Lin, Ann Chih & Harris, David R. (2008) The Colors of Poverty: Why Racial and Ethnic Disparities Exist. Reviewed by Steve Charbonneau, California State University, Stanislaus

Lin, Ann Chih & Harris, David R. (2008) The Colors of Poverty: Why Racial and Ethnic Disparities Exist. NY: Russell Sage Foundation 331 pages         ISBN 9780871545398 Reviewed by Steve Charbonneau California State University, Stanislaus May 15, 2009 The authors of The Colors of Poverty attempt to present the debate regarding the causes of minority poverty with a fresh lens. In doing so, they consider the compounding effects of disadvantage in perpetuating poverty across generations. It is a challenging and multi-layered problem to address, and the authors do not shy away from the complexities of it. They discuss a number of factors that contribute to widening racial gaps, including education, racial discrimination, social capital, immigration, and incarceration. It is clear that the authors intend their book to approach the poverty issue and its connections to race in a methodical and scholarly fashion. In affirmation of this, the publisher states, “The research in this landmark volume moves scholarship on inequality beyond a simple black-white paradigm, beyond the search for a single cause of poverty, and beyond the promise of one "magic bullet" solution” (book jacket cover). This reader agrees with the publisher’s statement. However, as will be addressed in this report, there are times that the authors and contributors seem more emotional and less objective than one would like to see in an academic work of this sort. Authors, Ann Chih Linn, Associate Professor of public policy in the Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy, and David R. Harris, deputy provost for social science and professor of Sociology at Cornell University, reveal their purpose for the book early on. In their preface, the authors state, “For both of us this project is a tangible sign of the passion for a more just society that brought us to academia” (p. ix). And so, there is an ideological purpose to their book. The authors argue that the problem of poverty is tragically interconnected with the issue of race. Their book is intended to convince its readers that this problem is one that must be dealt with now. Chapter one of the book is initiated by contrasting the national rates of poverty amongst African-American, Latino, and White children. According to the authors, nation-wide, one of every three African-American children and one of four Latino children lives in poverty. This is contrasted with the statistic that just one of seven White children live in poverty. From the authors’ standpoint, the problem is that in relative terms, poverty is disproportionately affecting children of color. The authors negotiate the problem in a respectful manner. To this end, they do not bemoan the fact that White children are living better than their peers. They simply want children of other backgrounds to have a better life. And in discussing the problem, they challenge others to ask the question, “Why is it that children of color experience greater rates of poverty?” It is a simple manner to go outside the confines of the book and find other research which substantiates the significance of the problem. For example, AlterNet (2009) reported that the Annual Minority Lending Report concluded that 47 percent of Hispanics and 48 percent of Blacks who purchased mortgages in 2006 got higher-cost loans, compared with about 17 percent of Whites and Asians. The predatory lending that targeted minority communities has now resulted in "extreme geographic concentrations of foreclosures," stated Jason Reece, a senior researcher at the Kirwan Institute for the Study of Race and Ethnicity (AlterNet, 2009). Furthermore, the problem is one that affects the State of California profoundly. In fact, California State Superintendent Jack O'Connell stated, "Eliminating the achievement gap between students who are African American or Latino and their white or Asian peers is a moral, ethical, and economic imperative. We must prepare all students to compete in the competitive global economy if we want California and the nation to continue to thrive as leading world economies” (California Department of Education, 2009). Of course, the achievement gap is determined by how different groups of students perform on standardized tests under the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). Taylor (2006), a proponent of Critical Race Theory, is concerned that institutionalized oppression of racial minorities has been practiced under the guise of State and federal policy. Ironically, NCLB, as federal policy, was created in an attempt to bridge the achievement gap between groups of students. And yet, Taylor contends that while NCLB has put pressure on students and educators to improve their performance, it has inadequately addressed the issues that Lin and Harris put forth in The Colors of Poverty. To this end, Taylor states, “there is considerable evidence that performance pressures alone are unlikely to reverse long-standing racialized policies and practices that remain neither well understood nor easily reversed” (Taylor, 2006, p. 2). The authors have one major assumption in approaching their subject. They assume that race is at the center of the poverty issue. Their assumption is based upon their view that the United States, its economy, culture, and policies have been formed over a long history of racially-based decision-making. From the authors’ standpoint, this has led to certain groups being more vulnerable to poverty than others. Initially, identifying the assumptions the authors hold was difficult for this reader. Some reflection revealed that this was due to the fact that this reader holds similar assumptions. Therefore, a kind of ideological blind spot initially obstructed an objective analysis of the authors’ assumptions. While the book is scholarly in nature, it is not written in a traditional research format. By the authors own admission, they do not intend their audience to be solely composed of scholars. They also want to engage students, journalists, and policy makers. With such a broad audience, the authors were wise to format their book in a way that made it more accessible to a wider range of people. However, implementing such a format did see the authors neglecting to follow protocols normally seen in academic research. This includes their failure to discuss alternative theories in any meaningful way. The book is organized into three parts: Group Identity and Group Outcomes, Nonracial Explanations for Racial Disparities in Poverty, and Policy, Race, and Poverty: Intentions and Consequences. The authors include a number of contributors to address these three topics. Throughout the book, the authors and contributors are careful to refer to numerous sources of previous research. What is more, a good deal of statistical data is included. Part one of the book, which established connections between race, privilege, disadvantage and achievement, reveals the use of surveys to illicit the self-reporting of experiences of unequal treatment by people representing different race, gender, and ethnic groups. The survey results were then quantified into statistical data and reported. Part two of the book, which discusses the impact of poverty on public education also utilizes statistical data to strengthen contributors’ positions. For example, a series of data tables displaying information regarding reading and math scores by race and disparity in family circumstance by race were used. Part three of the book, dealing with the implications of poverty and race on crime, victimization, and incarceration, utilized data regarding the incarceration of and victimization of Americans by race. As previously stated, neither the authors nor their contributors intended the book to be a traditional research paper. Nevertheless, they did utilize an adequate amount of evidence to support their assumptions. More than this, the citation of previous and supportive research helped make a strong case for their assertions. While much effort is spent to appeal to the emotions of the reader to adopt their assumptions regarding poverty and race, the authors do present evidence that adds credence to their discussion. Certainly the problem of poverty compounded by issues of race is extremely complicated. By utilizing a number of contributors and spending over 300 pages to deal with the problem, the authors demonstrated a desire to go beyond a one-dimensional, narrow analysis. In fact, they are more concerned with offering an analysis of the problem than forwarding a recommendation. To this end, they assert that some American racial and ethnic groups have gained greater economic empowerment than others. This economic empowerment was gained via cultural practices and formal policy which retarded the economic viability of certain racial and ethnic groups. Societal stratification occurred as social networking within groups perpetuated economic disparity. This is because groups with more economic clout were more capable of empowering others within their group than groups with little or no economic viability. Therefore, poverty is disproportionately experienced along racial and ethnic lines in the United States. The authors fear that if this viewpoint is not accepted more universally, than the true causes of the issue (as the authors perceive them to be) can not be dealt with. There is a dramatic discrepancy in academic achievement among certain subgroups of students within the American public education system. The weaker academic performance of some subgroups is carried with them into adulthood, as they enter the workforce in generally lower paying jobs than their counterparts in higher achieving subgroups. After years of addressing this achievement gap between different student subgroups, educators have little tangible evidence that suggests anything more than marginal success. This reader applauds the authors for their efforts in drawing attention to what they perceive to be the root of the problem of poverty. Until there is some sort of consensus amongst stakeholders on a national level about the reasons Americans of color experience disproportionately higher levels of poverty than their White and Asian counterparts, the problem will never be solved. Finally, stakeholders will also need to agree on a coordinated plan of action to deal with the problem on a national basis. References AlterNet. (n.d.) Retrieved March 11, 2009, from AlterNet: http://www.alternet.org/workplace/120755/everyone's_feeling_economic_pain,_but_it's_hitting_minorities_worst_of_all/ Closing the Achievment Gap: A Report California Superintendent Jack O’Connel P-16 Council, January 2008 California Department of Education http://www.closingtheachievementgap.org/cs/ctag/view/events/15l/ne/yr07/yr07rel121.asp Taylor, E. (2006). A Critical Race Analysis of the Achievement Gap in the United States: Politics, Reality, and Hope. Leadership and Policy in Schools. 5(1), 71-87. About the Reviewer Steve Charbonneau is a doctoral student in the Department of Educational Leadership at California State University, Stanislaus. He is a public school principal in Patterson, CA and holds a B.A. in Cultural Anthropology and an M.A. in International Relations from Fresno State.