In many cases the census forms are sent in by mail so nobody even has a chance to see whether they are filled in truthfully.
Vice President Richard Mentor Johnson and a slave woman named Julia Chinn had what would have been considered a common-law marriage if she had been free and white. He publicly called her “my wife.” After his death, courts ruled that there had been no marriage, and his children were denied their inheritance because they were considered bastards.
Fascinating. I never knew any of this. According to wikipedia, Chinn was an octoroon, meaning she was 7/8 European. And Johnson was a real stand-up guy:
It’s suspected that Thaddeus Stevens (a major politician during the Civil War) had a romantic relationship with his black housekeeper, Lydia Smith:
Nobody’s yet mentioned representative Mia Love who’s husband, Jason, is a white guy. McConnell has her beat for highest currently held office.
Online in Australia, though presumably still snail and sneaker as well.
In the US, a certain % of homes are visited by an actual census taker. Been that way for a long time, and it will likely be that way going forward. It’s built into the system. I suspect the poster who raised that issue was talking about those instances when a census taker is involved.
I saw a study a few years back which took blood samples and looked for genetic markers that would indicate European ancestry or African ancestry within a couple dozen generations. They found that 95% of Americans who self-identify as “black” have some European ancestry and 35% of Americans who self-identify as “white” have some African ancestry.
If the 43 presidents who served before Obama were a representative sample, we’d expect 35% of them (approximately 15) to have some African ancestry. It would be highly unlikely that all 43 of them, and their wives, had not one single African ancestor within 20 generations.
It would be virtually impossible to figure out precisely which ones, separating rumor from fact (Warren G. Harding? Eleanor Roosevelt?) but we could state with confidence that it’s very likely that at least one US President (before Obama) was either part black or married to someone who was part black.
Historically, government attempts to sort people into racial categories by fiat (such as the Racial Integrity Act, let alone the Nuremberg Laws) have had a really bad track record in retrospect. So self-reporting is pretty much all the census bureau can do; one just has to hope that the folks who think it’s funny to intentionally misrepresent themselves on census forms are a small minority of the population.
It’s also worth noting that the Census Bureau is well aware that people’s racial self-identifications can and do change over time. A Census Bureau study (PDF) found that a noticeable fraction of people (around 5-10% of Americans) changed their racial and/or ethnic self-identification between the 2000 Census and the 2010 Census.
Before 1982 Indians were classified as Caucasians, in contrast to other Asian nationalities. Indian businessmen lobbied the government and were able to get the classification changed to asian so they could be classified as a disadvantaged minority and get preferential treatment from the Small Business Administration.
That’s not correct. I’ve never heard of a black American, who was the descendants of slaves, who did NOT have some European ancestry. For white Americans, the number with recent African ancestry is much smaller-- less than 10%. Link.
Once you get down to < 1%, you’re getting too close to the noise level to make any meaningful conclusions.
We’re talking about two different studies. The one you’re citing defined “recent” to be within seven generations. The one I saw went back more than seven; I think it was twenty or so. Naturally, you’ll get different percentages that way.
Anyway, even if we go with 3.5% instead of 35%, that would still mean that, in a group of 43 US presidents and 43 first ladies, all of whom self-identify as white, you’d expect 3 of them to have some African ancestry. It would be surprising if none of the 86 had any African ancestry.
You’re applying the same probability to all 43 Presidents.
Do you think self described white Americans in 1789 were equally as likely to have African ancestry as would self described white Americans in 2016?
This is only half of the story: Indians were classified as Caucasians only from 1970 to 1982 (pdf, page 137). Actually, it’s more like a tenth of the story. But that’s neither here nor there. Certainly Indians are a historically disadvantaged minority (not eligible for citizenship prior to 1952, for example). We just haven’t had it as bad as other minorities (and to some degree we’ve been “selected” for by US immigration policy).
Yes, I did mention the assumption that the 86 presidents and first ladies were a representative sample compared to today’s data. And yes I’m aware that this assumption might be false. It could be true that the data was different in the past, and it could be true that presidents and their wives are a biased sample. The modern data at least gives us a point of comparison, though.