WASHINGTON, May 17, 2007
Census: Minority Population Tops 100M
One-In-Three Americans Is A Minority; 4 States Have "Majority Minority" Population
-
Residents walk past a paleta vendor along 26th Street in the predominantly Mexican Little Village in Chicago, Illinois. Hispanic was the fastest-growing minority group, enlarging 3.4 percent between July 1, 2005 and July 1, 2006 for a total of 44.3 million, according to Census data. (GETTY)
-
Interactive The Nation We Live In Who are Americans and what do they do? A comprehensive look at our economic, sociological and racial breakdown.
-
Timeline Population Milestones Track the steady increase of the U.S. population since the colonists landed, with the latest key Census Bureau reports.
The data suggest about one in three Americans was a minority last year.
The nation was 66.4 percent white, non-Hispanic; 15 percent Hispanic; 13.4 percent black; 5 percent Asian, and 1.5 percent American Indian or native Alaskan. Three-tenths of a percent identified themselves as Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander.
The percentages add up to more than 100, in part because some people identify with more than one race and Hispanics can be of any race.
"To put this into perspective, there are more minorities in this country today than there were people in the United States in 1910, Census Bureau Director Louis Kincannon said. "In fact, the minority population in the U.S. is larger than the total population of all but 11 countries."
California led the way with a minority population of more than 20 million, followed by Texas with just over 12 million.
A year ago, the minority population was 98.3 million.
Some highlights:
Based on the Census data, an analysis by The Associated Press showed that Illinois is the most average state in the country.
The study examined 21 demographic factors, including race, age, income, education, industrial mix, immigration and the share of people living in urban and rural areas.
Each state was then ranked on how closely it matched national levels. Illinois was followed by Oregon, Michigan, Washington and Delaware.
West Virginia was the least typical state: poorer, whiter, more rural followed by Mississippi, New Hampshire, Vermont and Kentucky.
© MMVII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.
More From U.S.
Add a Comment See all 100 Comments
- Note, the problem is larger than we think, it has to do with the way Capitalism functions and whether we are going to continue to allow capitalism to flourish in this country, as it has for such a long time or are we going to put constraints on our free enterprise system. Capitalism, as far as I know, needs cheap labor. This country has benefitted from the utilization of immigrant labor and has allowed capitalism to expand itself and consolidate itself here and abroad. Now many of us, with good and some with bad intentions, want to protect the American worker, want a better comprehensive homeland security program which, includes the securing of our borders, both north and south. And, some are just biased, racist and purist, lest nor forget, a possible demographic shift albeit change in the demographic composition in this country by Hispanics immigrants is not necessarily a bad thing. Just like the Irish, Italians, Jews and countless other immigrants in this country of the past, the process of acculturation will allow for the Americanization process of these people.
But calling eachother names and not looking at the issue on both sides of the fence only allows for tomfoolery and no real discourse on this very important matter. - Reply to this comment
- Every immigrant group in this country, past and present, has gone through the process of being looked upon or described as a scourge to this country.
For one, fear of cultural change or a complete demographic change in this country is what drives the anti-immigrant sentiment. The Irish, Italians, Jews, and other immigrants in this country, who by the way, were not english speakers, with the exception of the Irish, who in some cases spoke english or their native gaelic, came to this country and formed ethnic enclaves in many parts of the United States. They too were shunned by American purists who felt they were going to lose the country to illegals or those that came here to steal American jobs or rather work for less and do more, in contrast to those who want more money but want to do less.
On the one hand, I understand some of the complaints concerning the lowering of wages and the devaluing of the moral and ethical nature (i.e., crime, drug trafficking and other criminal behavior, and that is not to say that all immigrants, legal or illegal engage in such behaviors, this is solely related to those that come here to disrupt things with their criminality.), of our American culture, and I happen to be hispanic or latino myself and I say that carefully. But, on the other hand, I am bothered by the tone some people have concerning or singling out Mexicans and other Spanish speaking groups, simply because they came here, either illegally or legally. - Reply to this comment
- "I forgive RandalDS and rwassel for their hateful, bigoted and racial attacks on this country."
- Posted by cpaide at 01:01 PM : May 18, 2007
What are you even talking about? Now you're just grasping at straws. Name one post where I was a racist or a bigot.
And FYI - you can't be "racist" towards a country, only a race. Hence the term "race-ist".
Who's in 5th grade? - Reply to this comment
- Posted by Free_Citizen at 06:04 AM : May 18, 2007
Thanks. I went and read the entry on Manifest Destiny and you are right, it's pretty accurate. The concept of Manifest destiny (and esp the death and destruction of innocents that resulted from it) has become controversial again in many quarters as it's being practiced today in the Middle-East and indeed worldwide as a basic pillar of the Neoconservative Movement, which has stated the the United States is destined by God to spread democracy throughout the world and to dominate the world by as a result of it's success. To me, as the song goes, "It's just a little bit of history repeating". - Reply to this comment
- "There are some who think they know. Let them go until they don't." You two can go now.
Posted by cpaide at 01:01 PM : May 18, 2007
ROTFLMFAO!!!!!! To quote the one, the only, the Great Bugs Bunny "What a Maroon!!!"
LOL! - Reply to this comment
- I forgive RandalDS and rwassel for their hateful, bigoted and racial attacks on this country. I don't know if it's the lack of sleep or carrying around large chips on their shoulders for years that has done it to them, but they are obviously incapable of meaningful thought or comment without getting angry and calling names like 5th graders.
"There are some who think they know. Let them go until they don't." You two can go now. - Reply to this comment
- " These people were mostly MURDERED BY THE HISPANICS in one way or another."
The Hispanic presence throughout the Southwest that you refer to was PUNY AND PRIMATIVE in comparison. I wouldn't brag about these missions. The missions, BUILT BY SLAVE LABOR--NOT BY THE HISPANICS, were mostly nothing but abandoned, tumbled-down buildings when the Americans took the empty desert and developed it. Thanks to the Americans, many of these missions have been rebuilt and are now nice tourist attractions."
-Posted by cpaide at 02:03 AM : May 18, 2007
Alright, your racism is truly showing here. All your posts have been making GROSS GENERLIZATIONS of the Hispanic culture. You are a racist, plain and simple! Every post you have written, you seem more and more angry at the entire Hispanic culture - I'm sorry if you feel you've been wronged by Hispanics, but that is no cause to spew hate.
As to your previous post, I like how you say Hispanics murdered people back in those days, as if our entire country was not founded on the murder or people (see: Native Americans)
And the missions, built by slave labor? Again, this country was built on slave labor, my friend (see: 1700's - 1865).
It's funny how you accept that white people did these things, and yet only mention Hispanics. Again, your racist colors are showing, as is your bias on the subject. - Reply to this comment
- Dear RandalDS,
You are right, not every entry in wikipedia is checked for accuracy by an authoritative specialist. Contentious subjects such as current events are always biased and not reliable. However, other disciplins such as History and Science seem to be quite right. One entry that will coincide with what you say can be found under the title of "Manifest Destiny". - Reply to this comment
- Here is a phrase to get used to. The Browning of America. You're going to be hearing it a lot in the future. Because even if we shut the borders down completely and managed to throw out every illegal alien, in the next few decades the United States will gain a majority of Americans of Hispanic descent from all of the Americans of Hispanic decent that are here now and in many cases have been here for dozens of generations. At the bottom of all of this anti-immigrant talk is the fear of that truth and a desire to slow down or stop it from happening. However you might as well try to stop the rain from falling or the sun from shining. Within 40 or 50 years America will no longer be controlled by white people for the first time in it's history. For the first time in it's history the majority of people here will have grown up hearing Spanish spoken at home by their grandparents. It'll be up to them if they keep English as the national language. But hey, I'm already 50 and don't plan on living more then another decade or two, so I won't get to see how white Americans react when they finally realize that we ain't on top no more. Kind of a shame because I'd love to see it. ;-)
- Reply to this comment
- Obviously you're too close minded. I point out the truth to you and you reach for Wikipedia? I mean come on, anyone can write anything in Wikipedia they want and modify anything that's written there. I could write a Wikipedia entry that says Santa Claus discovered America and found the Jewish faith here 945AD and they'd publish it. Nothing is checked there. Look, I know that what is now the American Southwest was once a very important part of Northern Mexico, but even if you refuse to accept the obvious truth of that (and I'm sure you will) it doesn't change the fact that there are a huge number of Hispanics here who are descended from Hispanic families that have been here since before there was a USA. That is an undeniable historical fact (and do your own homework looking it up, it's not my job to teach you what you should have learned in 5th grade history class). It also doesn't change the fact that I believe that Mexicans who are here now should be allowed to remain and become citizens and that we should make it easier for more to come here. You don't think so? Fine. I really don't give a sh*it if you do or don't.
- Reply to this comment
- "There was a relatively large and thriving Hispanic presence throughout the Southwest BEFORE the Mexican/American War. That is the simple historical truth and denying it means you're either uneducated about it or are lying." Posted by RandalDS at 01:34 AM : May 18, 2007
Please cite something that backs up your opinions and PLEASE STOP THE PERSONAL ATTACKS.
I know that there were millions of people living in American cities as big, as rich, and even more populous than the capitals of Europe prior to the arrival of the Hispanics. These people were mostly MURDERED BY THE HISPANICS in one way or another. (See 1491: New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus, by Charles C. Mann, ISBN: 1-4000-4006-X).
The Hispanic presence throughout the Southwest that you refer to was PUNY AND PRIMATIVE in comparison. I wouldn't brag about these missions. The missions, BUILT BY SLAVE LABOR--NOT BY THE HISPANICS, were mostly nothing but abandoned, tumbled-down buildings when the Americans took the empty desert and developed it. Thanks to the Americans, many of these missions have been rebuilt and are now nice tourist attractions. But the missions we see today do nothing to prove that any ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS "belong" here.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Missions_of_California in the Wikipedia for more information. - Reply to this comment
- Below is a list of the 21 California Missions and the years they were founded. Notice anything about the names? Like maybe that many of them are now names of California cites and not names that "developers" came up with to be "quaint"? And these are just the missions in California. There were dozens and dozens and dozens of other Spanish and Mexican missions, small towns, churches with towns around them and villages throughout the Southwest starting from the early 1700's. To say the SouthWest was not once a significant part of Northern Mexico is wrong Wrong WRONG!
San Diego (16 July, 1769);
San Luis Rey (13 July, 1798);
San Juan Capistrano (1 November, 1776);
San Gabriel (8 September, 1771);
San Fernando (8 September, 1797);
San Buenaventura (31 March, 1782);
Santa Barbara (4 Dec., 1786);
Santa Inez (17 Sept., 1804);
Purmsima Concepcisn (8 Dec., 1787);
San Luis Obispo (1 Sept., 1772);
San Miguel (25 July, 1797);
San Antonio de Padua (14 July, 1771);
Soledad (9 Oct., 1791);
San Carlos or Carmelo (3 June, 1770);
Santa Cruz (29 Sept., 1791);
San Juan Bautista (24 June, 1797);
Santa Clara (12 January, 1777);
San Josi (11 June, 1797);
San Francisco (9 Oct., 1776);
San Raphael (14 Dec., 1817);
San Francisco Solano (4 July, 1823). - Reply to this comment
- Posted by cpaide at 01:10 AM : May 18, 2007
I still have never seen an American flag hung upside down at any protest or in any neighborhoods in L.A. I just have not.
I eat at fast food places all over L.A. and never have any trouble ordering food. Yes sometimes their accents are a bit thick, but they speak English. Every time. Lived here for all of the last 8 years and most of the last 18 and never have had a problem.
A Commodore during the Mexican/American war is hardly a "developer", but even he named it after a Spanish Mission because the majority of Hispanic sounding city names in California are named after the Spanish missions that founded them! They were all up and down the coast (and inland) with names like San Luis Obispo, Santa Rosa and San Juan Capistrano. And Of course some idiot developers name some housing developments after Indian and Spanish names, but there are more then enough named by Mexicans and Spaniards to show they were here in large numbers and many of the Hispanic residents of California are descended from them. There was a relatively large and thriving Hispanic presence throughout the Southwest BEFORE the Mexican/American War. That is the simple historical truth and denying it means you're either uneducated about it or are lying. - Reply to this comment
- "Adult classes that teach English are full every evening at high schools and community colleges across the city every night and weekend."
Right! I'm an ESL and citizenship teacher, and there are enough teachers for all of the people who want to learn English and citizenship. Randal, you know what you're talking about. - Reply to this comment
- RandalDS--PLEASE STOP THE NAME-CALLING, especially when almost everything you say is misleading and incorrect.
"I've never seen the American flag hung upside down..."
Let's see, I did a GOOGLE IMAGE SEARCH and got 41,600 RESULTS for "u.s. flag upside down mexican"
http://images.google.com/images?um=1&tab=wi&hl=en&q=u.s.+flag upside down mexican
"They don't refuse to learn English either."
That one is simple. Go to any fast food place in L.A. and try to order in English. Or VISIT A MIDDLE SCHOOL. "But I yam speeke inglish"
http://www.proenglish.org/issues/offeng/census.html
"The Hispanic names in California are Hispanic because the cities were named by Hispanics!!"
Wrong again. Here's one example, SAN FRANCISCO: In 1846, during the Mexican War, Commodore JOHN SLOAT (could be hispanic, but I doubt it) captured and named the settlement for the San Francisco de Asms mission (better known as Mission Dolores). Santa Clarita, Valencia, and many, many other cities were, in fact, named by developers.
I recommend to you the following: CALIFORNIA PLACE NAMES: The Origin and Etymology of Current Geographical Names by Erwin G. Gudde, Publisher: University of California Press; 1 edition (August 20, 1998), ISBN-10: 0520213165 - Reply to this comment
- To anybody feeling upset or despondent after reading this article, here's a solution. Have a talk with your spouse, something like this:
"Honey, why don't we have a few more kids, say, 10 to 15? I want to help offset the ethnic imbalance and retain the character of this great nation of ours. How about it?" - Reply to this comment
- The names of cities in Southern California are no evidence of "belonging" to Spain or Mexico. Most of the names were given by American developers who thought they sounded quaint. These same developers took a dry, unpopulated desert, watered it and made it bloom like a rose.
Posted by cpaide at 11:52 PM : May 17, 2007
What a complete crock of sh*it!!!! The Hispanic names in California are Hispanic because the cities were named by Hispanics!! You're not stupid enough to think a developer named Los Angeles or San Diego or San Francisco or Santa Barbara or are you? What an ignorant thing to say! What a complete and utter LIE! Southern California was a possession of Mexico before we took it from them in the Mexican/American war. So was Colorado, Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas. That is a historical fact and you are a complete bullshi*ter! Christ if you're going to lie then at least try to come up with one that sounds true and that can't be disproved by anyone with a history book! - Reply to this comment
- A large part of the US used to belong to Mexico. If you live somewhere else you may have a legitimist complaint.
Posted by Norcalruss at 10:18 PM : May 17, 2007
That is a complete MYTH. North America never "belonged" to the Mexicans. They never populated it with significant numbers of people, nor did anything constructive with it. Neither did the Spanish. Just about every country visited by the Spanish HISPANICS was destroyed. Just about every country visited by the English ANGLOS was improved.
The names of cities in Southern California are no evidence of "belonging" to Spain or Mexico. Most of the names were given by American developers who thought they sounded quaint. These same developers took a dry, unpopulated desert, watered it and made it bloom like a rose.
This land belongs to AMERICANS, including all LEGAL IMMIGRANTS who choose to become Americans by obeying they laws of the land, learning the language and constructively contributing to America.
Those ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS who break the law and demand special treatment and handouts DO NOT BELONG HERE and AMERICA DOES NOT BELONG TO THEM. - Reply to this comment
- I'm not sure how having illegal immigrants from Mexico impedes folks from these countries from moving to America...can you explain? And I'm confused - what makes Mexicans as a population racist bigots?
Posted by rwassel
Economics 101, my friend. The reason people come to America is for the paycheck. If ILLEGAL MEXICANS take all the jobs, that impedes other LEGAL IMMIGRANTS from moving to America.
What makes these ILLEGAL MEXICANS bigots? "A bigot is a prejudiced person who is intolerant of opinions, lifestyles, or identities differing from his or her own." --From Wikipedia Well, they openly defy U.S. laws, hang the U.S. flag upside down (not just at protests, either--I see this all over many neighborhoods), refuse to learn English, and persecute other immigrant groups.
Just last Sunday, I witnessed over a dozen itinerant mexican taco vendors selling food just outside the doors of Chinese and Vietnamese restaurants in Chinatown Los Angeles. They posted signs in Spanish on the outside walls of the restaurants. What are Mexicans doing in Chinatown selling tacos? Mexicans have excluded other ethnic groups from Olvera Street, a touristy mexican market in downtown Los Angeles.
People outside of S. California just don't understand the severity of the ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT problem. If they did, they would deport the 20 MILLION ILLEGALS, along with the President and both Houses of Congress and redeploy our troops from Iraq to the Mexican border. - Reply to this comment
- The gov't can well afford to secure the border, that is IF they want to. C'mon, we already spend hundreds of billions on Iraq. The fact is, businesses WANT the cheap labor of immigrants, legal or not, and businesses are the biggest campaign contributors, NOT the average Joe.
For better or worse, that's the "Free Market" at work, maximizing profit by cutting cost. Americans love to tout the Gospel of the Free Market. Well, here it is. - Reply to this comment
Best-selling author Mitch Albom on his first nonfiction work since "Tuesdays with Morrie."
