|
July 16, 2003
Figures Don’t Lie (A Continuing Series):
Linguistic Isolation Balkanizes America
In my last column, I
noted that the 2000 Census showed foreign language
enclaves growing rapidly in the U.S. - to the point
where there were now nearly six million native-born
Americans over the age of five who could not speak English
“very well.”
But wait! There’s more bad news!
The Census has another measure of
the failure of the
assimilative mechanism: “linguistic isolation” (LI).
Its
definition of “linguistic isolation:” households
in which no adult speaks only English; and no adult
speaks English “very well.”
The Census Bureau counts all the
members of such households as linguistically isolated.
(This includes members under 14 years of age, although
some may speak English.)
In
2000, 11.9 million U.S. residents were linguistically
isolated (LI). That’s up from 7.7 million in 1990, an
increase of more than half (53.6%).
Other key points from the 2000 Census:
 | The proportion of the U.S. population classified as LI
rose from 3.4% in 1990 to 4.5% in 2000 |
 |
California was the most LI intensive state, with
11.1% (!) of its population so classified in 2000 |
 | Texas (7.8%) was second-most LI intensive; West
Virginia (0.2%) was the least |
 | Census 2000 showed that the LI problem is spreading
geographically beyond six high immigrant magnet states
of California, Texas, New York, Florida, Illinois,
and New Jersey. LI population more than doubled (up
104%) between 1990 and 2000 in the 44 states not
considered high immigration magnets |
 | Some hinterland states experienced even faster LI
population growth rates, e.g., Nebraska (269%);
Georgia (376%); North Carolina (548%); Iowa (145%) |
 | Nearly one-third (31.2%) of the LI population now
lives in the non-high immigration states, up from
23.5% in 1990 |
 | Among U.S. residents speaking an
Asian or Pacific Islander language, linguistic
isolation remains very high–31% in 1990 and 30% in
2000. Pockets of Asian and Pacific Islander LI households
grew in such places as Kentucky (up 10%) and South
Carolina (up 8%). |
Spanish speakers now form the largest single LI
community in the United States - comprising about 60% of
the total.
Spanish-language
immigrants are
slower at acquiring English and the
intergenerational shift towards English proficiency is
less intense among the Spanish-speaking population.
Apparently, the sheer size of the Spanish-speaking
community, with its
Spanish-language institutions and
media obviates the need for English proficiency.
(Immigration enthusiasts
always assume that mass communications must spread
English, but
foreign language programming and satellite feeds
from the old country may also be promoting foreign
language retention for all groups–for example, Asians.)
Also important in
Spanish retention: Lower levels of schooling,
bilingual education, and a greater tendency for
Mexican immigrants to view their stay in the U.S. as
temporary or to be combined with frequent return
migrations to Mexico.
Immigrants who are not proficient in English pay a
price: they earn 17% less than immigrants of similar
backgrounds, experience, and education who are
proficient in English. (Source: Chiswick, B.R. and
Miller, P.W., “Language in the Immigrant Labor Market,”
in
Immigration, Language, and Ethnicity: Canada and the
United States, Washington D.C., American
Enterprise Institute, 1992.) And American society pays
a price: Linguistic isolation is often associated with
poverty, poor health, depression, and–most
obviously–alienation from the mainstream American
culture.
If current immigration
policy continues, the U.S. in the coming decades will be
increasingly characterized by both linguistic
concentration, with LI Spanish speakers accounting
for ever larger shares of the U.S. population, and
linguistic diversity, with an increasing number
of
non-Spanish language enclaves scattered throughout
the nation.
The Greeks had a word
for this: Balkanization.
|
Persons in Linguistically Isolated Households
|
|
(Population 5 Years Old and Over, in millions)
|
| |
| |
1990 |
2000 |
% Increase |
| United States |
7,741,259 |
11,893,572 |
53.6% |
| California |
2,680,665 |
3,472,270 |
29.5% |
| Texas |
988,458 |
1,503,924 |
52.1% |
| New York |
1,006,857 |
1,226,406 |
21.8% |
| Florida |
547,169 |
892,295 |
63.1% |
| Illinois |
370,081 |
603,221 |
63.0% |
| New Jersey |
329,111 |
479,959 |
45.8% |
| Arizona |
143,397 |
309,761 |
116.0% |
| Massachusetts |
199,367 |
263,971 |
32.4% |
| Washington |
89,268 |
206,283 |
131.1% |
| Pennsylvania |
141,473 |
191,233 |
35.2% |
Source:
U.S. Census Bureau,
Edwin S. Rubenstein (email
him) is President of
ESR Research
Economic Consultants in Indianapolis. |
|