The Politics of Multiracialism: Challenging Racial Thinking

5. BEYOND PATHOLOGY AND CHEERLEADING: INSURGENCY, DISSOLUTION, AND COMPLICITY IN THE MULTIRACIAL IDEA

FIVE BEYOND PATHOLOGY AND CHEERLEADING: INSURGENCY, DISSOLUTION, AND COMPLICITY IN THE MULTIRACIAL IDEA RAINIER SPENCER Recommendations Concerning Reporting More Than One Race • When self-identification is used, a method for reporting more than one race should be adopted. • The method for respondents to report more than one race should take the form of multiple responses to a single question and not a “multiracial” category. • When a list of races is provided to respondents, the list should not contain a “multiracial” category. —Office of Management and Budget IN OCTOBER 1997, the years-long drama concerning whether or not to revise the racial definitions utilized by the federal government so as to include a separate multiracial category came to a temporary halt. The nature of that halt was the decision of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to reject the idea of a separate multiracial category, and to also change the instruction on forms requesting racial designation from “mark one race only” 101 102 RAINIER SPENCER to “mark one or more.”1 This decision was the culmination of a four-year, multimillion dollar review of federal racial classification that included two sets of congressional hearings (totaling seven separate hearing dates over the four years), and numerous solicitations of public comment. It was a formidable task undertaken with the utmost seriousness by the persons and agencies involved. Throughout the entire period of the review, the Statistical Policy Office of OMB’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs consistently sought, collected, and considered the opinions and arguments of interested parties on all sides of the debate. OMB’s ultimate decision —allowing for an expansion of the racial choices open to respondents by removing the instruction to “mark one race only,” while avoiding the damage to civil rights compliance monitoring that would result from a separate multiracial category—was arrived at through considered judgment and informed debate.2 Yet, despite some initial applause at what was touted as a remarkable compromise, it was a decision that ultimately pacified some, angered a few, and truly satisfied none. In fact, not long after OMB’s decision, the more vocal advocates of a separate multiracial category characterized OMB’s judgment as being totally unacceptable. For instance, in spite of the new option to mark multiple categories, Jane Chiong remains critical of the government’s rejection of a stand-alone multiracial category, lamenting that multiracial children continue to be the victims of “monoracial minority messages” being transmitted to them in schools.3 In fact, before the actual decision was rendered—when OMB’s interagency committee for reviewing changes to federal race categories suggested the “mark one or more” solution—Project RACE (Reclassify All Children Equally), one of the most visible advocates of a multiracial category during the period of the review, quickly proclaimed its displeasure. Project RACE executive director Susan Graham criticized the interagency committee’s recommendation by asserting: “We do not want to be the check-all-that-applies community. We want to be the multiracial community.”4 Within weeks, Graham again denounced the “mark one or more” compromise during one of the aforementioned hearings. Testifying before Congress on July 25, 1997, she offered her organization’s assessment of the decision: I have been asked to come back today to address the Interagency recommendation to the Office of Management and Budget. The national membership of Project RACE expressed feelings of elation at the “mark one or more” part of the recommendation. For the first time in the history of this country our multiracial children will not have to choose just one race. It is progress. But after the elation came the sad truth. Under the current recommendation, my chil- BEYOND PATHOLOGY AND CHEERLEADING 103 dren and millions of children like them merely become “check all that apply” kids or “check more than one box” children or “more than one race” persons. They will be known as “multiple check offs” or “half and halfers.” You must understand that the proposal, in effect, says, multiracial persons are only parts of other communities; they are not whole. Let’s be very clear: The compromise for “check one or more” without a multiracial identifier was not a compromise with the multiracial community. It was a compromise with the opponents of a multiracial category. I have brought short comments from Project Race members from across the country, of all...