristate.org/. The scholarship offers six $17,000 scholarships to high school seniors of Asian descent. Attached is a flyer containing additional information about the scholarship including eligibility guidelines and requirements. The deadline for entries is December 20, 2012.

If you know any financially-needy students who may benefit from this scholarship, please feel free to forward this info them. 
If you would like to help promote the scholarship on your social media channels, here are some recommendations: 
Facebook: 2013 RMHC/ASIA Scholarship Program now accepting entries. Download a copy of the flyer here.  Twitter: Apply for the 2013 RMHC/ASIA Scholarship! http://bit.ly/asia2013 #2013RMHCASIA
We are also offering free RMHC/ASIA Scholarship workshops to schools and community centers. To arrange one, please contact Peter Ou at peter.ou@iwgroupinc.com or (646) 865-3517.
Posted on

Statement from the Asian American Federation on the Pew Research Center Study on Asian Americans

June 25, 2012

The Asian American Federation appreciates the significant investment of the Pew Research Center in producing a major report, The Rise of Asian Americans.  While we acknowledge the merits of this extensive report and its contribution to the public discourse on Asian Americans, we would like to express our disappointment and to point out the report’s serious shortcomings.

The portrait of Asian Americans as presented in the Pew report is glaringly incomplete and implicitly misleading.  The Asian American experiences are much more complex, diverse, and of contrasts than what the report presents.  Here are some cases in point:

·       Both demographic studies of the Asian American Center for Advancing Justice (A Community of Contrasts: Asian Americas in the United States in 2011) and the Asian American Federation (Asian Americans in New York City: A Decade of Dynamic Change 2000 – 2010) point to tremendous social and economic diversity among Asian Americans nationally and in New York City.

·       Bangladeshi and Pakistani, two of the fastest growing Asian subgroups, as well as Cambodian and Hmong, who share similar immigration experiences as Vietnamese, do not fit the report’s portrait of Asian Americans.  Nationally, the poverty rates of these subgroups range from 15% for Pakistani to 26% for Hmong.  In New York City, two Asian subgroups have higher poverty rates than that of the overall city population of 19%: Bangladeshi (30%) and Pakistani (26%).

·       Both nationally and in New York City, there has been a growing concern about poverty among Asian American seniors.  Nationally, seniors of seven Asian subgroups experience significant poverty, and they are Korean (21%), Hmong (20%), Laotian (19%), Cambodian (19%), Chinese (17%), Vietnamese (16%), and Bangladeshi (16%).  In New York City, the Asian subgroups with seniors having higher poverty rates than that of the overall elderly population citywide were Korean (30%) and Chinese (30%). 

·       According to recent studies of the Economic Policy Institute, despite having higher educational levels, Asian Americans had the highest share of unemployed workers who were out of work for more than half a year when compared with white, black and Hispanic workers during and after the Great Recession (2007 – 2011).  In addition, highly educated Asian Americans continued to have a higher overall unemployment rate than similarly educated whites.

·       The Pew report states that “for the most part, today’s Asian Americans do not feel the sting of racial discrimination or the burden of culturally imposed ‘otherness’ that was so much a part of the experience of their predecessors who came in the 19th and early 20th centuries”.  This statement is totally contrary to the well-documented racial profiling and discrimination that South Asian Americans, nationally and in New York City, have continued to feel and experience since the September 11th tragedy.  In general, Asian Americans have continued to experience bias and discrimination in different forms, from being called “chinks” to mockery on television, to bullying in school, and to hazing in the military.

As an organization dedicated to the advancement of Asian Americans, we at the Asian American Federation certainly recognize many successes that Asian Americans have made as discussed in the Pew report.  However, we also believe that a comprehensive narrative of the Asian American experiences should reflect certain critical challenges that the community still has to confront.  Therefore, we hope that Pew will seek the insight of researchers and thought leaders with greater knowledge of Asian American experiences for any future studies.

Posted on

LETTER TO PEW RESEARCH CENTER: June 22, 2012

Dear Paul Taylor and Dr. Mark Lopez,

We are writing on behalf of the Asian American Pacific Islander Policy and Research Consortium (AAPIPRC), a national organization of four university-based Asian American research centers. [i]  We respectfully submit this response to the Pew Research Center’s recent report, The Rise of Asian Americans. Pew has assembled U.S. Census Bureau and government economic data, developing a detailed survey questionnaire, and conducting extensive telephone interviews with a national sample of 3,511 Asians. We acknowledge this is a major investment of Pew Research Center’s time and resources, and as a result has added to the publicly accessible information on the economic, social, and political situation of Asian Americans.

While there are merits to the Pew report, the selection of what information to present and highlight is highly biased, and the framing and interpretation of the analysis are incomplete and implicitly misleading and damaging for Asian American communities. We believe it is important to acknowledge the many accomplishments made by Asian Americans, but not at the expense of a fuller understanding of the diverse, complex and nuanced reality. The publication presents overly generalized descriptive and aggregate statistics, fails to critically explain the causes and limitations of observed outcomes, and falls short of examining tremendous and critical differences among Asian ethnic groups. We echo the comments by many Asian American scholars, advocates and lawmakers who point out how the study could lead policymakers, the media and the public to draw conclusions that reflect inaccurate stereotypes about Asian Americans being only a community with high levels of achievement and few challenges. There are many educational, economic, and health disparities, among others, facing our diverse communities. The selection of included populations leaves out some of the most distressed groups; consequently, the studied subjects are not representative.

As academic researchers, we understand the power and importance of quantitative analysis, but numbers are not just numbers, and they do not speak for themselves. They support a narrative through subjective decisions on topics, research design and methods, large frameworks to interpret results, and prioritizing which findings to highlight. We do not necessarily dispute the validity of many of Pew’s numbers, but we are deeply troubled by the emphasis that leaves the reader with a one-sided picture.  A primary example revolves around the claim that “Asian Americans are the highest-income,” an assertion that is the lead line in the press release and rests on median household income. Pew is accurate in reporting the most recently available numbers from the American Community Survey ($66,000 for Asian Americans and $54,000 for non-Hispanic whites), but fails to fully adjust for two critical factors: one, Asian Americans tend to have larger households, and two, they are heavily concentrated in high-cost metropolitan areas.

Because of a larger household size, income does not go as far in covering expenses. Analytically, per capita income is a more realistic measure. Nationally, Asian Americans on the average have 93 cents to every dollar for non-Hispanic whites. High-cost metropolitan area puts a strain on available income, and the economy partially adjusts for this through offsetting higher wages (compensating differential). Analytically, it is more accurate to compare statistics at the metropolitan level. Over half of Asian Americans (54%) live in the ten metropolitan areas with the highest number of Asian Americans.  In these areas, Asian Americans have 71 cents to every dollar for non-Hispanic whites. Clearly, the statistics on median household income and on adjusted per capita income portray Asian Americans very differently. Accounting for household size and location is very well known within the extensive literature on Asian Americans. While we realize that Pew acknowledges the potential role of household size and location, it nonetheless decided to spotlight unadjusted median household income. We believe that there are also other analytical flaws with the report because of Pew’s “spin”.

“Spinning” and selectively framing have serious implications. Pew examines race relations, and not surprisingly, the findings indicate inter-group tension. Unfortunately, the report does not adequately explain the factors and context that create the friction nor formulate effective solutions. Instead, it implicitly highlights the negatives. In examining perceived discrimination, the report does not integrate the research showing that Asian Americans are less likely to interpret, report and verbalize such acts, which can result in under-reporting. While the report sheds light on significant U.S. immigration trends and policies as they relate to Asians, it does so in a way that can adversely affect Asian-Latino relations. By highlighting the success of high achieving Asian immigrants, it shifts the immigration policy debates away from the concerns and contributions of Latino immigrants, especially the large numbers who are undocumented. This “model minority” framing can have a damaging impact on intergroup collaborations.

Again, we want to be balanced in our critique. We assume that Pew has made a useful contribution that brings much needed attention to the accomplishments of Asian Americans. At the same time, this has been counter balanced by the negatives. Our goal is to inform the public, decision makers and the media with accurate and well-rounded research that incorporates quantitative and qualitative methods, along with historical and humanistic accounts that give depth to the Asian American experience.

It is important, therefore, for Pew and other organizations to include researchers and analysts with greater knowledge of Asian American experiences. As you know, we are in the process of establishing an independent policy voice that more adequately represents Asian Americans. The Consortium is an initial effort to promote solid applied research. In this larger effort, we look forward to support and collaboration with Pew, along with other mainstream institutions.

We look forward to your response. Please send any correspondence to Professor Paul Ong (pmong@ucla.edu), who has agreed to coordinate AAPIPRC’s activities on this issue.

Sincerely yours,

Professor Joyce Moy, Executive Director
Asian American / Asian Research Institute at the City University of New York

Professor Lois Takahashi, Director
University of California Asian American Pacific Islander Policy Multi-campus Research Program

Professor Paul Watanabe, Director
Institute for Asian American Studies at the University of Massachusetts Boston

Professor David K. Yoo, Director
UCLA Asian American Studies Center

[i] This statement was prepared by Paul Ong, Melany De La Cruz,  Chhandara Pech, Jonathan Ong and Don Nakanishi.

Proudly powered by WordPress