(UPDATED)Hispanics, Latinos Need Not Apply…

shutterstock_107261690

UPDATE:

The Washington Post reports that Jason Richwine, the co-author of a controversial immigration study released this week by the Heritage Foundation, and the author of a doctoral thesis at Harvard “arguing that the United States should focus its immigration efforts on those with high IQs, and [who] had written for a Web site that describes itself as ‘nationalist,’” has told Post Politics that he has resigned his position with the organization.

The Post: “’Yes, that’s right,’ Richwine wrote in a brief e-mail. Heritage confirmed that he resigned.”

Original Post:

The Heritage Foundation is “a public policy think tank that promotes the principles that made America great: free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense.”

Apparently one of those principles that made America great is opposing, preferably killing, immigration reform as The Heritage Foundation actually helped to do six years ago, in part through two reports written by senior research fellow Robert Rector — “one predicting a flood of 100 million new legal immigrants over the next 20 years, the other again finding that reform would swell the welfare ranks,” according to the Washington Post. These were reports referenced to by U.S. Senators during debates.

A more recent study by Robert Rector and Jason Richwine of the Heritage Foundation claims that “the immigration reform bill being weighed in the U.S. Senate will cost the government $5.3 trillion. Or, more precisely, that undocumented immigrants under current law will cost the government $1 trillion, and legalizing those immigrants will increase that to $6.3 trillion.”

The Washington Post does an extensive analysis of Rector and Richwine’s claims and concludes:

Rector and Richwine are certainly correct that making currently ineligible immigrants eligible for means-tested benefits and retirement entitlements has a real budgetary cost. But in the long run, we know that immigration is a net economic boon, and in particular for immigrants, which reduces their fiscal cost and increases our ability to pay for what benefits they do receive. And the best study we have on the fiscal effects of immigration reform, from the CBO, finds the impact to be minimal or positive.

Pay attention to that study. Pay attention to whatever score the CBO puts out of the Gang of 8 bill. But the Heritage numbers simply are not credible.

OK, so Rector and Richwine “make a lot of curious methodological choices that cumulatively throw the study into question.” We all make curious methodological choices in our lifetimes, but to suggest that:

The statistical construct known as IQ can reliably estimate general mental ability, or intelligence. The average IQ of immigrants in the United States is substantially lower than that of the white native population, and the difference is likely to persist over several generations. The consequences are a lack of socioeconomic assimilation among low-IQ immigrant groups, more underclass behavior, less social trust, and an increase in the proportion of unskilled workers in the American labor market. Selecting high-IQ immigrants would ameliorate these problems in the U.S., while at the same time benefiting smart potential immigrants who lack educational access in their home countries.

That is exactly what Jason Richwine, a Senior Policy Analyst at the Heritage Foundation and co-author of the “immigration reform bill being weighed in the U.S. Senate will cost the government $5.3 trillion” study, wrote in the abstract of his doctoral dissertation, titled “IQ and Immigration Policy.”

The Washington Post adds:

Richwine’s dissertation asserts that there are deep-set differentials in intelligence between races. While it’s clear he thinks it is partly due to genetics — “the totality of the evidence suggests a genetic component to group differences in IQ” — he argues the most important thing is that the differences in group IQs are persistent, for whatever reason. He writes, “No one knows whether Hispanics will ever reach IQ parity with whites, but the prediction that new Hispanic immigrants will have low-IQ children and grandchildren is difficult to argue against.”

Now, as one of those “low-IQ Hispanic immigrants,” of course I don’t have the wherewithal to even begin to dispute such a claim from such an educated person, especially an analyst at the reputable Heritage Foundation.

Fortunately, many others with much better education, acumen and credentials than poor, ole, low-IQ-me are disputing and disassociating themselves from these “findings.” Even the Heritage Foundation, already reeling from the $6.3 trillion study may not be feeling all that comfortable with Richwine’s past findings — although it has not renounced the findings nor the author:

Michael Gonzalez, vice president of communications for Heritage Foundation, wrote in a blog post that the Harvard paper does not represent Heritage’s position. “It’s [sic] findings do not reflect the positions of The Heritage Foundation or the conclusions of our study on the cost of amnesty to U.S. taxpayers, as race and ethnicity are not part of Heritage immigration policy recommendations,” Gonzalez wrote, adding that Richwine provided quantitative support to the lead author Robert Rector, according to politico.com.

Some great “quantitative support.”

Perhaps The Heritage Foundation should check the credentials and the work of the “analysts” it hires as aggressively as it promotes free enterprise, limited government, etc. and as aggressively as it opposes immigration reform.

Read more here, here, here and here.


Image: spirit of america / Shutterstock.com

spirit of america / Shutterstock.com

Auf Stumbleupon zeigen
Auf tumblr zeigen

Author: DORIAN DE WIND, Military Affairs Columnist

  • sheknows

    Thank you, good article Dorian. Must say…Wow!
    Just the name Heritage Foundation sends creepy crawlies down my spine. Could there BE a more bigoted, hard-wired, Republican fund raising organization on the face of the planet??

  • SteveK

    Thanks Dorian, It’s obvious that de Mint on de pillow comes from Jim.

    Jim DeMint comes from humble background and is therefore a embarrassment, and an insult, to his own roots.

  • DORIAN DE WIND, Military Affairs Columnist

    LOL, Steve.

    Thanks, sheknows.

    Goodnight, all.

  • abufarsi

    What a slap in the face are plans to legalize illegals when my wife had to wait years for her legal visa.

  • DR. CLARISSA PINKOLA ESTÉS, Managing Editor of TMV, and Columnist

    the history of ‘allowing’ immigrants is shameful. The Chinese exclusion act, the quotas from certain countries off and on, the allowing of money buying passage in while spitting on and turning away the poor… turning away a boatload of jewish refugees at harbor, the bs about if you make landfall from cuba or haiti, you have a chance to stay, but if caught in the water, youre turned back. Many many people during ‘beloved’ Mao’s time, post WWII, for whom coming to America was life or death, no such thing as ‘visas’ and such. I’ve 25 people in my own immigrant and refugee family who are so grateful they cry still to this day that they were ‘allowed’ to come with body parts shot away, with grave illnesses from starvation, with war injuries aghast, and the raped and child loss women could barely stand. If most people knew the corruption, the lack of reasoning, the GREED that is behind who comes, who is not allowed, we all would be sickened unto death. Mainly because of how many literally died trying to come here, how many died when they were turned away. I especially find galling those of wealth who came here on a ‘foreign advisor’ visa or teaching visa, who then turn and dun others who try to come who have not had the advantage of education yet…

    A significant portion of anti-immigrant feeling we know, actually comes from higher economic and educational classes of immigrants who were lucky enough to outwit, outwait, outspend, marry, or otherwise come to citizenship. I have to say, I’d much prefer that anyone who had challenges coming here, that they have care and regard and empathy for those who have been barred. At town meetings however, I’ve heard certain ‘naturalized citizens’ who came to raise hell about ‘the dirty immigrants’ of our time, boast and brag and spit about how they, they, they came here ‘legally.’ But they forget, some of us know them and their trajectories, know their money, their status-climbing, their trading whatever for helping hands, their pointedly made connections and corruptions. They appear to be in love with their own fantasy of their great worth, and the lesser worth, in their minds, of others who are not themselves or do not belong to their ‘group.’

    Read history, but with an open heart, and the unfairness and cunning of many on both sides is evident– in government and certain classes of immigrants who lie in their teeth and bribe to get here, is stunning. Just stunning. US complicity is vast re ‘immigration’ through the US to other countries as well, of those who were/are the Allies sworn enemies. The entire swiss cheese of immigration, is not a reasoned nor just process.

    Just my .02

  • DORIAN DE WIND, Military Affairs Columnist

    “What a slap in the face are plans to legalize illegals when my wife had to wait years for her legal visa.”

    So did I, so did I, abufarsi. However, that does not prevent me from showing some compassion and from supporting sensible immigration reform.

    BTW, “immigration reform” is much more than “plans to legalize illegals” — even if your characterization was correct.

  • zusa1

    “We’re so used to thinking of IQ as being genetically given, used to thinking of these traits as somehow embedded at birth, but they’re not. The whole literature in genetics is now talking about gene-environment interactions: epigenetics.”

    http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2013/02/it-pays-to-invest-in-early-education-says-a-nobel-economist-who-boosts-kids-iq.html

    It’s amazing to think, but early environmental intervention of one generation, will also have an inherited effect on that generation’s children and grandchildren.

    http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1952313,00.html

  • ShannonLeee

    The world is more dynamic than most people think.

  • DORIAN DE WIND, Military Affairs Columnist

    Perhaps relevant — perhaps not — to the discussion of low-IQ Hispanics might be the findings by the Pew Research Center that “A record seven-in-ten (69%) Hispanic high school graduates in the class of 2012 enrolled in college that fall, two percentage points higher than the rate (67%) among their white counterparts…”,

  • slamfu

    First off, Dorian, hats off to you. Having completed a military career, raised a family, plus your significant well thought out contributions to this site, all with the handicap of being a “low IQ Immigrant”, is truly an inspiration. How nice of the gentlemen at the Heritage Foundation to shed some light on this … screw it I’m too hung over today to churn out snark.

    These guys are morons, plain and simple. In this day and age to put out a piece like that, they might as well have backed up their theories with phrenology. The same arguments have been made through the ages to hold back immigrants. I’m sure someone said the exact same thing about his ancestors when they were trying to immigrate. Although I think I might have accidentally made his own point there.

  • DORIAN DE WIND, Military Affairs Columnist

    Hi Slamfu,

    Your compliments are much, much more, than I deserve. However, as a low-IQ Hispanic/Latino immigrant, I better accept them as I may need them.:)

    Thank you so much

    Dorian

  • roro80

    Great article Dorian.

    There is quite a large percentage of white America that holds onto this idea of IQ as something valuable and indicative of important, inherent characteristics. It’s mostly conservatives, but a pretty good number of oh-so-intellectual and drolly unbiased so-called liberal and libertarian types also hold fast to this idea. For the conservatives and conservatism as a movement, the motives are easy to spot: if we can make up and sell a reason besides public policy why particular racial and ethnic groups are less successful, there’s no impetus to fix the public policy in such a way that would improve the success of more people, including those racial groups. For the fauxgressive puedo-intellectuals, I think it’s just an enjoyment of feeling superior to others. Not that that couldn’t be part of the thinking in conservative circles as well. Feeling superior to others feels good to most people of both sides of the aisle.

    But make no mistake: “White people are just naturally better and smarter than [insert racial or ethic group here]” is racism at its most basic, simple level.
    There really truly is nothing more clearly racist than a statement that white people are just better. There are some who try to justify this racism with something along the lines of “it can’t be racist if it’s true”. It’s not true, of course, and those who clearly are happier as racists then go searching out bogus measures of worth like IQ to “prove” their racist mindsets.

  • slamfu

    “But make no mistake: “White people are just naturally better and smarter than [insert racial or ethic group here]” is racism at its most basic, simple level.”

    You. Nail. Head.

  • DORIAN DE WIND, Military Affairs Columnist

    Thanks, roro.

    Your comments remind me of something like a superior Aryan race” or a “master race,” but I don’t quite remember where I saw that movie before…

  • roro80

    Yep, Dorian, I may have heard that tune as well. SSDD, you know? Using rational-sounding or even scientific-sounding justifications for the same old hatred is a perversion of both humanity and of science, and it’s such an old tactic it may be prehistoric (if only there were written records…! :) ). Mein Kampf was mostly for the propagandizing for the public, but if you go back and read all the scientific studies done in pre-war Germany used to justify the elimination of non-Aryans, it is all quite rational, as Richwine intends to be. Very similar “sciency” propaganda was used to justify slavery and Jim Crow in our own country. The grosteque things done to Darwin’s work is a shame. Hopefully we can come to a place where this history is well enough known that it will be recognizable as the pile of donkey dooky it is right off the bat.

  • bluebelle

    Until they assimilated into our culture, various European groups tested poorly on standardized tests too. Success is defined by much more than those tests, and roro is right that evil doers like the Nazis and white supremacists have used
    that type of rationale for the most venal purposes. I wish we could keep those kinds of considerations out of our immigration policy and return to the ideals expressed by Emma Lazarus– who is a distant ancestor of mine, BTW.
    The most important American symbol has always been Lady Liberty, welcoming the oppressed in New York harbor.

  • DORIAN DE WIND, Military Affairs Columnist

    Hi Bluebelle and Roro,

    Thanks to both of you for your comments.

    Wow, Bluebelle, Emma Lazarus a distant relative. How neat!

    Of course we have to mention at least some of those famous words so representative of America in the late 19th century and so relevant to the discussion at hand:

    Give me your tired, your poor,
    Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
    The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
    Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
    I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

    And talking about a “pile of donkey dooky,” I just thought of a post by the incomparable Michelle Malkin heaping praise upon Jason Richwine, and lamenting “his crucifixion” and resignation from Heritage.

    Warning: Take some anti-nausea pills before reading.

  • bluebelle

    Thanks for reprinting Emma’s inspirational words, Dorian- now why can’t we live up to them??
    And I can’t tell you how sick I am of seeing conservatives who always seem to be willing to blame others for their failures yet who develop a persecution complex when faced with their own. I remember Tom DeLay comparing himself to Christ on the cross when he was driven out of politics.

  • DORIAN DE WIND, Military Affairs Columnist

    If Delay felt that way, it is because he built his own cross.