state of latino arizona contents 4 letters . .................................................................................................................................... President Michael Crow Raul Yzaguirre 6 foreword the state of latino arizona...................................................................................................... Sal Rivera 8 introduction mirando adelante ................................................................................................................ Carlos Vélez-Ibáñez 14 history histories of mexican origin populations in arizona..................................................................... F. Arturo Rosales Christine Marín 22 demographics contemporary characteristics of a dynamic population.............................................................. Eileen Diaz McConnell Amanda Skeen 32 politics and civil rights the impact of politics, legislation and civil rights on arizona latinos............................................. Lisa Magaña Miguel Montiél James Garcia 40 education each of us has a role............................................................................................................ Paul Luna the critical condition of latino education in arizona................................................................... Eugene E. García Mehmet Dali Öztürk J. Luke Wood 54 economic and financial issues economic mobility: earnings, income, and wealth indicators ..................................................... Bárbara Robles Loui Olivas 64 health toward a healthy latino population in arizona .......................................................................... Hilda García-Pérez Seline Szkupinski-Quiroga 76 the arts genesis and development of latino/a expressive culture in arizona: theater, literature, film, music, and art.................................................................................... Carlos Vélez-Ibáñez Paul Espinosa James Garcia Marta Sanchez Michelle Martinez 88 credits and acknowledgments A Report Presented by The Arizona Latino Research Enterprise, ASU Department of Transborder Chicana/o and Latina/o Studies and ASU Office of Public Affairs. Copyright Arizona Board of Regents 2009. The sunburst logo is a registered trademark, and the Arizona State University wordmark is a trademark of the Arizona Board of Regents. Copyrights to original works remain with the authors. Governor Raul H. Castro Council Member Regina Romero 4 Arizona State University is pleased to collaborate with the Arizona Latino Research Enterprise to present the State of Latino Arizona. The report represents an important contribution to our effort to advance a broad understanding of the changing dynamics of the Latino experience in Arizona, which has played such an enduring and fundamental role in the development of our state and region. The trajectory of Hispanic culture and society in the American Southwest began long before Arizona achieved territorial status, and its impact remains a defining element shaping the future of our expansive binational region. Historical perspective provides a framework for an assessment of contemporary successes, challenges, and aspirations, as well as perceptions and projections regarding the potential of the decades to come. The report offers both objective indicators and nuanced perspective regarding the critical issues that require our collective attention, including education, healthcare, justice and equality, job creation, economic development, quality of life and quality of place, and opportunity for enterprise and social advancement. While the report focuses on how these factors impact Hispanics, the spectrum of concerns and hopes and values under consideration are equally relevant to all Arizonans. The unprecedented transformation of the regional demographic profile suggests the scale and complexity of impending societal change. According to projections by the Pew Research Center, the Hispanic population of our nation will triple from 2005 through 2050, increasing from 14 percent to 29 percent of the total during this timeframe. Already during the present decade—between 2000 and 2007—the Hispanic population in Arizona grew by 46.5 percent. In Maricopa County during this timeframe, the Hispanic population increased by 55 percent, following a decade that witnessed growth of 121 percent.[1] As is already the case in California, within the near term no single demographic group will comprise a majority in Arizona. The State of Latino Arizona appears during the academic year ASU is commemorating its 50th anniversary as a comprehensive university. In this context and inasmuch as ASU has throughout its history championed diversity, we particularly value the perspective the report provides on Arizona students from historically underrepresented backgrounds. We reject the notion that academic excellence and inclusiveness to a broad demographic cannot be achieved in a single institution. With our egalitarian admissions standards, we seek to admit all qualified students who demonstrate the potential to succeed. Many individuals inspired and guided the creation of the report, including the faculty and students of the ASU Department of Transborder Chicana/o and Latina/o Studies and the staff of the ASU Office of Public Affairs. The input of community members and civic and business leaders has been especially invaluable, and I would like to commend all those who contributed to this important document. The project is certain to support decision-making on public issues and provide a valuable resource for policymakers throughout Arizona. I hope that you will find this report to be both useful and thought provoking, and I would like to express my appreciation for your steadfast support of ASU. Michael M. Crow President [1] J. S. Passel and D. Cohn, U.S. Population Projections: 2005–2050 (Washington, DC: Pew Research Center, 2008), i; “Statistical Portrait of Hispanics in the United States, 2007,” table 13 http://pewhispanic.org/factsheets/factsheet.php?FactsheetID=46; “Demographic Profile of Hispanics in Arizona, 2007” http://pewhispanic.org/states/?stateid=AZ The State of Latino Arizona   2009 Building Bridges between the University and the Community as Catalysts for Transformation I have spent most of my adult life working to protect and advance the quality of life for my community. For 30 years, I led the National Council of La Raza, now acknowledged as the largest and most influential Latino advocacy organization in the nation. . In that pursuit, before, during and after my days with NCLR, I delivered speeches, I sometimes marched in protest, and, on occasion, I was known to pound my fist on a podium or two in an effort to make my views known. More often, I advocated on behalf of our community by pursuing a simple and practical philosophy: I believe that it is only as a result of our collective edification and our ability to shape public policy that the American Latino community and the rest of our nation can progress. Public policy, of course, is not confined to administrative or legislative acts of government. The policies and actions of the private sector, nonprofits and our own families similarly mold the world we occupy. Our ability to influence public policy, however, requires that we attain at least a sufficient base of knowledge that we can draw upon to effectively promote, implement and preserve our respective point of view. In other words, impassioned dedication is not enough – we need to be in command of the facts. The document you are about to read, The State of Latino Arizona, embodies this concept. In these pages, you will read about most major aspects of what it means to be Latino in Arizona today. This is not to say that the report represents a unified perspective on the state of our community. The views expressed here are multifaceted and diverse – and rightly so. Still, the thread that binds the content of these articles is the shared conviction that it is through the presentation of reliable data, information and informed analysis that you, the reader, will be willing to listen. If you are Latino, I hope the articles presented in this report will enhance your ability to influence the world around you. If you are not Latino, my desire is that you’ll not only find this report informative but a means to building greater mutual understanding. Raul Yzaguirre Executive Director and Presidential Professor of Practice Center for Community Development and Civil Rights 542 East Monroe, Suite D-100, Phoenix, AZ 85004 (602) 496-1020 | Fax: (602) 496-1029 | Email: cdcr-info@asu.edu http://cdcr.asu.edu 5 foreword “This report also helps document a watershed moment in the ongoing social and cultural development of our community. The role and influence of Latinos is increasingly vital to the development of our nation.” The State of Latino Arizona   2009 7 foreword by Sal Rivera The Arizona Latino Research Enterprise (ALRE) was created in 2004 by a group of Latino professionals who sought to make a positive impact on Arizona and the Latino Community. ALRE is a non-partisan, Arizona nonprofit corporation that unites Arizona leaders in a professional and respectful environment where they can (1) intelligently analyze issues facing Arizona and the Latino Community; (2) thoughtfully consider potential solutions; (3) passionately act to facilitate greater awareness and change; and (4) facilitate discussions on issues in a social network that allows debate, exploration, and cultural celebration. ALRE has accomplished many things in its short history. It is especially proud, however, of its role in the creation of this report, The State of Latino Arizona. One of ALRE’s goals is to bridge the gap between academicians and policy makers. Much can be accomplished through the implementation of research-based strategies, and this report provides important guidance for addressing the many challenges facing our state. This report also helps document a watershed moment in the ongoing social and cultural development of our community. The role and influence of Latinos is increasingly vital to the development of our nation. American Latinos are now the nation’s largest and fastest growing minority group. And although experts predict that one in four Americans will be of Hispanic origin by 2040, the Latino community in Arizona has already surpassed that mark. Our state has dramatically changed in the past two decades, and much of that transformation results from international and interstate migration. The recession has recently slowed the state’s population growth, but most experts predict that overall upward growth trends—fueled to a large degree by increases in the Latino population—will continue as the economy recovers. In short, there is much more change in store for Arizona and its growing Latino population, and our community promises to play a steadily more important role in our state’s future. As part of our organization’s mission to serve as a force for positive change, ALRE is very proud to help support and present this groundbreaking project in cooperation with the Arizona State University Office of Public Affairs, Arizona Public Service, the Department of Transborder Chicano/a and Latino/a Studies, and the many other people who participated in the creation of this document. We want to do more than just help generate a report, however. Instead, we look forward to working with our many partners to pursue the strategies set forth here. We also hope this document will be the first of many meaningful partnerships between ASU and ALRE, and a rallying point for positive change. n Sal Rivera is a partner and shareholder of Rivera and Rivera P.C., a full-service litigation and government relations firm. Mr. Rivera practices in the areas of government relations and tort and commercial litigation. He is very active in political, legal, community, and charitable organizations. In 2008, Governor Janet Napolitano appointed him to serve as the founding President/CEO of the Arizona Economic Resource Organization (“AERO”). Governor Napolitano and Mayor Gordon have appointed him to chair or serve on key committees and commissions. Before attending the University of Chicago Law School, Mr. Rivera was a legislative assistant to an Arizona congressman. introduction “We were convinced that the historical narrative too often erroneously depicts (or worse, ignores) the sheer wealth of experiences contributed by Mexicanorigin populations and other Latinos, who shaped not only the state of Arizona but the entire southwestern United States.” The State of Latino Arizona   2009 9 mirando adelante by Carlos Vélez-Ibáñez This is a labor of love written by the faculty of the Department of Transborder Chicana/o and Latina/o Studies (TCLS) with fine contributions by Eugene Garcia, Christine Marín, Loui Olivas, Bárbara Robles, and F. Arturo Rosales, media professional Ruben Hernandez, and playwright James Garcia. All gave of their expertise, energy, and time with the conviction that we had to be looking toward the future—mirando adelante—in order to influence policies along a broad front. We were convinced that the historical narrative too often erroneously depicts (or worse, ignores) the sheer wealth of experiences contributed by Mexican-origin populations and other Latinos, who shaped not only the state of Arizona but the entire southwestern United States. Peoples have been migrating and trading from south to north, from Mesoamerica to this region, since as early as 700 AD. The Spanish and Mexican populations later followed the same ancient native trade routes so that for 1,300 years, people have traveled back and forth between Arizona and Mexico. Thus the Latino presence in Arizona today should be inexorably linked to the past, but public knowledge of that history is too often absent. Among other knowledge nuggets in the history section by Arturo Rosales and Christine Marín is the information on the little-known Sonoran homesteaders who established many of the ranches in central and southern Arizona following the 1862 Homestead Act. This kind of information is not recognized or worse yet, it is ignored. People also should not be surprised that Arizona Sonorans, Tejanos, and Nuevo Mexicanos fought in the American Civil War, on both the confederate and union sides, and that they have long defended the United States, from the charge up San Juan Hill to the actions in the mountains of Afghanistan and the streets of Mosul today. The demographic information in the second chapter must be contextualized within this historical framework or these data will be mere numerical representations relevant to the immediate present but with little meaning for the future. Eileen Diaz McConnell and Amanda Skeen offer the fact that between 2000 and 2007, Arizona enjoyed an increase in Latino population of more than 45.2%, and today the state’s total Latino population is mostly of Mexican origin (88.6%). The impetus for this growth really began much earlier, with the economic integration of the southwestern United States and northern Mexico. So, as Diaz McConnell and Skeen’s work indicates, Arizona will have a population that is one-third Latino well before 2025, consisting mostly of Mexican-origin people. This population will be young, with higher birth rates, and a sizeable percentage will be foreign born. Another demography-related nugget should offset the present hysteria over Mexicans crossing the border illegally: one-third to one-half of all unauthorized immigrants in the United States are estimated to be visa “overstayers,” who enter legally and then become unauthorized. Thus, of the 320 million people living in the United States, about 6 million have crossed the physical border illegally from all entry points. That figure includes all immigrant-sending countries, with Mexico accounting for about 3.75 million people. Thus, the massive border interdiction and anti-immigrant legislation are aimed at about 1.5% of the total U.S. population. Economic and educational concerns define the issues noted by Lisa Magaña, Miguel Montiel, and James Garcia in the next chapter, The Impact of Politics, Legislation, and Civil Rights on Arizona Latinos. Immigrant rights play a major role in Arizona Latinos’ political concerns. The hostility toward immigrants has certainly spilled over into serious civil rights issues, including racial profiling and public-accom- 10 modations laws. As Raul Yzaguirre, Presidential Professor of Practice in community development and civil rights at ASU, has stated, this has dire impacts on educational quality for a demographic population that is both young and undereducated. The education essay by Eugene García, Mehmet Dali Öztürk, and J. Luke Wood reinforces the critical needs for improved Latino education in Arizona. The number of Latino children in the state increased from almost 270,000 to 416,000 between 1998 and 2008. Of those who are under the age of six, 75% live in low-income families and suffer from a low preschool preparation rate, which affects their school performance across all grade levels. Thus, economic and poverty issues not only plug up but also create breaks in the university and post-graduate pipelines. The authors call for a remedy that would involve first-rate intervention programs at all levels. As the authors point out, “We cannot afford to take years to raise the condition of Latino education to levels comparable to other . . . groups in the state or the nation.” In their essay on economic mobility, Bárbara Robles and Loui Olivas give cogency and substance to those economic and educational issues. They provide a snapshot of the current state of Arizona’s Latino population’s economic mobility, dynamic wealth creation, and future progress. The information may have both negative and positive portents for our ability to offset the educational gap. The essay indicates that Latinos in Arizona overall have lower wealth parity with non-Hispanic Anglos. Nevertheless, both high and low indicators and a significant growing middle-class population exist. This knowledge nugget is extremely important because it provides some respite from the more dismal aggregate numbers that directly affect educational achievement. Yet, the article points out that education is tied directly to the formation and development of wealth in Latino populations. Reversing the great loss in numbers of Latino students that occurs between secondary and post-secondary school is a key to the future creation of wealth, earnings, and income for the entire population. By implication then, the intervention programs suggested in the education essay are crucial to the future well-being of the entire Latino population, particularly given the projected demographic growth. The essay on health by Hilda García-Pérez and Seline KupinskiQuiroga supports this contention. Their findings point out that serious wealth and income and educational issues directly affect physical health among Latinos. Interestingly, second-generation Latinos seem to be less healthy than first-generation immigrants, even though the first generation is more likely to be at or below the poverty line. The authors point out that Arizona Latinos are at a disadvantage because only 42% of working Latinos have employerprovided insurance compared to 66% of other working Arizonans. There is a direct relationship between health access, health, and the availability of insurance, which leads to deteriorating health over time. Latinos are most likely to die of heart diseases followed by cancer and unintentional injury, stroke, and diabetes. All are related to late treatment or the inability to access health care. Thus, the future health of Arizona’s Latinos is directly associated with demographic growth, educational attainment, political and civil participation, the development of wealth, and access to affordable insurance and timely health care. The State of Latino Arizona   2009 11 The final chapter, on the arts, provides early examples of the expressive arts. The authors also give examples from film, theater, music, and literature that portray the issues discussed in this volume. The Chicano Arts Movement of the 1960s was directly tied to political and civil protests by a variety of university-based groups like MEChA and community-based organizations like CPLC, Valle del Sol, Barrio Youth Project, and Friendly House. The Movement’s incipient artists formed the cadres that would exhibit street art and open their own galleries in Arizona. Like the their literary brethren, these artists literally created art forms from the ground up, with thematic issues of community revival, the use of Mesoamerican motifs, and pictorial narratives in the form of murals. Today, despite being somewhat hamstrung by funding and support constraints, the explosion in the arts continues. Across all the forms—painting, sculpture, film, theater, music, literature, and more—Latino work is burgeoning, and it is appealing to wider, national and international, audiences even as it continues to inspire members of the Latino community. Mirando Adelante The question then is what does the future portend? The issues and problems presented in this volume give us clear signposts of what must be done, and there are no clearer signposts than the fact that important and massive interventions in education must be undertaken with great attention to preparation in the humanities, the sciences, mathematics, and research. That must be accompanied by social scaffolding that not only supports but also guarantees a timely, successful entrance into higher education, and more importantly, an egress of excellence for all our children and young adults. This is the future of the Latino population mirando adelante. n Carlos G. Vélez-Ibáñez is chair of ASU’s Department of Transborder Chicana/o and Latina/o Studies, Presidential Motorola Professor of Neighborhood Revitalization, Professor of Transborder Chicana/o and Latina/o Studies and of the School of Human Evolution and Social Change, and emeritus professor of Anthropology, University of California, Riverside. His research and six books have won numerous academic prizes, including the Bronislaw Malinowski Medal. He is an elected Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the Society for Applied Anthropology, and the American Anthropology Association, and a former fellow at the Center for Advanced Studies in the Behavioral Sciences, Stanford University. Edith Auslander Matt Molina history “Mexican immigrants, zanjeros, also worked on a system of canals that delivered a steady supply of water to valley farmers, later known as the Salt River Project, and they played major roles in the building of Phoenix’s streets.” The State of Latino Arizona   2009 histories of mexican-origin populations in arizona by F. Arturo Rosales and Christine Marín With the discovery of silver near modern-day Nogales in 1736, the Spanish crown advanced its efforts to expand into an area inhabited by native peoples and already colonized by the famed Spanish missionary Eusebio Kino. Over the next 150 years, españoles mexicanos (Spanish Mexicans) settled in the Santa Cruz Valley. They faced droughts, periodic uprisings by the native O’odham peoples, and Apache warriors who raided throughout the valley. After Mexico became a republic in 1821, southern Arizona was part of Sonora. For the next 31 years, Mexico gave out land grants (mostly in southern Arizona), laying the foundation for the region’s ranching and agricultural development. When Mexico lost the MexicanAmerican War in 1848, the United States acquired the territories of New Mexico, Arizona, California, and parts of Nevada, Utah, and Colorado for $15 million. The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, signed at the end of the war, granted Mexicans who remained in U.S. territory citizenship and voting rights and, ostensibly, protection of their property, language, culture, and religion. In 1853, under pressure from the United States, General Antonio López de Santa Anna, Mexico’s president, sold the lands that are now southern Arizona and southwestern New Mexico—a region that extended from Yuma along the Gila River to the Mesilla Valley in New Mexico. The Gadsden Purchase gave Mexicans in the acquired territory the same rights as provided by the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo (Officer 1987, 133). Initially, Sonorans kept their land holdings, and many even migrated farther north, into el salado, the Salt River Valley and today’s Maricopa County. The 1841 Preemption Act and the 1862 Homestead Act let these people acquire land, and with that, the cultural and economic life of Sonora arrived in Central Arizona. By the 1860s, despite opposition from Anglo civilians, more Sonorans migrated north from the Altar and the Santa Cruz valleys. In 1863, Tucson became the capital of the new Arizona Territory. Two years later, in an attempt to protect miners from Apache raids in the Salt River Valley, Fort McDowell was established. This created jobs, which attracted even more Sonorans. The 1870s and 1880s saw a flood of new immigrants, drawn to jobs generated by the growing agricultural economy and the building of the Southern Pacific and the Maricopa and Phoenix railways. Mexican immigrants, zanjeros, also worked on a system of canals that delivered a steady supply of water to valley farmers, later known as the Salt River Project, and they played major roles in the building of Phoenix’s streets. In the early 20th century, the federal Newlands Reclamation Act allowed Anglo farmers to plant cotton and lettuce on irrigated acreage in the vast desert surrounding Phoenix and Yuma, and industrial metals, particularly copper, abundant in the eastern part of the state, were exploited. Both industries relied on Mexico as a primary labor source. By 1910, Mexicans accounted for 13% of Arizona’s population of 200,000 (Benton-Cohen 2009). Nevertheless, the economic and political fortunes of Mexicans in the Southwest declined considerably under U.S. government rule. Although the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo granted U.S. constitutional and land-holding rights to Mexicans, and the Homestead and Preemption acts also allowed them to acquire land, many of the promised guarantees were not upheld. As the territory’s Anglo population increased, entrepreneurs, developers, and farmers competed to take land from the Mexican population. On the political front, in 1864, territorial governor John Goodwin moved the capital to Prescott in northern Arizona—far from the center of the Mexican origin population. 15 16 As these populations lost power, the need to protect their civil and workplace rights inspired them to form organizations. Responding to police mistreatment in the 1880s, for example, Tucson Mexicans led by newspaperman Carlos Velasco formed El Centro Radical Mexicano (The Mexican Radical Center). In southern and eastern Arizona, Mexican railroad workers and miners began forming labor unions. In 1894, Mexicans in Tucson founded La Alianza Hispano Americana (Hispanic American Alliance) as a mutualista (mutual aid society) and political organization. Mutualistas spread across the Southwest, and by the 1920s, they had a respected record in protecting Mexicans’ civil rights. The Liga Protectora Latina (Latino Protective League) was organized in 1914 in Phoenix to address civil rights and labor abuses. One of its early successes was opposition to legislation that threatened to prohibit non-English speakers from working in the mines. La Liga also defended Mexicans in the justice system (Rosales 2006, 175-76). One of the most active civil rights leaders in the 1920s was Jesús Franco. As the publisher of Phoenix’s El Sol and the Arizona correspondent for El Paso’s La Patria, Franco took up the cause of Mexicans and Mexican Americans wrongfully accused of crimes. He used his journalistic forum and his position in several Phoenix organizations, including the Comisión Honorífica Mexicana (Mexican Honorary Commission), La Cruz Azul (the Blue Cross), and Woodsmen of the World to forward his work. In 1925, this vigilance led to Mexicans in Tempe waging the first successful school desegregation case in the United States. Unfortunately, school segregation continued for children of recent immigrants and poorer families until the 1940s (Rosales 1999, 30-31). Mexican origin populations were also the first to be involved in aggressive union organizing in Arizona. Mexican and Mexican American workers led strikes that rocked southeastern Arizona’s mining regions in 1903. Mexicans William “Wenceslao” Laustaunau and A. F. Salcido, along with Italian Frank Colombo, convinced about two thousand workers in Morenci to stay out of the mines for three days. Armed miners milled through the town making demands until the governor sent in the Arizona Rangers, who arrested and jailed Salcido, Laustaunau, and Colombo. Laustaunau died in prison in 1906. In 1915, the Western Federation of Miners successfully and broadly organized Mexican miners. Opposing a dualwage system that paid Mexicans less for doing the same work that Anglos did, five thousand workers, about 70% of whom were of Mexican origin, struck in Morenci, Clifton, and Metcalf. During World War I, aware that Arizona mine owners were reaping huge profits, the International Workers of the World (IWW), the Wobblies, initiated many strikes. Lázaro Gutiérrez de Lara, a Mexican immigrant and political radical, was a Wobblie leader. In retaliation, employers, principally the Phelps-Dodge Corporation, accused the Wobblies of un-American activities and sabotaging the war effort. The most infamous incident occurred in 1917. Phelps-Dodge, in collusion with Bisbee city officials, rounded up the mostly Mexican strikers and loaded them at gunpoint onto railroad cars. Ultimately, they left them stranded in the New Mexico desert (Mellinger 1995). During the Great Depression, hundreds of thousands of Mexicans across the United States returned to Mexico. Some left voluntarily, but many were coerced or physically deported (Meeks 2001, 190-95). These deportations also included many Mexican Americans who were U.S. citizens, especially children born to Mexican immigrants. Despite the out-migration, in the 1930s, Arizona’s Hispanic population (about half of whom were U.S.-born) reached 60,000 out of the total population of 400,000. Anglo society influenced young Arizona Mexicans, and they began practicing “Mexican Americanism,” an ideology dedicated to acculturation, breaking down segregation codes, and fighting discrimination (García 1990). Mexicans and Mexican Americans in mining, farming, and ranching communities, as well as those living in urban areas, founded the Latin American Club of Arizona in 1929 dedicated to the “betterment of living and economic conditions.” The group’s first president was Luis S. Cordova, a Southern Pacific railroad worker from Phoenix. By 1938, the Latin American Club had “more than 5,000 active members from almost every community in Arizona” (Arizona Silver Belt 1938). At the Arizona Normal School in Tempe (now Arizona State University), students founded Los Conquistadores, a vehicle for advocating for greater educational opportunities. In 1939, club members attended a conference sponsored by the Mexican American Movement (MAM) in Los Angeles. Returning to Tempe, Los Conquistadores worked to apply the ideological Mary Jo French Councilman Adam Diaz The State of Latino Arizona   2009 precepts of MAM, whose mission was “to improve our conditions among our Mexican American and Mexican people living in the United States” and to pursue “citizenship, higher education . . . and a more active participation in civic and cultural activities by those of our national descent” (Rosales 1996, 99-100). Although self-improvement became an integral part of this generation’s goals, they also understood the debilitating effects of racism and stood firmly against job discrimination and segregation, all of which continued to be commonplace throughout the 1930s and 1940s. In 1941, the constitution of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen in Tucson explicitly barred the promotion of non-whites: “Mexicans, Indians, or those of Indian or Spanish-American extraction are not eligible” for the positions of fireman or brakeman (Meeks 2001, 210). As part of a sociological study on Mexicans in Tucson in the late 1940s, a University of Chicago doctoral student, Harry T. Getty, interviewed an official from Tucson’s Southern Pacific Railway. This Anglo told the researcher, “I haven’t hired any Mexicans, not because I’m prejudiced, but because… I think our own boys should have a chance first.” The researcher also reported that telephone companies would not hire Mexican women because of “their accent in speaking English.” In addition, a cab dispatcher said, “Why, those damn, dirty Mexicans, I wouldn’t have them around me at all. We just don’t like them. We wouldn’t have a Mexican driver” (Meeks 2001: 210). Despite this pattern of discrimination, when the United States declared war against the Japanese in 1941, Mexican Americans and some Mexican immigrants joined the armed forces, while others organized civilian-led “home-front” efforts, such as U.S. Treasury bond drives. After the war, the discrimination and social rejection continued, prompting steppedup efforts to break down barriers to social and economic mobility. Returning veterans, for example, protested restricted housing policies in Phoenix. In the late 1940s, Frank Fuentes and Ray Martínez organized the first American Legion post for Mexican Americans in Phoenix. Using Post 41 as a home base, they challenged discrimination by white veterans’ organizations and fought for integrated housing under the GI Bill. Post 41 became a civil-rights vehicle, as well as a volunteer community-service organization and a social club (Marín n.d.). Mexican American civil rights leaders continued their struggle to eradicate discriminatory practices during the 1950s. Alianza Hispano Americana member and lawyer Ralph Estrada, with the help of other local community leaders, argued the 1951 González v. Sheely case in U.S. District Court, which abolished segregation in Tolleson, three years before the decision in Brown v. Board of Education. The Alianza continued to exert pressure on segregated schools in Arizona. Then in 1954, the Peoria school district, the state’s last holdout, caved and voluntarily ended the segregation of Mexicans. These initiatives had foiled the desires of school officials, who stubbornly clung to the idea that Mexican Americans deserved to be segregated because of their culture (Muñoz 2006, 185-86). Arizona’s economy dramatically changed after the war, as electronic manufacturing overshadowed the mining- and agriculturebased economy. Nonetheless, many Mexicans continued as low-paid agricultural laborers. In 1968, the achievements of civil-rights and farm-labor leader Cesar Chavez and the United Farm Workers Association in California inspired Gustavo Gutiérrez to organize farm workers in Tolleson. With Mel Hewey and Carolina Rosales, all three former Arizona Migrant Opportunity Program (MOP) employees, he established the Arizona Farm Workers Organizing Committee (AFWOC). By 1969, the AFWOC struck local grape growers and obtained contracts (García 2000, 42-43). Mexican Americans in Arizona also fought to increase their influence at the ballot box. Carlos McCormick, president of the Alianza Hispano Americana, led a national coalition of Mexican American organizations that resulted in the Viva Kennedy! Clubs that helped to elect President John F. Kennedy in 1960. The Viva Kennedy! campaign energized the Mexican American community. The Political Association of Spanish-Speaking Organizations (PASSO), based in Texas, was at the vanguard in this effort. In the early 1960s, PASSO established the American Coordinating Council of Political Education (ACCPE) in Phoenix. The Arizona organizers, however, sought independence from PASSO, citing the need to develop homegrown strategies. ACCPE soon established chapters throughout the state, which bolstered the political power of Mexican Americans in Arizona’s smaller communities. At its height in the 1950s and early 1960s, the organization had about 2,500 members and successfully 19 community commentary 20 “ In truth, it would be difficult to separate the history of the growth and development of Arizona from the history of Latino Arizona. Latinos have contributed to every segment of Arizona’s development. The State of Latino Arizona provides for an excellent synopsis of the long proud legacy of the Latinos of Arizona.” Frank Barrios backed the election of Mexican Americans to city councils and school boards, but ACCPE eventually folded. After World War II, thousands of Anglos immigrated to Arizona. By 1965, the state’s population had topped one million. Many Mexican Americans took advantage of the resulting prosperity, and by the early 1970s, more Mexican Americans were enrolling in Arizona colleges and universities than ever before. At the University of Arizona (UA) and Arizona State University (ASU), some of these students joined the Chicano Movement. Activists rejected the assimilation strategy of older Mexican Americans and took on the task of ending social repression and poverty in the state. In 1968, ASU students organized the Mexican American Student Organization (MASO), as part of a growing nationwide trend to press higher education officials to meet the needs of Latino communities. In 1969, students and community activists founded Chicanos por la Causa (CPLC), a radicalized civil-rights and community-development organization. CPLC would be a lasting legacy of the Chicano Movement in Arizona. After obtaining a small seed grant from the Ford Foundation through the Southwest Council of La Raza, CPLC’s ambitious, idealistic young militants began working to transform Phoenix’s growing Chicano community. They initially focused on education issues and politics, supporting a slate of barrio residents for an inner-city school board election in 1969. In 1970, CPLC helped organize walkouts at Phoenix Union High School (with a predominantly minority student body) to protest inadequate funding and the lack of culturally relevant courses. That year, the Ford Foundation fully funded CPLC. Soon, the organization’s militant edge gave way to more pragmatic objectives, as it evolved from an advocacy group to a communityservice organization. The federal government began funding CPLC in 1974, which let it pursue eco- nomic development, job training, and housing issues. It also opened service centers in Tucson and Yuma (Rosales 2000, 379-80). In 1969, UA students Salomón “Sal” Baldenegro, Raúl Grijalva, Lupe Castillo, and others founded the Mexican American Liberation Committee (MALC). MALC organized walkouts at Pueblo and Tucson High Schools, which brought attention to overcrowding and the need for bilingual education and Mexican culture classes. In 1970, MALC successfully convinced Tucson officials to turn the Del Rio Golf Course into a people’s park and to build a community center (Navarro 2000, 205-6). The zeal and fervor of the Movement eventually subsided, but it had spawned a generation of political activists like Ed Pastor and Grijalva, both of whom now represent Arizona in the U.S. Congress. The issue of how to reform the nation’s immigration policy and enforce U.S. immigration law is a high priority for Arizonans, perhaps especially for the state’s burgeon- ing Mexican origin community (30% of the population). In 2006, an estimated 200,000 people marched in Phoenix in solidarity with hundreds of thousands nationwide to protest stepped-up law enforcement efforts aimed at immigrants. Many Mexican origin and non-Latino community leaders argued that bigoted attitudes toward Latinos had inspired these measures. The march was the largest in Arizona history. That year, Governor Janet Napolitano (who now heads the U.S. Department of Homeland Security) joined other Arizona Democrats and called for a state law punishing employers who knowingly hire illegal workers. At the time, State Representative Steve Gallardo suggested that Democrats had decided to use employer sanctions as a “poison pill, threatening to attach it to every immigration bill put forward by Republicans. . . [so that it would force] the business community to go to the Republicans . . . and get them to kill the bill” (Arizona Republic 2009). The The State of Latino Arizona   2009 strategy backfired because Arizonans, including many in the Phoenix Latino community, favored employer sanctions. The state legislature approved the measure, and it took effect in 2008. Illegal immigration and efforts to pass a so-called comprehensive immigration reform bill in the U.S. Congress continue to be hotbutton, politically volatile issues in Arizona. State lawmakers have approved numerous proposals ostensibly intended to stem illegal immigration, such as prohibiting state-funded adult-education classes and child-care assistance, as well as requiring students to prove U.S. citizenship in order to pay lower in-state tuition rates at public colleges and universities. Other proposals have included efforts to bar local governments from using taxpayer money to finance day-labor centers that help immigrants and others find work (NewsMax.com Wires 2005). Claims of discrimination and workplace harassment against Hispanics in Phoenix are on the rise due to the employer-sanctions bill (Phoenix Business Journal 2008). The federal government also reports that hate crimes against Hispanics have increased nationwide. Thus, for Latinos, the promise of the “American Dream”—which has drawn Mexicans and other Hispanics to Arizona in the wake of 19th-century U.S. expansion, the chaos of the Mexican Revolution, and the post-World War II economic boom—is now threatened by growing anti-immigrant sentiment and the baseless fear that the Latino community is somehow “not American enough.” Yet, sociologists say that it is the acculturation of Arizona Latinos—not the Latinization of Arizona—that is, by far, the more likely historical legacy to come. n Arturo Rosales is a professor of History in the School of Historical, Philosophical, and Religious Studies, Arizona State University. He received his Ph.D. from Indiana University in 1978. Since writing a dissertation on Mexican immigration to the Chicago area, he has published over 40 articles and essays and six books on the Mexican immigrant experience and on Latino civil rights. His book Chicano! A History of the Mexican American Civil Rights Movement accompanied a PBS documentary of the same name. Professor Rosales other works include ¡Pobre Raza!: Violence, Crime, Justice, and Mobilization Among México Lindo Immigrants, 1890; Testimonio: A Documentary History of the Mexican American Struggle for Civil Rights in 2000; and A Dictionary of Latino Civil Rights History. Christine Marín, Ph.D. in History and specialist in 20th-century Mexican American history, is the archivist and historian of the Chicano/a Research Collection and the Arizona Collection in ASU’s Hayden Library Archives and Special Collections. She has taught courses on the history of Mexican Americans and Latinos in various ASU departments. She was a founder of ASU’s prestigious Department of Transborder Chicana/Chicano and Latina/Latino Studies. An annual award named in her honor is given by the Chicano/Chicana and Latino/Latina Faculty & Staff Association to a faculty or staff member for their outstanding service to ASU students. Marín is the recipient of Arizona Humanities Council’s Distinguished Scholar Award, and she is a member of the council’s board of directors. Her recent publications include Latinos in Museums: A Heritage Reclaimed. References and Additional Readings Arizona Republic. 2009. “Napolitano to Face Immigration Questions.” Arizona Republic. January 15. Arizona Silver Belt. 1938. “Latin-American Clubs Elect Luis S. Cordova as Supreme President.” Arizona Silver Belt (Miami, Arizona). August 5. Benton-Cohen, Katherine. 2009. Borderline Americans: Racial Division and Labor War in the Arizona Borderlands. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. García, Ignacio M. 2000. Viva Kennedy: Mexican Americans in Search of Camelot. College Station: Texas A&M Press. García, Mario T. 1990. Mexican Americans: Leadership Ideology and Identity, 1930-1960. New Haven, CN: Yale University Press. Marín, Christine. n.d. LULAC and Veterans Organize for Civil Rights in Tempe and Phoenix, 1940-1947. Available at http:// www.cervantesvirtual.com/servlet/SirveOras/68016185989478386754491/ p0000001.htm (last accessed on July 3, 2009). Meeks, Eric V. 2001. “Border Citizens: Race, Labor, and Identity in South-Cen- tral Arizona, 1910-1965.” PhD dissertation, Department of History, University of Texas at Austin. Mellinger, Philip J. 1995. Race and Labor in Western Copper: The Fight for Equality, 1896-1918. Tucson: University of Arizona Press. Muñoz, Laura K. 2006. “Desert Dreams: Mexican American Education in Arizona.” PhD dissertation, Department of History, Arizona State University. Navarro, Armando. 2000. La Raza Unida Party: A Chicano Challenge to the U.S. Two-Party Dictatorship. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press. NewsMax.com Wires. 2005. “Arizona Hispanics Protest Anti-Illegal Immigration Measures.” NewsMax.com Wires. May 11. Available at http:// archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2005/5/11/112020.shtml (last accessed on July 3). Officer, James E. 1987. Hispanic Arizona, 1536-1858. Tucson: University of Arizona Press. Phoenix Business Journal. 2008. “EEOC Reports Increase in Claims By Hispanic Workers.” February 15. Rosales, F. Arturo. 1996. Chicano! A History of the Mexican American Civil Rights Movement. Houston, TX: Arte Público Press. ______. 1999. ¡Pobre Raza!: Violence, Justice and Mobilization among México Lindo Immigrants, 1890-1936. Austin: University of Texas Press. ______. 2000. Testimonio: A Documentary History of the Mexican American Struggle for Civil Rights. Houston, TX: Arte Público Press. ______. 2006. Dictionary of Latino Civil Rights History. Houston, TX: Arte Público Press. 21 demographics “Between 2000 and 2007, Arizona’s Latino population grew by 45%. The percentage change of Latinos in Arizona—and in each county—is reported to have been larger than that of the total Arizona population growth comprised by non-Hispanic Whites and Blacks.” The State of Latino Arizona   2009 contemporary characteristics of a dynamic population by Eileen Diaz McConnell and Amanda Skeen The state of Arizona has experienced tremendous growth and change in recent decades. Since 2000, the U.S. Latino population has also experienced continued growth and change. This population’s demographic portrait is based on the most current data collected by the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (see the appendix). National Context It is important to place the discussion of Arizona’s Latino demographics in a national context. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, approximately 14.6 million Latinos lived in the United States in 1980. By 1990, this figure had grown to 22.3 million and by 2000, it had reached more than 35 million. The U.S. Latino growth rate has exceeded the growth of the total U.S. population; between 1990 and 2000, for example, the U.S population increased by 13.2% with Latinos accounting for approximately 40% of the entire net population increase over the decade. The growth of the Latino population continues to be significant. The population rose from 35.3 million in 2000 to an estimated 45.4 million in 2007—a growth of 28.7%. During this period, Latinos accounted for half of the total population growth of the United States. The Census Bureau estimates that within 25 years, Latinos will likely comprise 20% to 22% of the U.S. population. The Latino population is diverse in terms of heritage and national origin, nativity, and geographic location in the United States, among other factors. For example, although the majority of U.S. Latinos in 2000 reported being of Mexican heritage, significant proportions report that they are Puerto Rican (9.6%), Cuban (3.5%), or other groups 28.4%). The Latino population has diversified even more in recent years. The nativity of Latinos is also heterogeneous. In 2000, approximately 60% of all Latinos in the United States were native born. Latino immigrants are predominantly from Mexico; however, the increase of “other” Latinos in recent years is partially due to increasing numbers of immigrants from the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and elsewhere in Latin America. Latinos have also become more geographically dispersed. Between 1990 and 2000, Latino populations increased by 81% in the Midwest, 71.2% in the South, 51.8% in the West, and 39.9% in the Northeast. In that same period, the Latino population more than doubled in states like Minnesota and tripled in states like Georgia and North Carolina. Arizona also experienced significant growth in its Latino population. Additional characteristics about the total U.S. Latino population should be considered in understanding Latino demographics in Arizona. For example, Latinos in the United States are a young population. In 2000, the median age of the U.S. Latino population was 25.8 years, compared with 35.3 for the overall U.S. population. In 2000, the average Latino household had 3.62 members, compared with 2.59 for the overall population. The majority of Latino households are headed by a married couple (53.9%), with much smaller proportions of households headed by males (8.2%), females (17.8%), or non-family households comprised of unrelated people or one person living alone (20.0%). Population Growth in Arizona The total population of Arizona has grown dramatically since 1980, with significant increases across all racial and ethnic groups. Arizona’s population grew by 88% between 1980 and 2000, an absolute size increase of 2,412,417 people. The total population of Maricopa County more than doubled, as it experienced an increase of 103.6% over the 20year period. Other counties in the state, such as Mohave, Pinal, and Yavapai, had percentage increases that exceeded the state growth rate as a whole. Between 2000 and 2007, Arizona’s Latino population grew by 45% (figure 2-1). The percentage change of Latinos in Arizona—and in each county—is reported to have been larger than that of the total Arizona population growth comprised by non-Hispanic Whites and Blacks. For example, Maricopa County alone saw a 283.6% 23 24 Figure 2-1. Racial/Ethnic Population Change (2000-2007) (Source: Prepared by the authors based on U.S. Census data) Total White Black 107.1 Latino 120 0 Maricopa 66.7 26.3 7.2 14.6 26.3 27.7 49.8 54.9 50.1 45.2 Arizona 13.2 20 13.9 40 23.5 Percent 60 66.5 80 65.2 100 Pima ethnicity determines differences in the age structure in Arizona (figure 2-4). For example, more than one-third of Latinos in Arizona, 37.3%, are under 18 years of age compared with 19.6% of non-Hispanic Whites and 33.3% of African Americans. Latinos are less likely than African Americans and non-Hispanic Whites to be 65 years of age or older. More than one-quarter of the Latino population in Maricopa County is estimated to be between five and 17 years of age, compared with 14.9% of non-Hispanic Whites and 23.9% of African Americans. The age composition of Latinos, coupled with the fact that they comprise 30.5% of the county’s population in 2007, suggests that they will continue to account for a significant proportion of children attending kindergarten through 12th grade in the near future (see figure 2-5). Nativity Estimates by the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS) indicate that in 2007 the majority of Arizona’s Latinos—62.7%—were born in the United States. Approximately 72.4% of Latinos in Pima County are U.S.-born, compared with an Pinal Figure 2-2. Racial or Ethnic Makeup of Arizona (2000-2007) increase in the number of Latinos, or more than 760,000 individuals. In 2007, approximately 88.6% of Latinos in Arizona identified themselves as Mexican. Due to Arizona’s geographic location and the long, rich transnational connections between Mexico and Arizona, an even larger proportion of the state’s Latinos are of Mexican descent than is true for the nation as a whole. (See figure 2-3 for the estimated breakdown of Latinos by group in Arizona.) Other groups identified themselves as Central American (primarily from El Salvador and Guatemala), Puerto Rican, South American, and “other Hispanic or Latino,” which includes individuals from Spain and other categories that were not elsewhere classified. Persons between the ages of 18 and 64 years of age are the largest proportion of Arizona’s population across all three groups (Latinos, non-Hispanic Whites, and African Americans). Indeed, 2007 estimates indicate that between 58% and 62% of each group’s population are between 18 to 64 years of age. However, race and (Source: Prepared by the authors based on U.S. Census data) 3.4% 4.1% 4% 29.7% Hispanic Non-Hispanic White Non-Hispanic Black Non-Hispanic Native American and Alaska Native Other Race 58.8% The State of Latino Arizona   2009 25 Figure 2-4. Age Distribution for Arizona Residents (2007) (Source: Prepared by the authors based on U.S. Census data) Under 18 years 65 years and over 18 to 64 years 33.1 30 1.6% 0 Mexican 6.5 4.6 10 6% 18.3 40 20 .6% Latino Non-Hispanic White African American Puerto Rican Central American South American Dominican/Cuban Figure 2-5. Age Distribution for Maricopa County Residents (2007) Other/Hispanic (Source: Prepared by the authors based on U.S. Census data) Latino African American Non-Hispanic White 60 59.7 58.1 70 0 Under 5 5 to 17 18 to 64 6.1 3.2 10 14.9 20 10.3 30 23.9 25.9 40 5.7 Percent 50 16.1 88% 63.3 80 12.8 1.2% 2.2% 50 19.6 (Source: Prepared by the authors based on U.S. Census data) Percent Figure 2-3. Latinos in Arizona, by Group (2007) 37.3 60 60.4 58.0 70 62.1 80 65 and over 26 estimated 69.3% of Pinal County’s Latinos, and 58.9% of Latinos in Maricopa County (figure 2-6). According to ACS’s 2005-2007 estimates, nearly a million foreignborn individuals resided in Arizona during that three-year period. The majority of foreign-born are from Latin America (figure 2-7). Data indicate that most immigrants in the state are from Mexico, followed by the Philippines, India, and China. About two-thirds of Arizona’s immigrants from Latin America have arrived in 1990 or later, with 33.9% having arrived between 1990 and 1999, and 33.2% arriving after 2000. The remainder arrived before 1980 or between 1980 and 1989 (figure 2-8). Asian immigrants in Arizona have fairly similar trends to Latin American immigrants, although larger proportions are estimated to have entered the United States in earlier periods and smaller proportions entered more recently (figure 2-9). Citizenship Status of Immigrants Recent estimates suggest that there are between 400,000 and 530,000 unauthorized immigrants in Arizona. Discussions about the immigrant population—nationally and in Arizona—tend to focus on those who entered the country illegally. However, between one- third and one-half of unauthorized immigrants in the United States are estimated to be visa “overstayers,” persons who entered the country legally through a port of entry using a visa or temporary Border Crossing Card. These individuals became unauthorized when they remained in the country after their documents expired. The remainder entered the country clandestinely. Recent estimates suggest that about 78% of unauthorized immigrants in the United States are from Mexico or other Latin American countries. ACS data from 2007 provide estimates of the citizenship status of the foreign-born population by region of origin and period of entry. This information differentiates between whether immigrants are naturalized U.S. citizens or non-citizens. Non-citizens can include persons who are Lawful Permanent Residents, temporary migrants with visas, refugees and other humanitarian migrants, as well as persons without legal permission to live or work in the United States. Therefore, ACS data do not specifically identify whether non-citizen immigrants have legal permission to reside and work in the United States. In 2007, most Latin American immigrants in Arizona—and in Maricopa, Pima, and Pinal coun- ties—were not naturalized U.S. citizens. For example, in the state of Arizona, 78.6% of immigrants born in Latin America were not naturalized citizens; in Maricopa, Pima, and Pinal counties, the figures were 81.4%, 72.5%, and 76.3%, respectively. As noted earlier, the majority of Latinos in the state and all three counties in 2007 were U.S. citizens at birth. Taken together, 2007 ACS estimates indicate that 72.3% of all Latinos in Arizona were born in the United States or are naturalized U.S. citizens. The remainder, or 27.7%, of Arizona’s Latinos are not U.S. citizens. Between 68.3% and 80.7% of Latinos in Maricopa, Pima, and Pinal counties were born in the United States or are naturalized U.S. citizens. Figure 2-6. Latinos, by Nativity (2007) (Source: Prepared by the authors based on U.S. Census data) Pinal 69.3% 30.7% Pima 72.4% 27.6% Maricopa 58.9% 41.1% Arizona 62.9% 37.1% Native Born Foreign The State of Latino Arizona   2009 Figure 2-8. Latin American and Asian Foreign-Born Arizona Residents, by Period of Entry (2005-2007) (Source: Prepared by the authors based on U.S. Census data) (Source: Prepared by the authors based on U.S. Census data) 27 27.3 Latin American Asian 22 25 Europe 50 22.4 Asia 0 Arizona 14.3 Maricopa 15 Pima 5.4 8.2 7.6 10 6.6 11.2 6.0 9.3 12.8 6.1 10 9.3 20 13.8 30 20 15 40 17.9 Other Percent Percent total foreign born by World Region 30 Latin America 60 28.3 70 33.2 35 67.9 70.9 71.8 80 33.9 78.8 Figure 2-7. Origin of Foreign-Born Population in Arizona, by Region (2005-2007) 5 Pinal 0 2000 or later Figure 2-9. Latin American Foreign Born, by Period of Entry (2005-2007) (Source: Prepared by the authors based on U.S. Census data) 19.1 2000 or later 23.9 11.2 Pinal Pima 17.0 20.7 16.4 1990 to 1999 Maricopa 40.6 1980 to 1989 25.8 36.4 23.4 Before 1980 29.6 36.0 0 10 20 30 Percent 40 50 1990 to 1999 1980 to 1989 Before 1980 Figure 2-10. Arizona Latino Households, by Type (2007) (Source: Prepared by the authors based on U.S. Census data) 59.6 Male householder, no wife present Female householder, no husband present 42.5 50 Married couple family 51.8 60 Other households 0 Arizona 16.8 17.7 21.7 17.5 21.4 Maricopa 5.9 10 9.4 20 7.2 30 28.6 40 18.6 22.5 Household Size and Type The most recent data on average household size for Arizona is from the 2000 Census. There are differences by race and ethnicity for the state and by county. For example, average household size in Arizona in 2000 was 2.35 for households headed by nonHispanic Whites, 3.66 for Latino households, and 2.24 for African American households. There are also differences for each racial and ethnic group across Arizona’s counties. In the case of households headed by Latinos, the average size in 2000 ranged from 2.43 in Yavapai County to 3.89 in Maricopa County. The average household size for non-Hispanic Whites ranged from 2.01 to 2.72, and African American-headed households ranged from 2.43 to 3.18 across the counties. Data from 2007 about household type is available for the state of Arizona and Maricopa, Pima, and Pinal counties. In Arizona, households comprising a mar- ried couple are the most common type. The proportions of Latinos living in each type of household in Arizona are similar to the Arizona totals (figure 2-10). Approximately 50.6% of Latino households are headed by married couples—8.4% are headed by males, 18.6% are headed by females, and 22.5% are “other” or non-family households. 50.5 births. The remainder resulted in abortions or fetal deaths. The total birth rate per 1,000 females aged 15 to 44 in Arizona in 2007 was 78.9, with birth rates of 112.8 for Latinas, 58.9 for non-Hispanic White women, and between 78.1 and 78.7 for women of other races. Percent Birth Rates Estimates suggest that approximately 98,302 women between the ages of 15 and 50 gave birth in Arizona in 2007. Of these, 39,872, or 40.6%, were Latinas. Another 47.3% were non-Hispanic White women. The remaining 12.2% of women giving birth were of other racial groups, particularly American Indian and Alaska Native and African Americans. Of the women in that age bracket who gave birth in 2007, nearly 61,000 resided in Maricopa County and 44.4% were Hispanic, 44.8% were nonHispanic Whites, and 10.7% were of other races or ethnicities. The racial and ethnic compositions of women giving birth in Pima and Pinal counties are similar. In the state and in each of the three counties, the proportion of women giving birth who were Latina was larger than the total proportion of women of that age group who are Latina. For instance, in the state, 31.5% of women between the ages of 15 and 50 are Hispanic, but they comprised 40.6% of the women giving birth. Reasons for this pattern include their relative youth and a variety of other factors. The Arizona Department of Health Services reports that there were 113,756 pregnancies in Arizona in 2007, with 102,687 live 8.4 28 Pima Pinal Ernest Calderón, President, Arizona Board of Regents 30 Future Demographics of Arizona As noted at the beginning of this demographic profile, the nation as a whole and Arizona have experienced strong population increases in recent decades. Population projections released by the Arizona Department of Economic Security in 2006 indicate that Arizona’s population might be as large as 10.9 million in 2034— this suggests a 72% increase in population over the 2007 estimate of approximately 6.3 million. Additional projections suggest that there may be as many as 12.8 million Arizonans by the year 2050, with more than 7.6 million residing in Maricopa County alone. Latino population increases in the state (and the nation) have been larger than past projections would indicate. For example, a 1996 Census Bureau report sug- “ gested that Latinos would likely represent 32.2% of Arizona in 2025. Given that Latinos represent about 30% of Arizona in 2007, they are likely to comprise more than one-third of the state’s population well before 2025. Latinos may represent an increasingly important component of Arizona’s population in the coming decades, as suggested by such factors as the group’s strong growth rate between 1980 and 2007, its relative youth, higher birth rates, and immigration from Latin America during the last thirty years. However, in light of recent changes in the national and state-level economy, housing market, and other factors, it is difficult to accurately predict how the state’s population and racial and ethnic composition, including the proportion of Latinos, will change in future decades. ...in light of recent changes in the national and state-level economy, housing market, and other factors, it is difficult to accurately predict how the state’s population and racial and ethnic composition, including the proportion of Latinos, will change in future decades.” Appendix The American Community Survey (ACS) is a national, continuous survey that provides annual measures of the social and economic characteristics of the U.S. population. Each year, the ACS samples approximately three million addresses, with nearly two million interviews (in contrast to the U.S. Census of the Population taken every ten years that is available at every geographic level, from the nation to street blocks). As the ACS is not based on a complete enumeration of the U.S. population and has a fairly small sample, it aggregates data from multiple years to produce reliable numbers for small counties and smaller geographic units. One-year estimates, in this case from 2007, are available for areas with populations larger than 65,000, which includes the state and selected counties. Three-year estimates (2005-2007) are available for areas with populations of 20,000 or more. For some characteristics, only three-year ACS estimates are available, even for the largest Arizona counties. In order to provide a consistent demographic profile, this report uses 2005-2007 or 2007 estimates. This demographic profile focuses on providing a description of Arizona and its counties where data are most consistently available (Maricopa, Pima, Pinal), and it does not focus on identifying county-level differences in the estimates.ACS data are available at http://factfinder. census.gov/ and other technical ACS information are available at http://www.census.gov/acs/www/ Downloads/ACSGeneralHandbook. pdf. Decennial census data used in the profile come from Summary Tape File 1 (STF1) of the 1990 Census of the Population and Summary Files 1 and 3 (SF1 and SF3) of the 2000 Census. These data are available at http://factfinder. census.gov/. Census data for 1980 were accessed using the CensusScope project developed by the Social Science Data Analysis Network (SSDAN) at http://www.censusscope.org/. National-level projections through 2050 are based on the U.S. Census Bureau 2004), and state-level projections are based on the Arizona Department of Economic Security 2006). n Eileen Diaz McConnell (Ph.D., Sociology) is Assistant Professor in ASU’s Department of Transborder Chicana/o and Latina/o Studies. Her research interests include Latina/o social demography, the experiences of Latinos in non-traditional areas of the United States, and racial, ethnic, and nativity differences in housing and wealth accumulation. The State of Latino Arizona   2009 Amanda Skeen is a Hispanic National Merit Scholar from San Antonio, Texas. Currently, she is an honors senior at Arizona State University, double majoring in Transborder Chicana/o and Latina/o Studies and Political Science. Her interests include policy formation in the Southwest and immigration reform. Further Readings and References Arizona Department of Economic Security. 2006. “Arizona Population Projections 2006—2055.” Research Administration, Population Statistics Unit. Phoenix, AZ. Available at http://www. azcommerce.com/econinfo/demographics/Population%20Projections.html (last accessed on June 29, 2009). Arizona Department of Health Services. 2008. “Arizona Health Status and Vital Statistics 2007.” Bureau of Health Statistics. Table 1A-1, Table 1B-2. Available at http://www.azdhs.gov/plan/ report/ahs/ahs2007/toc07.htm (last accessed on June 29, 2009). Guzmán, Betsy. 2001. The Hispanic Population: Census 2000 Brief. United States Census Bureau. May. Available at http://www.census.gov/ prod/2001pubs/c2kbr01-3.pdf (last accessed on June 29, 2009). Guzmán, Betsy, and Eileen Diaz McConnell. 2002. “The Hispanic Population: 1990-2000 Growth and Change.” Population Research and Policy Review. 21(1-2): 109-28. Passel, Jeffrey S. 2006. “The Size and Characteristics of the Unauthorized Migrant Population in the U.S.: Estimates Based on the March 2005 Current Population Survey.” Pew Hispanic Center, Washington, DC. March 7. Available at http://pewhispanic.org/files/ reports/61.pdf (last accessed on June 29, 2009). Pew Hispanic Center. 2006. “Modes of Entry for the Unauthorized Migrant Population.” Washington, DC. May 22. Available at http://pewhispanic.org/files/ factsheets/19.pdf (last accessed on June 29, 2009). ______. 2008. “Arizona: Population and Labor Force Characteristics, 20002006.” Washington, DC. January 23. Available at http://pewhispanic.org/files/ factsheets/37.pdf (last accessed on June 29, 2009). SSDAN (Social Science Data Analysis Network). 2001. CensusScope. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI. Available at http://www.censusscope.org/ (last accessed on June 29, 2009). U.S. Census Bureau. 1980. Census of Population and Housing, 1980. Public Use Microdata Sample. Washington, DC. ______. 1991. 1990 Census of Population and Housing, Summary Tape File 1. Available at http://factfinder.census.gov/ (last accessed on June 29, 2009). ______. 1996. “State Population Rankings Summary, Arizona’s Population Projections: 1995 to 2025.” Population Paper Listing #47, “Population Projections for States, by Age, Sex, Race and Hispanic Origin: 1995 to 2025.” U.S. Bureau of the Census, Population Division, Washington DC. Available at http://www.census.gov/population/ projections/state/9525rank/azprsrel.txt (last accessed on June 29, 2009). ______. 2001. Census 2000 Summary File 1, Census 2000 Summary File 3, Washington, DC. Available at http:// factfinder.census.gov/ (last accessed on June 29, 2009). ______. 2004. “U.S. Interim Projections by Age, Sex, Race, and Hispanic Origin.” Table 1a. Projected Population of the United States, by Race and Hispanic Origin: 2000 to 2050. Available at http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/ usinterimproj/ (last accessed on June 29, 2009). ______. 2008. “A Compass for Understanding and Using American Community Survey Data: What General Data Users Need to Know.” U.S. Government Printing Office,Washington, DC, October 2008. Available at http://www.census. gov/acs/www/Downloads/ACSGeneralHandbook.pdf (last accessed on June 29, 2009). U.S. Department of Homeland Security. 2008. “Estimates of the Unauthorized Immigrant Population Residing in the United States: January 2007.” Michael Hoefer, Nancy Rytina, and Bryan C. Baker. Office of Immigration Statistics. Washington, DC. September. Available at http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/ statistics/publications/ois_ill_pe_2007. pdf (last accessed on June 29, 2009). 31 politics and civil rights “Even as the topic of immigration continues to grab headlines, Arizona Latinos are also witnessing the emergence of a new generation of young, educated, and economically successful Latino activists, politicians, and entrepreneurs.” The State of Latino Arizona   2009 the impact of politics, legislation and civil rights on arizona latinos by Lisa Magaña, Miguel Montiél and James Garcia More than 40 years since the passage of the . Voting Rights Act, the political clout of Latinos in Arizona and nationwide has grown significantly. Yet, the community’s ability to shape the outcome of elections, legislation, and public opinion on the major issues of our time lags behind its proportional demographic representation. As the Latino community struggles with the challenge of boosting turnout at the polls, it faces a closely related—and what some view as a more acute—problem of defining and advancing its evolving civil rights agenda. “I think the leadership [in the Latino community] is fractured,” notes Edmundo Hidalgo, President/Ceo of Chicanos por la Causa. “I don’t think we’ve clearly defined the issues regarding civil rights, our empowerment, especially when it comes to the segment of the Latino population that has the ability to vote. We can protest and rally, but ultimately, we have to get people out to vote.” Because Latinos are the fastest growing ethnic group in Arizona and nationwide, the major political parties and candidates are trying to appeal to these voters like never before. Yet, certain characteristics hamper voter turnout: Latinos have higher school dropout and poverty rates than other major U.S. ethnic groups (Magaña 2005), and they tend to be younger than the general population. Although Latinos are about 30% of Arizona’s population (nearly double the nationwide figure), an estimated 40% are foreign born, although many of them are now U.S. citizens. These immigrants are 15% of the state’s population, slightly higher than the 12.5% share of immigrants in the U.S. population overall in 2006 (Pew Hispanic Center 2008a, 1). All of these demographic characteristics help account for lower levels of voter participation compared to other groups. In the 2008 presidential election, the Latino vote meant the difference between winning and losing in some states, but the community’s clout at the ballot box in Arizona was less significant. Nationwide, Arizona ranked 29th in terms of its total share of Latinos eligible to vote, approximately 673,000 individuals (Pew Hispanic Center 2008b, 1). Election-day exit polls nationwide found that President Barack Obama won 67% of the Latino vote, while John McCain received 32%. This represented a 5% decrease compared to 2004 when approximately 37% of Hispanic voters supported George W. Bush. In Arizona, McCain lost the Latino vote to Obama, 56% to 41%. The exit polls in Arizona revealed that Latinos’ policy concerns were similar to those of non-Latinos. For all groups, economic concerns were the top priority, but the issue of immigration reform had relatively little influence on the Latino voters’ candidate of choice for president (Gimpel 2009). Underlying much of the dis- cussion in Arizona today about grassroots activism and traditional partisan political engagement is an ongoing and often contentious debate among Latinos regarding civil rights. Many define the predominant civil rights initiative of our time as the need to organize to counter the state’s growing anti-immigrant sentiment, which increased after a 1990s federal crackdown on illegal immigration in California and Texas fueled a sharp increase in the number of undocumented immigrants entering through Arizona. An increase in hate crimes against Latinos, legislative efforts by ultra-conservative politicians and other public officials, and stepped-up and sometimes abusive law enforcement activities targeting immigrants— including federal legislation that grants local police the authority to enforce immigration law—have added up to a widespread and increasingly institutionalized assault on the rights of Latinos. This fact, along with the group’s improved economic status and better education, have been the driving force behind a proliferation of Latino advocacy groups in Arizona. One anti-immigrant group, Protect Arizona Now (PAN), placed Proposition 200, on the 2004 general election ballot. Its financial backers—a coalition consisting of 33 The Honorable Barbara Rodriguez Mundell The State of Latino Arizona   2009 the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), Americans for Better Immigration, and POP. STOP—hoped to use the Arizona vote to help spread their agenda: a militarized border, a significant decrease or end to legal immigration, deportation of undocumented immigrants, and opposition to so-called immigrant amnesty and guest-worker proposals (Avalos, Magaña, and Pantoja, in press). In the Arizona legislature, the conservative Republican leadership advanced this agenda. Although ultimately unsuccessful, a broad coalition of organizations, representing Latinos and non-Latinos, vocally opposed Proposition 200. It included a bipartisan array of politicians and organizations representing business, labor, the health industry, and church leaders and community activists. Arizonans for Real Immigration Reform (ARIR) united around a campaign called “No on 200.” It was chaired by former Arizona Attorney General Grant Woods, a Republican, and supported financially by the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). Other Proposition 200 opponents included then-Governor Janet Napolitano; U.S. Senator John McCain, a vocal supporter of immigration reform and measures that would provide undocumented immigrants with a path to citizenship; and Latino advocacy groups, including Alianza Indígena Sin Fronteras, the Arizona Hispanic Community Forum, the Arizona Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Arizona, the Arizona AFL-CIO, the Arizona Democratic Party, and the Arizona Education Association (Diaz 2004). In the end, 56% of Arizona voters cast a ballot in favor of Proposition 200, including about 30% of Arizona’s Latino population. Support for the initiative was highest among Republican voters. Historically, undocumented immigration into the United States has been a civil offense, but in early 2006, Congress considered making it a felony. In response, immigrant advocacy groups, many that had formed in response to Proposition 200, orchestrated the largest street protests in Arizona’s history. On March 24, 2006, more than 20,000 protesters from Phoenix, mostly Latinos, marched and chanted “Somos America” or “We Are America.” The protestors called for an end to so-called anti-immigrant legislation and for federal immigration-reform efforts that would include the legalization of the millions of undocumented immigrants living in the country. That impressive, history-making march was dwarfed on April 10, 2006, when between 125,000 and 200,000 people marched two-and-one-half miles from the fairgrounds to the state capitol. The rally was one of many nationwide, involving millions of people, in a national day of action to support immigration reform. Some political observers believe that the marches failed to substantially increase Latinos’ political influence, especially with regard to immigration policy. Congress failed to pass immigration reform, but its attempt to make undocumented immigration a felony was thwarted. Since then, immigrant advocacy groups have shifted their strategy away from mass protests to efforts to increase the number of registered Latino voters. They are running voter registration drives throughout Maricopa County, particularly in densely populated Latino districts. “We are building electoral power for our community so they can have a say, not only on the streets but at the ballot box,” said Ruben Villarreal, an organizer for the Arizona Coalition for Migrant Rights, a Phoenix-based organization working with the We Are America Alliance, a national group. Even as the topic of immigration continues to grab headlines, Arizona Latinos are also witnessing the emergence of a new generation of young, educated, and economically successful Latino activists, politicians, and entrepreneurs. The Arizona Latino Research Enterprise (ALRE), a cosponsor of this report, is a nonpartisan organization whose members are predominantly young professionals intent on shaping public policy based on a philosophy that economic and political clout go hand in hand. Despite the efforts of these many groups, an assault on the rights of Latinos continues. “It’s more subtle than it used to be,” said Daniel Ortega, a leading civil rights attorney and community activist in Phoenix. “We find ourselves, as Latinos, whether documented or not, in a social situation in which our civil rights are not being respected.” He believes that public officials, like Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, State Senator Russell Pearce, and others, are using the political system in ways that ultimately, even if less overtly, discriminate against Latinos. Critics complain that a manipulation of public policy has provoked growing public discontent with immigrants. For instance, Pearce routinely claims that immigrants are responsible for a “majority” of the crimes being committed in Arizona. Yet, overall crime rates have actually dropped in the 35 36 community commentary “ Because the backgrounds of Latinos are multifaceted and complex in Arizona, not surprisingly, so is the Latino view of civic participation. Latino civic influence in Arizona refers to both political activities (such as voter turnout, numbers of elected representatives, grass roots strategies and community activism) as well as the sometimes understated influence that comes from business success and leadership. While it is essential to highlight the emergence and establishment of political activists and leaders, it is just as important to understand the quiet yet tremendous influence of Latinos in law, banking, healthcare, education, the arts, the military, and entrepreneurship. Latinos, who increasingly serve as decision-makers in a variety of industries, are making tremendous contributions to the social and economic conditions of all Arizonans. Latinos today are positioned to provide a much-needed voice on issues in their professions that may not otherwise be considered. They also shape policy debates on topics that would be ignored if not for their presence. Furthermore, the positive impact of their prominence in the community is a valuable reminder of how much has been accomplished despite how much more needs to be done. Given the real diversity of Latinos in Arizona, it is no doubt that civic participation is complex and constantly changing. Some Latinos continue to participate in marches and voter turnout efforts, while others have sought to develop their civic influence through pursuit of business and leadership that are more available today than in the past. Regardless, Latinos continue to pursue the advancement of civil rights and civic opportunity in varied, sometimes subtle, yet legitimate ways.” Paul Berumen, senior advisor to the chief of Staff at the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), U.S. Department of Homeland Security. state in recent years, and studies have shown that immigrants (including the undocumented) do not commit crimes at a greater rate than do nonimmigrants. The spreading of misinformation by Pearce and others has provoked growing hostility toward Latino immigrants and Latinos in general. “The hostility has spilled over to citizens in the form of racial profiling, which is occurring at all levels, whether it involves getting services or public benefits, finding a job or in areas of law enforcement. The color of your skin and how you look now make [Latinos] suspect. People are afraid of their government. Employers are afraid to offer jobs. We are not only suspect, but we have to be afraid of being suspected [of violating the law], even if we’ve done nothing wrong,” Ortega noted. This has perpetuated a culture of fear among Latinos, even though three-quarters of Arizona’s Latino population are U.S. citizens. CPLC President Edmundo Hidalgo says that it is difficult to separate the issue of immigrant rights and civil rights, given that so many U.S.-born Latino families have relatives or recent ancestors who are immigrants. The issue of immigration also remains at the forefront in Arizona because an overwhelming majority of Arizona Latinos believes there is a legislative assault on immigrants. “We came to that crossroads when the state passed Proposition 300, a voter-approved bill that barred undocumented immigrants from accessing many state taxpayerfunded services, including tuition scholarships for college and university students. Prior to that, I think other issues were at the top of the [civil rights] agenda.” Raul Yzaguirre, executive director and presidential professor of practice, ASU Center for Community Development and Civil Rights, argues that a lack of access to a quality education presents the greatest challenge to Latino civil rights today. “The reality is that even though virtually every child in the United States has equal access to a public education, there is no guarantee that they will receive a qualitatively equal education. ‘Separate but equal’ is history, but our public schools systems today might best be described as ‘no longer separate but often unequal.’” Yzaguirre argues that these inequalities arise because of how we finance our public schools. Wealthier school districts collect more taxes and spend more money per student on average than do poor school districts. That means the quality of educa- Senator Alfredo Guitierrez 38 community commentary “ The hostility has spilled over to citizens in the form of racial profiling, which is occurring at all levels, whether it involves getting services or public benefits, finding a job or in areas of law enforcement. The color of your skin and how you look now make [Latinos] suspect. People are afraid of their government. Employers are afraid to offer jobs. We are not only suspect, but we have to be afraid of being suspected [of violating the law], even if we’ve done nothing wrong.” Daniel Ortega, a leading civil rights attorney and community activist in Phoenix tion that a child receives greatly depends on the state, city, and even the neighborhood where she or he resides. Unequal public school funding is especially hard on Latinos, African Americans, and other children of color. Latinos and Blacks nationwide still tend to live in the lowest-income school districts, which spend about $1,300 per pupil less than districts serving predominantly white students. The ramifications can be far reaching and, in some cases, catastrophic. Per-pupil spending at public schools helps determine if a child is able to pursue a higher education. Schools that do not offer advanced academic courses, for instance, are ill equipped to prepare students for admission to the best colleges. Efforts to address this problem have been pursued at the state level, typically through litigation based on state constitutions that require “equal educational opportunities.” Yet, progress in the courts has been slow and limited. “What’s needed now is legislative action and leadership from state governors and legislatures, as well as Congress and our president.” More money alone cannot guarantee educational excellence, but spending on teacher salaries, school construction, technology, and other basic educational resources—and doing all of that in a more equitable manner—is a vital prerequisite to doing everything else it takes to prepare our children for the challenges of the future. That said, Yzaguirre believes that “a minority of Americans has silenced a majority of Americans in the debate over immigration. The hate, the venom, and the xenophobia characteristic of this debate have poisoned relations between Hispanics and the body politic for generations to come. [Nevertheless,] the future of our civil rights struggle depends on us. Power, rights, inclusion, and social and economic equality will not be forthcoming without action and perseverance.” n Lisa Magaña is an associate professor in ASU’s Department of Transborder Chicana/o and Latina/o Studies. She has published in the area of immigration and Latino public policy in the Harvard Hispanic Policy Journal, the Journal of Policy Studies, and the Journal of Social Psychology. She is the author of Straddling the Border and The Politics of Diversity. Miguel Montiel is Motorola Presidential Professor Emeritus in ASU’s Department of Transborder Chicana/o and Latina/o Studies. Montiel chaired the City of Phoenix Human Services Commission, is on the Board of the Arizona Center for Public Policy, and is a member of the Arizona Judicial Council. Montiel’s books include Debatable Diversity: Critical Dialogues on Changes in American Universities (with The State of Latino Arizona   2009 Raymond Padilla, 1998) and Resolana: Emerging Dialogues on Community and Globalization (with Tomás Atencio and Tony Mares, 2009). James E. Garcia is a Phoenix-based journalist, playwright, university instructor, and media consultant. He is the founder and producing artistic director of Phoenix’s New Carpa Theater Company; a board member of the Arizona Latino Research Enterprise; and the president of the Phoenix chapter of the National Association of Latino Independent Producers. Garcia has written and produced more than a dozen plays. His upcoming work includes, among others, The Tears of Lives (Playhouse on the Park). The Crossing won the national short play competition at the Kennedy Center American College Theater Festival in 2003. References and Additional Readings Note: All direct quotations are from interviews by James E. Garcia. Avalos, Manuel, Lisa Magaña, and Adrian Pantoja. In press. “The Latino Vote in Arizona.” In Latinos in the Presidential Election, ed. Louis De Sipio and David Leal. Notre Dame, IN: Norte Dame Press. Diaz, E. 2004. “66% in State Favor AntiImmigrant Issue.” The Arizona Republic, September 10, B1. Gimpel, James G. 2009. Latino Voting in the 2008 Election: Part of a Broader Electoral Movement. Backgrounder Report for the Center for Immigration Studies, Washington, D.C. Available at http://www.cis.org/articles/2009/ back109.pdf (last accessed on August 5, 2009). Magaña, Lisa. 2003. Straddling the Border: The Immigration Policy Process and Its Effect on the INS. Austin: University of Texas Press. ______. 2005. Mexican Americans and the Politics of Diversity, ¡Querer es poder! Tucson: The University of Arizona Press. Magaña, Lisa, and Armando Mejia. 2004. “Latino Protest Politics.” In Latino/a American Political Participation, ed. Sharon Ann Navarro and Armando Xavier Mejia. Santa Barbara, California: ABC-CLIO. Montiel, Miguel, and Felipe de Ortego y Gasca. 1997. “Chicanos, Community, and Change.” In Commuity Organizing in a Diverse Society, ed. Felix G. Rivera and John L. Erlich, 3d. ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Montiel, Miguel, Tomás Atencio, and E. A. Mares. 2009. Resolana: Emerging Chicano Dialogues on Community and Globalization. Tucson: University of Arizona Press. Pew Hispanic Center. 2007. 2007 National Survey of Latinos: As Illegal Immigration Issue Heats Up, Hispanics Feel A Chill. Washington, D.C.: Pew Hispanic Center, December. Available at http://pewhispanic.org/files/reports/84.pdf (last accessed on August 5, 2009). ______. 2008a. Arizona’s Population Growth Parallels America’s Demography of the State’s Population and Labor Force, 2000-2006. Fact Sheet. Washington, D.C.: Pew Hispanic Center, January 24. Available at http://pewresearch.org/pubs/702/arizona-population (last accessed on August 5, 2009). ______. 2008b. Hispanics in the 2008 Election: Arizona. Fact Sheet. Washington, D.C.: Pew Hispanic Center, February 1. Available at http://pewhispanic. org/files/factsheets/vote2008/Arizona. pdf (last accessed on August 9, 2009). Wingett, Yvonne, and Susan Carroll. 2006. “20,000 in Phoenix Rally for Migrants: City’s Biggest Demonstration Ever Part of National Wave; Marchers Call for Legalizing Undocumented Immigrants.” Arizona Republic, March 25. Available at http:// www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/ articles/0325twomarches.html (last accessed on August 5, 2009). 39 education “Policy makers, educators, and Arizonans, in general, must focus on increasing the academic success of Hispanics at every educational and income level. This long-term and complicated process needs to be multifaceted, and it must take into account issues related to race, class, language, and culture.” The State of Latino Arizona   2009 each of us has a role by Paul Luna Many young Latinos in Arizona and across the nation encounter barriers, and a quality education is the best way to help them overcome these obstacles. Education lays the foundation for long-term success and opens the door to greater personal and professional opportunity. Improving educational outcomes for Latino children is the shared responsibility of students, parents, and the larger community. Increasing academic achievement, improving postsecondary access, and fostering parent and community engagement are key among the many steps to advance the educational attainment of our children. Latinos are the largest ethnic minority in Arizona and the second largest segment of our state’s population. Nearly as many Latino babies (43.1%) were born in Arizona in 2003 as non-Hispanic White babies (44%). Hispanic children accounted for nearly 87% of the total growth in the K-12 population over the last ten years. By sheer numbers, Latinos are an incredible force moving along the pre-kindergarten through postsecondary education continuum. A point of pride for all Latinos is that our children are growing up in an increasingly diverse Arizona. However, evidence that non-Hispanic White and Asian peers consistently outperform our children academically should also create great concern for all of us who care about their future and the future of our state. All Arizona youth are entering a much more competitive global environment. Ensuring that students graduate with the skills and knowledge they need to pursue a postsecondary education and succeed in future careers is fundamental to their ability to compete effectively with people around the world. Today’s employers are seeking individuals who have the ability to think critically, solve complex problems, communicate effectively, and work collaboratively—all skills developed by completing a rigorous and relevant education. The achievement gap continues to limit the opportunities available to Latino youth. Fortunately, progressive efforts like ASU’s American Dream Academy, Teach for America, and the Center for the Future’s Beat the Odds Institute are breaking down the barriers and increasing the success of Latino students. Starting in their earliest years, we must nurture the social, emotional, and intellectual growth of our children—laying the foundation for long-term academic achievement. That means making high-quality early childhood education both affordable and accessible for all children, especially for the 75% of Latino children under the age of six who live in poverty who too often start kindergarten less prepared to succeed than their peers. As they progress along the education continuum, we must challenge students to take tougher courses (including advanced science and math), perform at higher levels, and graduate from high school. This will set the stage for postsecondary and workforce preparedness and prosperity. Postsecondary education is an option for all students. Early in their academic careers, we must talk to our children about their aspirations, helping them plot their academic coursework to ensure they have the most options and opportunities to choose from at the end of their secondary education career. Each of us has a role in building Latino youths’ belief that postsecondary education is a viable option and to guide them toward the variety of postsecondary pathways that exist in our state. In addition, we must remove the financial barriers that often deter families from encouraging students to pursue postsecondary education. One of the greatest gifts we can give our Latino youth is to create a culture within our homes and across the state that values lifelong learning and fosters educational attainment from the earliest years on. Parents play a critical role in encouraging their children to excel academically. The lagging performance of Latino youth seen in standardized test scores should be a rallying cry for our community to fight for improvements across the educational system. We must encourage participation and achievement, create greater access, and ensure that our children have the skills and knowledge to compete and succeed not only in school but throughout their lives. n Paul J. Luna is president and CEO of Helios Education Foundation, whose mission is to create opportunities for individuals in Arizona and Florida to succeed in postsecondary education. 41 42 the critical condition of latino education in arizona by Eugene E. García, Mehmet Dali Öztürk and J. Luke Wood Arizona’s school-aged Latinos are an ever-greater presence in the state’s K-12 schools. Between 1998 and 2008, Hispanic enrollment ballooned from 268,098 to 416,705, accounting for 86% of the total student population growth. Other ethnic minorities—African Americans and Asian Americans, for example—also experienced net gains in enrollment, but the number of White students dropped 4% to 459,367 in 2008 (figure 4-1). Close to half of all children in Arizona under the age of 18 live in low-income families, with the figure for Latino children, 69%, and for American Indian children, 72%; about 75% of Latino children under the age of 6 are low income, compared to 30% of White children (NCCP 2008). A recent study found that poverty precludes many Latino families from enrolling their children in preschool (Nevarez and Rico 2007). Parents cite the cost of tuition and the lack of transportation as major deterrents. Preschool academic development is important. Research indicates that Latino children—especially English-language learners from immigrant families—need to improve their reading skills in order to keep pace with White and Asian students. Data from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study found that only 20% of Latino children understood beginning word sounds as compared to 34% of Whites and 42% of Asian Americans (ECLS-K) . The discrepancies likely are even higher, since approximately 30% of Latino children were excluded from the assessment because they did not reach the minimum recordable reading level. Deficits in early reading skills can result in lower reading scores at every subsequent level of education (Miller and García 2008). National and state assessments reflect the effects of income disparities at all grade levels. The National Assessment for Educational Progress (NAEP) measures a student’s academic performance on a four-point scale: Below Basic, Basic, Proficient, and Advanced. Using data on Arizona students, so-called Underrepresented Minorities (URM) perform at lower rates than White and Asian Americans at every grade level in reading, mathematics, and science. The study compared His- panic and White students by class to understand how poverty and race or ethnicity affect student performance. The study determined a student’s class based on whether a student qualified for the federal reduced-lunch program. NAEP reading scores for 4th-grade students revealed that 58% of Hispanics were Below Basic, double the rate for White students (28%), and nearly three times higher than Asian students (20%). Among the low-income students, a statistically significant difference emerged (p< .001), indicating that Hispanics scored, on average, 21 scale points below White students. Statistically Figure 4-1. Arizona Enrollment Trends: Grade Level K-12, by Race/Ethnicity and Net Gain/Loss (1998-2008) (Source: ADE 1999, 2008c.) Native American White Asian -2.4 Black -4.2 Hispanic 8.7 11.5 86.3 -20 0 20 40 60 Percent 80 100 The State of Latino Arizona   2009 Figure 4-2. Arizona NAEP 4th-Grade Reading, Math, and Science Proficiency Levels, by Race/Ethnicity Figure 4-3. Arizona NAEP 8th-Grade Reading, Math, and Science Proficiency Levels, by Race/Ethnicity (Source: For reading and math, U.S. Department of Education 2007a, 2007b. For science, U.S. Department of Education 2005.) (Source: U.S. Department of Education 2007a, 2007b. For science data, U.S. Department of Education 2005. Note: Data were not reported for Asian American students.) Reading 120 Advanced 120 Proficient 100 Advanced 100 Proficient 80 Basic Basic BelowBasic Basic Below 60 40 Percent Percent 0 Reading 80 60 40 20 20 White Asian Black 0 Hispanic Native American White Asian Math 120 100 100 80 80 60 40 20 20 White Asian Black 0 Hispanic Native American 100 100 80 Percent Percent 80 60 White Asian Black Hispanic Native American Science Science 120 60 40 40 20 20 0 Hispanic Native American 60 40 0 Black Math 120 Percent Percent significant differences between the not-low-income students also were found (p< .001). Hispanic students scored, on average, 15 scale points lower than White students. In 2007, 39% of Hispanics scored Below Basic in mathematics, compared to only 11% of White and 9% of Asian students. Fewer than 1% of Hispanics attained Advanced math achievement. The science test had similar outcomes: 69% of Hispanics scored Below Basic, whereas fewer than 1% scored in the Advanced category (figure 4-2). Trends seen in 4th-grade NAEP scores persisted into the 8th grade (figure 4-3). White Asian Black Hispanic Native American 0 White Asian Black Hispanic Native American 43 Daniel Fontes Kent Paredes Scribner 46 Figure 4-4. Arizona AIMS 4th-Grade Reading and Math Proficiency, by Race/Ethnicity (Source: ADE 2007.) Reading 150 Exceeds 120 Meets Approaches 90 Falls far below 60 30 0 White Asian Black Hispanic Native American Math 120 100 Percent AIMS Scores Arizona’s Instrument to Measure Standards (AIMS) is a state-level standardized test that examines reading, math, and science performance. AIMS data are also evaluated on a four-point scale: Falls Far Below, Approaches, Meets, and Exceeds. Findings from 2007 AIMS scores corroborate the racial or ethnic disparities the NAEP data identified. The AIMS scores for 8th graders mimic the results for 4th graders (figures 4-4, 4-5). Poor performance on 4th- and 8th-grade state assessment tests portends similar performance in high school. Analyzing 12th graders by race or ethnicity, we find that the percentage of all students who score at Falls Far Below is high, but minority students are much more likely than Whites and Asians to score at this level (figures 4-6 and 4-7). Percent Parental Education The analysis also explored the relationship between parents’ education levels and a student’s academic success. Educational status was determined by the mother’s or father’s highest level of completed education (Did Not Finish High School, High School Graduate, Some Education After High School, College Graduate, and Unknown). For Hispanic students, there were few significant differences in those categories. However, analysis revealed that both 4th- and 8th-grade students whose parents had completed some education beyond high school scored higher in math and reading, on average, than those whose parents had not finished high school or whose education level was unknown. White students outperformed Hispanic students independent of parental education. For children whose mothers had not completed high school, the research found that 8th-grade White students scored, on average, 14 points higher in reading than the Hispanic students in this group (p< .001). Similar differences were found for the other levels of parental education. 80 60 40 20 0 White Asian Black Hispanic Native American The State of Latino Arizona   2009 47 Figure 4-5. Arizona AIMS 8th-Grade Reading and Math Proficiency, by Race/Ethnicity Figure 4-6. Arizona AIMS 12th-Grade Math and Reading Proficiency, By Race/Ethnicity (Source: ADE 2007.) (Source: ADE 2007.) Reading 100 120 Meets 100 60 Approaches Falls far below 40 Percent Percent Exceeds 80 20 0 Exceeds 80 Meets 60 Approaches 40 Falls far below 20 White Asian 0 Black Hispanic Native American White Asian Black Hispanic Native American Figure 4-7. Arizona AIMS 12th-Grade Writing Proficiency by Race/Ethnicity, 2007 (Source: ADE 2007.) Math 120 100 100 80 80 Percent Percent 120 60 40 Meets Approaches Falls far below 60 40 20 20 0 Exceeds White Asian Black Hispanic Native American 0 White Asian Black Hispanic Native American Figure 4-8. Arizona High School Dropout Rates (2001-2008) (Source: ADE 2008c.) 15 Asian/Pacific Islander Black 11.7 12.3 Hispanic 0 2001-02 High School Dropouts and Graduation Arizona defines dropouts as “students who are enrolled in school at any time during the school year but were not enrolled at the end of the school year and did not transfer, graduate, or die” (ADE 2005, 1). In one encouraging note, from 2001-2002 to the 2007-2008 school years, the dropout rate for Hispanics declined from 9.7% to 4.3% (figure 4-8). Despite this decrease, Hispanics still have the secondhighest dropout rate in Arizona (Native Americans had an 8.2% rate in 2008). ADE statewide data indicate that 59.6% of Hispanic 2002-03 2004-05 males graduate from high school (Hispanic females’ rate is 70%). In contrast, graduation rates were 78% for white and 82% for Asian males. Female students in all racial or ethnic groups graduate at markedly higher rates (tables 4-3 and 4-4). College Readiness A joint study by the Arizona Community Foundation and Arizona State University assessed Maricopa County schools for their college-enrollment rates and student-readiness rates in English and math (Arizona Indicators 2008). Although statewide data are not available by racial or 8.2 8.9 4.2 2006-07 2.4 1.3 1.7 2.6 3.1 2005-06 3.7 4.3 5.3 6.1 1.8 1.9 3.3 4.8 5.5 3.9 2.4 2003-04 Native American 9.3 7.6 4.4 2.9 3 4.9 6 2.9 Percent 6.1 9 8.0 8.7 8.8 9.7 10.0 12 7.1 6.2 48 2007-08 White The State of Latino Arizona   2009 49 Table 4-3. Arizona High School Dropout Rates, by Ethnicity, 2001 through 2008 (Source: ADE 2008c.) Asian/ Pacific Islander Black Hispanic Native American White 2001-2002 2.9 2002-2003 2.9 8.8 9.7 12.3 4.9 8 8.7 11.7 4.4 2003-2004 2.4 6.1 7.6 10 3.9 2004-2005 1.9 5.5 7.1 6.2 3.3 2005-2006 1.8 4.8 6.1 9.3 3.1 2006-2007 1.7 4.2 5.3 8.9 2.6 2007-2008 1.3 3.7 4.3 8.2 2.4 Table 4-4. High School Graduation Rates, by Race/Ethnicity and Gender, 2007 (Source: ADE 2008d.) Ethnicity Asian Black Hispanic Native American White Gender Female Number Graduated Number in Cohort Graduation Rate by Gender Total Graduation Rate 839 945 88.8% 85.5% 82.2% Male 801 974 Female 1481 1904 77.8% Male 1280 1914 66.9% Female 8632 12333 70.0% Male 7435 12485 59.6% Female 1558 2631 59.2% Male 1282 2529 50.7% Female 15357 18137 84.7% Male 14689 18810 78.1% 72.3% 64.7% 55.0% 81.3% 50 Table 4-5. College Enrollment and Readiness Rates in the Phoenix Union High School District, 2007 (Source: Arizona Indicators 2008. Note: Bostrom Alternative Center is excluded from these data.) College Enrollment Readiness Rate Students Rate English Math Alhambra High School 174 58 % 54 % 28 % Camelback High School 140 45 % 61 % 42 % Carl Hayden High School 112 39 % 35 % 46 % Central High School 138 57 % 68 % 42 % Cesar Chavez High School 171 46 % 59 % 41 % Maryvale High School 176 54 % 52 % 40 % Metro Tech High School 58 11 % 48 % 36 % North High School 203 68 % 76 % 48 % South Mountain High School 125 39 % 66 % 43 % Trevor Browne High School 155 65 % 56 % 35 % ethnic group, an analysis of college enrollment rates for students in the Phoenix Union District may be instructive, with the caveat that it is inappropriate to generalize to all Latino students in the state. Among the district’s schools, the college-enrollment and English- and math-readiness rates varied widely. College enrollment ranged from 11% (Metro Tech High School) to 68% (North High School). The percentage of students identified in each school as being prepared for collegelevel English ranged from 35% (Carl Hayden High School) to 76% (North High School). In general, math readiness rates hovered close to 40%. The lowest rate was 28% (Alhambra High School) and the highest was 48% (North High School). More students districtwide were English-ready than math-ready (table 4-5). The ACT and the SAT standardized tests also measure college readiness. ACT scores range from 1 to 36, whereas the SAT uses a 600 to 2400 scale. In measuring the average ACT score for each subject group—English, math, reading, and science—Hispanics consistently scored below White and Asian students and below the state average in all subjects. Hispanics scored lowest in English, with an average score of 19. However, Hispanics scored above American Indians and African Americans in every subject. Compared to nationwide data for all students, Hispanics scored approximately 1% to 2% below the mean (table 4-6). The SAT breaks the scores for Hispanics into three categories: Mexican/Mexican American, Puerto Rican, and Other Hispanic/ Latino. In examining the Mexican/ Mexican American scores—about 86% of all Hispanics in Arizona are of Mexican origin—data confirmed that the scores were 54 points below those of Whites in critical reading, 53 points below in math, and 52 points below in writing. In all subject areas, Hispanics scored below the state average. Utilizing the national mean scores for all racial or ethnic groups as benchmarks, Mexican/Mexican Americans in Arizona scored below those benchmarks in critical reading (29 points), math (21 points), and writing (20 points) (table 4-7). Attainment of College and University Degrees Latinos’ proportional presence in colleges and universities has not kept pace with Latino population growth in Arizona. It is critically important to increase Latino representation in higher education. To achieve that, policy The State of Latino Arizona   2009 makers must develop diverse college preparation programs that encourage and educate families based on a support system that helps students gain access to higher education (Turner and García 2005; Nevarez 2001; Miller and García 2004; Villalpando and Solórzano 2005; Tierney and Auerbach 2005). In 2007, Arizona State University (ASU) awarded 12.2% of its bachelor’s degrees to Hispanics. The figure for University of Arizona (UA) was 14.6%, and for Northern Arizona University (NAU), 12%. Regarding graduate degrees, ASU awarded 6.1% to Hispanics, and UA and NAU had slightly higher rates, at 8.6% and 13.3%, respectively. ASU awarded 5% of its doctoral degrees to Hispanics; the rate for UA was 4.3%; but NAU’s rate was substantially higher rate (11.3%). Considering that Hispanics make up almost 30% of the total Arizona population and account for 41% of the K-12 school population, these percentages reveal that Latinos continue to be underrepresented in degree attainment in public higher education (IPEDS 2009). Conclusion Policy makers, educators, and Arizonans, in general, must focus on increasing the academic suc- cess of Hispanics at every educational and income level. This longterm and complicated process needs to be multifaceted, and it must take into account issues related to race, class, language, and culture. Accomplishing this goal in our difficult financial times will require steadfast determination from all educational stakeholders. We cannot afford to take years to raise the condition of Latino education to levels comparable to other ethnic and racial groups in the state or the nation. The social and economic benefits are potentially great and the cost of failure would be grim. n Eugene E. García, Ph.D., is the ASU vice president for Education Partnerships and a professor of education. He was dean of the ASU College of Education from July 2002 to July 2006. Dr. García has published extensively in the area of language teaching and bilingual development. He served as a senior officer and director of the Office of Bilingual Education and Minority Languages Affairs in the U.S. Department of Education from 1993-1995 and chaired the National Task Force on Early Childhood Education for Hispanics. Table 4-6. Arizona Total Mean SAT Scores, by Ethnicity, 2008 (Source: College-Bound Seniors State Profile Report for Arizona 2008. Note: Benchmark is the average score for students in the country.) Native American Asian Black Mexican/ Mexican American White Total Benchmark Critical Reading 481 524 458 477 531 516 502 Math 486 565 451 483 536 522 515 Writing 456 511 442 462 514 500 494 Table 4-7. Arizona Average ACT Scores for Graduating Seniors, by Race/ Ethnicity, 2008 (Source: ACT High School Profile Report 2008. Note: Benchmark is the average score for students in the country.) Race/Ethnicity English Math Reading Science Composite All 21.3 22.1 22.3 21.3 21.9 African American / Black 17.5 18.8 19.0 18.5 18.6 Native American 14.7 17.8 16.6 17.6 16.8 Caucasian/White 22.7 23.1 23.7 22.3 23.1 Hispanic 19.0 20.4 20.4 19.6 20.0 Asian American / Pacific Islander 22.7 24.6 23.3 22.6 23.4 Other/No Response 22.2 22.8 23.0 21.6 22.5 National Benchmark 20.6 21.0 21.4 20.7 21.1 51 52 Mehmet Dali Öztürk, Ph.D., is the executive director for Research, Evaluation, and Development in ASU’s Office of Education Partnerships, which works with universityschool public and private sector partners to enhance the academic performance of students in high-need communities. Dr. Öztürk has produced dozens of academic and scholarly research papers, publications, and conference presentations. His most recent publication is entitled Global Competition: America’s Underrepresented Minorities Will Be Left Behind (Teachers College Record, June 2007). He is the recipient of the University of Southern California’s Outstanding International Leadership Award. J. Luke Wood is the co-coordinator Program for Policy, Ethics, and Education Leadership (APPEEL) and is a PhD student in Educational Leadership and Policy Studies, with a concentration in Higher Education, at ASU’s Mary Lou Fulton College of Education. He was a Sally Casanova Pre-Doctoral Fellow at Stanford University and the Sacramento Observer listed him among the Top 30 under 30. He has published in Educational Studies and the African American National Biography. Wood is a graduate of California State University, Sacramento (CSUS) with a bachelor’s degree in Black History and Politics and a master’s degree in Higher Education Leadership with an emphasis in Student Affairs. References and Additional Readings ACT High School Profile Report. 2008. The Graduating Class of 2008-Arizona. Iowa City, IA: ACT. Retrieved on February 2, 2009, from http://www.act.org/news/ data/08/pdf/states/Arizona.pdf. ADE (Arizona Department of Education). 1999. 1998-99 October Enrollment File. Phoenix: Research and Policy Section, ADE. ______ 2005. Dropout Rate Code Book. Phoenix: Research and Policy Section, ADE. ______ 2007. AIMS Report Wizard. Phoenix: Research and Evaluation Section, ADE. Accessed on February 1, 2009, from www.ade.state.az.us/profile/publicview/. ______ 2008a. 2008-09 October Enrollment File. Phoenix: Research and Evaluation Section, ADE. ______ 2008b. AIMS Report Wizard. Phoenix: Research and Evaluation Section, ADE. Accessed on February 1, 2009, from www.ade.state.az.us/profile/publicview/. ______ 2008c. Dropout Rate Study Reports. Phoenix: ADE. ______ 2008d. Graduation Rate by School. Phoenix: ADE. Arizona Indicators 2008. College Enrollment and Readiness, Maricopa County High Schools, Class of 2006. Phoenix: Arizona Indicators. College-Bound Seniors State Profile Report for Arizona 2008. State Profile Report: Arizona. New York: College Board. ECLS-K (Early Childhood Longitudinal Study). 2009. Study information. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved February 5, 2009, from http://nces.ed.gov/ecls/ Kindergarten.asp. IPEDS (Integrated Postsecondary Education System). 2009. Degree Attainment by Race/Ethnicity- Peer Analysis System. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. Miller, L. Scott, and Eugene E. García. 2004. Better informing efforts to increase Latino student success in higher education. Education and Urban Society 36, no. 2: 196-205. NCCP (National Center for Children in Poverty). 2007. 50-State Data: Income Status of Children under Age 6, by Race. New York: National Center for Children in Poverty. ______. 2008. Demographics of LowIncome Children. New York: National Center for Children in Poverty. National Vital Statistics Report. 2003. Live Births by Hispanic Origin of Mother and by Race for Mothers of Non-Hispanic Origin: United States, Each State and Territory, 2002. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics. Nevarez, Carlos. 2001. Mexican Americans and Other Latinos in Postsecondary Education: Institutional Influences. Eric Digest 12: 1-4. Retrieved February 25, 2009, from: http://eric.ed.gov/ ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_ storage_01/0000019b/80/19/78/02. pdf. Nevarez, Carlos, and Timo Rico. 2007. Latino education: A synthesis of recurring recommendations and solutions in P-16 education. New York: College Board. Retrieved February 25, 2009, from http://www.collegeboard.com/ prod_downloads/prof/counselors/LatinoEducation-A-Synthesis.pdf. Tierney, William G., and Susan Auerbach. 2005. Toward Developing an Untapped Resource: The Role of Families in College Preparation. In Preparing for College, ed. W. G. Tierney, Z. B. Corwin, and J. E. Colyar. Albany: State University of New York Press. Turner, Caroline S.V., and Eugene E. García. 2005. Latina and Latino Students in Higher Education: Enhancing Access, Participation, and Achievement. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education 4, no. 3: 178-80. U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 Summary File 1, Matrices P1, P3, P4, P8, P9, P12, P13, P,17, P18, P19, P20, P23, P27, P28, P33, PCT5, PCT8, PCT11, PCT15, H1, H3, H4, H5, H11, and H12. U.S. Census Bureau. 2005-2007. American Community Survey. Retrieved February 1, 2009, from http://factfinder. census.gov/servlet/ADPTable?_bm=y&geo_id=04000US04&-context=adp&ds_name=ACS_2007_3YR_G00_&tree_id=3307&-_lang=en&-_ caller=geoselect&-format=. U.S. Department of Education. 2005. Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2005 Science Assessment. U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2007a Reading Assessment. U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2007b Mathematics Assessment. Villalpando, Octavio, and Daniel Solórzano. 2005. The Role of Culture in College Preparation Programs: A Review of the Research Literature. In Preparing for College, ed. W. G. Tierney, Z. B. Corwin, and J. E. Colyar. Albany: State University of New York Press. Carl Hayden High School Robotics Club Students Front row left to right: Yuliana Flores, David Carter, Elizabeth Perez, John Freer. Second row left to right: Gonzalo Lopez De Dios, Eduardo Fernandez, Maria Castro, Mary Cuevas, Staphany Ramirez Solis, Hugo Ceballos, Norma Irigoyen, Judith Beltran, Faridodin “Fredi” Lajvardi. Third row left to right: Britney Childers, Jonathan Harris, Ezequiel Barrera. economic and financial issues “Latino businesses are truly the economic engines that fuel local economies as both key employers and providers of goods and services to the general population they serve.” The State of Latino Arizona   2009 economic mobility: earnings, income, and wealth indicators by Bárbara Robles and Loui Olivas The mythos of the American Dream has two essential components: economic mobility and financial security. The American Dream offers the potential to participate in upward economic mobility, which forms the basis of the success stories of our immigrantrich heritage. The history of economic mobility and financial security in the southwestern United States is complex, and it remains a persistent and ongoing saga of our collective colonial past. Add to this the ethno-racial dynamic of the peoples of the Southwest, and of Arizona in particular, and the story takes on an even higher order of complexity. These issues lie at the root of Arizonan Latino communities’ history of contributions to the economic prosperity of Arizona and of advocacy for full participatory inclusion in all venues of wealthbuilding activity. This chapter provides a snapshot of Arizona’s Latino population in terms of its economic mobility, dynamic wealth creation, and future progress, based on cultural, social, human, and financial capital and assets. Overview of Wealth and Economic-Mobility Indicators Wealth is a broader measure of economic mobility than is income. Wealth includes income (earnings as well as any other income-generating activities, such as revenue from rental property, royalties, and other transfers) and asset holdings. Assets can be tangible investments like homeownership; business ownership; physical capital (vehicles, machin- ery, factories, plants, land, and investment and retirement portfolios); high-appreciation items, like paintings, jewelry, and artifacts; and inherited items. Assets also include intangible factors that are often overlooked or not included in direct measures of wealth: (1) cultural capital, including language assets (being bi- or multilingual) and biculturalism, that is, understanding how to navigate other cultures; (2) social capital, including social networks or membership in social, civic, religious, or union organizations that provide access to both physical and financial resources; and (3) human capital, including educational attainment, such as university, post-graduate, and professional degrees, and specialty certifications, as well as employment experience, apprenticeships, or semi-skilled crafts. For Latino communities, the ability to own and control assets and to engage in wealth-creating activities relies on a variety of both tangible and intangible factors. Biculturalism and bilingualism are asset-building factors that can command a higher wage premium in the labor market, especially in industries with global markets. For Latino entrepreneurs and business owners, this cultural capital can guarantee an expansion of one’s customer base. In neglected Latino communities, the ability to navigate local institutions; to understand mainstream markets; and to access affordable housing, financial services, and transportation helps increase family wealth and financial stability. Additionally, the adaptation strategies that immigrants pass on to younger generations (as well as the youth interpreting and translating for their elders) can also act as a form of wealth building through intergenerational knowledge transfers (in youth-elder and elder-youth interactions) that benefit the entire community. Carlos Vélez-Ibáñez (2004) coined this phenomenon a “fund of knowledge” owned by the community. Arizona Latino Economic Mobility Indicators The Latino community in Arizona has roots going back to the colonial era, long before the U.S. nation-building period and statehood. The legacy of Latino contributions in agriculture, mining, ranching, large and small businesses, and the arts and entertainment is part of the state’s ongoing economic and dynamic progress. These sectors have produced Latino leaders that have been pivotal resources supporting the participation and inclusion of the growing Latino community in accessing wealthenhancing opportunities. Although 55 56 Figure 5-1. Arizona Family Income for Non-Hispanic Whites and Hispanics, in Inflation-Adjusted 2007 Dollars (Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2007.) Hispanic 22.9 25 Non-Hispanic White 11.4 16.8 16.4 15.0 2.8 1.8 6.8 14.1 12.6 10.6 9.0 7.3 2.9 5 10.2 11.8 Percent 10 12.4 15 12.5 20 Le ss th an $1 0, $1 00 0, 0 00 1$1 9, $2 99 0, 9 00 0$3 5, $3 99 5, 9 00 0$4 4, $4 99 5, 9 00 0$5 9, $6 99 0, 9 00 0$7 4, $7 99 5, 9 00 0$ $1 99 00 ,9 ,0 99 00 -$ 14 9, $1 00 50 0 ,0 00 or m or e 0 little researched, Hispanic mutual aid societies—major contributors to community well-being in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries—became the blueprint for the current Latino-led non-profits serving the populations of the Southwest. In Arizona, aggregate Latino wealth indicators display a persistent lack of parity with the nonHispanic White community, but as with all communities, Latinos have both high- and low-wealth families as well as a significant, growing middle-wealth population. In figures 5-1 and 5-2, the comparative distribution of family income and earnings for the non-Hispanic White and Hispanic communities in Arizona indicate the different income-category concentrations. Related to the income and earnings indicators are the distribution of occupational categories by total respective populations (figure 5-3). The skewed distribution of occupational categories contributes to the lack of parity in the income and earnings distributions between non-Hispanic Whites and Hispanics in Arizona’s labor market. The State of Latino Arizona   2009 57 Figure 5-2. Non-Hispanic White and Hispanic Median Earnings by Sex, 2007 (Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2007, table B20017H. Note: FT-YR = full-time, year around.) Figure 5-3. Hispanic Occupations as a % of All Hispanics Employed, and Non-Hispanic White Occupations, as a % of Total Non-Hispanic White Employed (Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2007.) Hispanic $50,703 $38,020 $0 17.0 1.7 0.2 12.2 15.1 Administrative 9.1 $11,786 Sales $9,504 $10,000 13.8 26.3 Service 14.4 Installation, Production, and Transportation 18.1 11.3 Professional and Management Male MaleFT-YR “ MaleNot FT-YR Female FemaleFT-YR FemaleNot FT-YR Non-Hispanic White as a Total NH-White 5.1 Agriculture $24,820 $26,844 $17,334 $20,000 $15,549 $12,652 $30,000 $24,847 $40,000 Hispanic as a % of total Hispanic Construction $29,342 $40,372 $60,000 $50,000 Non-Hispanic White 15.7 40.2 0 10 20 30 40 Percent Demographers agree that there is a strong correlation between population growth and smallbusiness growth. Since 2000, one-half of Arizona’s population growth has been attributable to Latino births. Moreover, on or before 2040, Arizona’s population will have gone full circle, as Hispanics once again become the dominant population, just as they were prior to 1912. From that, we can predict that this will generate more Latino businesses.” 50 Figure 5-5. Arizona Enrollment by Educational Level for the Population 3 Years of Age and Older, Non-Hispanic Whites as a % of the Non-Hispanic White Population, and Hispanics as % of Hispanic Population Figure 5-4. Arizonans over 25 Years of Age and without a High School Diploma, by Sex 58 (Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2007.) (Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2007, Table B14001.) HS Diploma 66.8 70 80 40 4.4 7.1 7.5 3.9 2.4 7.4 8.0 10 8.6 20 20 4.8 17.4 30 33.2 38.4 42.5 Percent Percent 40 50 22.9 57.5 61.6 60 60 0 Hispanic 77.1 92.0 100 NH White 80 92.6 Less than HS 0 NH White-M Latino-M There are also significant gaps in education that affect Latinos wealth-accumulation possibilities. Complex educational policies implemented at the local, state, and federal level are behind these disparities. Crucial components producing educational-attainment rate discrepancies between the non-Hispanic White and Latino populations include: (1) a significant underfunded school system anchored in local property-tax values; (2) a lack of multilingual, NH White-F Latino-F whole-language policies that could prepare students for a twenty-firstcentury, global-market workplace; and (3) continuous waves of immigrants arriving from countries that have different compulsoryschooling frameworks and underfunded educational systems when compared to the United States,. These factors play a significant role in generational legacies of wealth inequality for Latino families. Perhaps the most significant stoppage in the educational Enrolled in school Enrolled in Enrolled in Nursery School, Grade 1 to Grade 8 Kindrgarten pipeline for Latino students is the transition from secondary to postsecondary schooling (figures 5-4 and 5-5). The key to income and earnings enhancements in current and future labor markets requires obtaining a university degree. Ideally, completing a professional and post-graduate degree would produce a large private as well as public benefit in the form of increasing tax revenues, especially given the youth bulge in Arizona’s Latino population (Robles 2009). Enrolled in Grade 9 to Grade 12 Enrolled in College or Graduate School Not Enrolled in School Homeownership is another significant anchor affecting wealthand asset-building capacity (figure 5-6). Although Arizona Latinos have a higher rate of homeownership (56%) than the national homeownership rate for Latinos (50%) (U.S. Census Bureau 2007), caution is required when analyzing these data given the current volatility of the housing market combined with the waves of foreclosures that have occurred since 2007. The least understood and most The State of Latino Arizona   2009 Figure 5-6. Non-Hispanic White and Hispanic Homeowner Status in Arizona, 2007 (Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2007.) Hispanic 80 White Non-Hispanic 73.5 70 60 56.2 Percent 50 43.8 40 30 26.5 20 10 0 Owner Occupied Renter Occupied Figure 5-7. Minority Business in Arizona by Race or Ethnicity, 2002 (Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2006.) Hispanic Asian 10,563 18% Black 6,330 11% Native American 6,548 11% Hispanic 35,104 60% Black Asian Native American Hispanic Business in Arizona - 35,104 Firms in Arizona - $4.3 billion in gross receipts - 39,363 paid employees under-researched wealth-stripping phenomenon regarding home and property foreclosures is tax liens. Although eclipsed by the current mortgage foreclosure crisis, this is a particularly acute issue for Latino families in Arizona and other border states. This particular issue has its roots in the complicated inheritance laws and protocols that leave many Hispanic families unaware of their tax obligations on inherited properties. Since land ownership enhances and amplifies wealth building, not having sufficient legal, tax, and financial advice about navigating the registering of land-title transfers, paying outstanding property taxes, and settling outstanding financial obligations associated with inherited homes creates truly disadvantageous circumstances, where loss of generational lands can occur in a blink of an eye. Unaware of their legal recourse, families end up devastated over the loss of ancestral lands. Hispanic-Owned Businesses in Arizona: Contributions to Arizona’s Wealth and Economic Mobility Hispanic-owned businesses in Arizona have a rich and sustained record of growth dating back to the territorial days, well before 1912 when Arizona became the 48th state. Thanks to historians, we have a record of the communities that prospered because of Mexican merchants, traders, farmers, cattle ranchers, and trade routes that connected these regional settlements prior to the arrival of the original “undocumented” (non-Hispanic) settlers in the Southwest. The most recent data published by the U.S. Census Bureau (2006) for 2000 and 2002 reveals that there are well over 35,000 Hispanic-owned businesses in Arizona, generating $4.3 billion in gross receipts and supporting more than 39,000 paid employees (figure 5-7). The majority of these employees are Latinos. Given Arizona’s population growth trends projected by the U.S. Census Bureau, it is demonstratively clear that Latinos are driving population growth. Demographers agree that there is a strong correlation between population growth and small-business growth. Since 2000, onehalf of Arizona’s population growth has been attributable to Latino births. Moreover, on or before 2040, Arizona’s population will have gone full circle, as Hispanics once again become the dominant population, just as they were prior to 1912. From that, we can predict that this will generate more Latino businesses. These small 59 60 Congressman Raúl M. Grijalva The State of Latino Arizona   2009 and not-so-small businesses will contribute economically by creating jobs and with that, sales- and property-tax revenues for federal, state, county, and city coffers, as well as business-tax revenues. Latino businesses are truly the economic engines that fuel local economies as both key employers and providers of goods and services to the general population they serve. As employers, they pay their fair share of business taxes while providing employment to Hispanic and non-Hispanic workers. These employees, in turn, contribute income taxes to the state and federal governments. They are also consumers in the communities in which they work and live. These heads of household are also difference makers in their communities, people who participate in their PTAs, volunteer for nonprofit organizations, and make charitable contributions. Beyond looking at Hispanicowned businesses from a demographic and economic perspective, an examination of owner profiles and firm characteristics compared to the characteristics of other minority- and non-minority-owned businesses in Arizona reveals some striking differences. The 2007 Arizona Business Study: Focus on Minority-Owned Business, the only study of its type in the United States, analyzed a number of business characteristics (SRP 2007). It found four key things that were higher for Hispanic-owned businesses than for non-Hispanic minority-owned ones (figure 5-8). Among other things, these features reflect the multigenerational, extended-family characteristics of Arizona’s Latino population: 1) median income is $226,000; 2) 13% are partnerships, as the legal form of ownership; 3) 67% are family owned; and 4) the median number of employees is 4. Future Wealth and Economic Mobility Prospects for Latinos in Arizona Looking ahead at state, national, and global market restructuring, the Latino community in Arizona is clearly poised to become an important economic driver and to remain an anchor of sustainable wealth for the state’s economy. Arizona Latino-owned businesses are growing at a pace faster than any other, and they will continue as an economic engine for the communities they serve. The Latino population is young, highly entrepreneurial, with bicultural and bilingual assets, and it remains connected to growing 61 Figure 5-8. Arizona Minority Business Profile with a Focus on Hispanic-Owned Businesses, 2007 (Source: SRP 2007.) Total NonMinority Total Minority HispanicOwned Businesses Overall Non-Hispanic Minority Owned Businesses 777 663 441 222 38% 39% 40% 39% Corporation 23% 23% 22% 25% S Corporation 22% 17% 17% 17% Partnership 8% 11% 13% 11% LLC* 7% 9% 8% 11% $270,000 $201,000 $226,000 $181,000 3 4 4 3 15 yrs 9 yrs 9 yrs 9 yrs Family owned 57% 64% 67% 60% Home-based 39% 38% 38% 39% Sample Size Ownership* Sole Propietorship 2006 Median revenue Median number of employees Median age of company Business Descriptions Web-based 10% 9% 9% 10% Mail order 1% 1% 2% ** Not for profit 4% 4% 6% 1% Conducts business internationally 19% 16% 16% 17% Conducts business nationally 48% 32% 31% 34% Geographic Scope 62 export markets in Mexico, Central America, and South America, as well as other international markets (SRP 2007). Additionally, the significant demographic shift in the United States as the baby boomers age opens up the possibility for a large surge in two markets that will continue to be foundational as we move forward in the new millennium: health care and energy independence. The need for a growing labor segment of technically trained health-care providers (which also includes social service professionals as well as community-based promotores de salud, community health advocates) brings into focus the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ labor-market projections for the period from 2008 until 2016 (BLS 2008). In both markets, there is projected above-average growth in wage occupations clustered in health-care industries (in all segments requiring a minimum of an Associate’s Degree in vocational-technician training) and in green-energy markets (where the range of occupations is quite broad, including construction and agriculture, two sectors with heavy Latino representation). The key to capitalizing on these future career opportunities rests on a strong and dedicated education pipeline between secondary schools, community colleges, and institutions of higher education. Additionally, these high-growth markets will also attract the Hispanic entrepreneur in a variety of domains: general health care and in-home care; green recycling; construction focused on energy saving and weatherization; and organic, safe-food farming and ranching. Clearly, Arizona’s Latino leadership is represented in our communitybased organizations (NGOs), our business enterprises, and increasingly, in our presence in educational institutions. The key to the future of Latino wealth building in Arizona is the expanding Latino participation in the public, private, and nonprofit sectors, which will help to create a pipeline of significant Latino leadership to mentor future generations. n Bárbara Robles, Ph.D. in Economics, is an associate professor in ASU’s School of Social Work. She is also the coordinator of the Office of Latino Projects and Research Faculty, Center for Community Development and Civil Rights in ASU’s College of Public Programs. She authored Financial Services and Product Usage by Latinos in the U.S. (2007) and co-authored The Color of Wealth: The Story Behind the U.S. Racial Wealth Divide (2006). Formerly, she served as a Revenue Estimator for the Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation, sc oring tax legislation for Congress. Her research focuses on wealth inequality, asset building, community development and micro-businesses, and entrepreneurship. Loui Olivas, Ph.D., a fourth-generation native Phoenician, joined Arizona State University in 1979. He is currently Assistant Vice President, Office of the Vice President for Education Partnerships, and Associate Professor of the Management Department in the W. P. Carey School of Business. His teaching and research focus on entrepreneurship, small business management, and Hispanic demographics and marketing perspectives. Among other publications, he authors the annual DATOS Report for the Arizona Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, and since 1991, he has published the Annual Survey of Hispanic Owned Businesses in Arizona. References and Additional Readings BLS (Bureau of Labor Statistics). 2008. Occupational Outlook Handbook. Washington, D.C.: Department of Labor. Available at http://www.bls.gov/oco/ (last accessed on July 16, 2009). Robles, Bárbara J. 2009. “Exploring the Wealth Returns to Latino Higher Educational Attainment: Estimates of Work-Life Earnings Profiles.” Journal of Hispanic Higher Education 8 (1): 5–22. SRP (Salt River Project). 2007. Arizona Business Study: Focus on MinorityOwned Business. Phoenix: Salt River Project and Hispanic Research Center, Arizona State University. U.S. Census Bureau. 2006. Survey of Minority Owned-Business Enterprises (SMOBE) [specifically, the data on Hispanic businesses]. Available at http://www.census.gov/econ/sbo/ (last accessed on July 16, 2009). _________. 2007. The American Community Survey. Various tables. Available at http://www.census.gov/acs/www/ (last accessed on June 26, 2009). Vélez-Ibáñez, Carlos. 2004. “Regions of Refuge in the United States: Issues, Problems, and Concerns for the Future of Mexican-Origin Populations in the United States.” Human Organizations 63 (1): 1–2. Congressman Ed Pastor health “The lack of health insurance is an important barrier in the prevention and treatment of diseases for Latinos. Nationally, nearly 33% of Latinos under the age of 65 did not have health insurance in 2007.” The State of Latino Arizona   2009 toward a healthy latino population in arizona by Hilda García-Pérez and Seline Szkupinski Quiroga Latinos are the fastest growing minority in Arizona (U.S. Census 2009). This population is not only changing the state’s demographic makeup, it is also redefining its epidemiologic and public-health profile. Despite the Latino population’s demographic weight in Arizona, public and private programs and research studies often overlook this group’s health needs. This essay describes the health profile of Latinos in Arizona, emphasizing gender differences in disease incidence and overall premature mortality. We try to call attention to some barriers that Latinos face in accessing appropriate health care, and we conclude by offering a list of recommendations that might help to close the health-care gap between this population and other groups in Arizona. Who Are the Latinos of Arizona? In 2007, the Latino population was estimated to be 1.8 million or about 30% of Arizona’s population. Latinos are the state’s youngest group, with a median age of 26 years, compared to 35 years for the state as a whole. More than one-third (37.3%) of Arizona’s Latinos are under age 18 and fewer than 4.5% are 65 and over. About 36% are foreignborn residents and many entered the United States in 2000 or after. Four in five Latinos reported speaking a language at home other than English, and half of these indicated speaking English less than “very well.” Latinos’ educational attainment is lower than the state’s average, with close to 40% of the population that is 25 years and over not having finished high school. The median income of Arizona’s Latino households was $38,175, 21% lower than the state median household income. One in five Latino families is in poverty and about 40% allocate more than 30 cents of each dollar earned to pay for housing. Latinos also tend to reside in older dwellings and in overcrowded conditions (U.S. Census Bureau 2007). Paradoxically, second-generation Latinos seem to be less healthy than first-generation immigrants, even though the first generation earns less, creates less wealth, and is more than likely to be at or below the poverty line. The relative youth of Latinos provides a unique opportunity for health planning and policy development. Additionally, Latinos’ strong family and community orientation may facilitate community-based health policies. However, Arizona is pressed to find ways to meet the health needs of this group. The challenge ahead is complicated by the Latino population’s cultural and bio-physical traits that create a particular epidemiological profile. A Health Profile of the Latino Population in Arizona Several national studies and very limited Arizona data have documented that Latinos are disproportionately exposed to health hazards and are affected by a particular set of conditions and diseases, including violence, diabetes, obesity, and heart diseases. Arizona has shown a steady decline in all mortality causes during the last 25 years, consistent with national trends. The Latino population mirrored this until 2000, but the latest data seem to indicate a drastic reversal (table 6-1). In 2005, adjusted mortality rates for the state’s Latinos were higher than those for the general population in Arizona and the United States, with noncommunicable diseases and violent deaths the most probable cause for rising mortality. Statewide and nationwide, heart diseases and cancer are the first and second causes of death for both Latinos and the overall population. However, in 2005, Latino mortality rates were higher than the state and national mortality rates for seven of the 10 leading causes of death (table 6-1). Unlike the state’s general population, Latinos have experienced significant increases in deaths from cerebrovascular diseases, heart diseases, diabetes mellitus, and homicides. The impact of these trends is substantial, especially when one considers the relative youth of Arizona’s Hispanic population. 65 Table 6-1. Age-Adjusted Mortality Rates (per 100,000) for Selected Causes of Death by Race or Ethnicity* (Source: NCHS 2008 and ADHS 2006b.) 1980 U.S. Primary Cause 66 2000 Arizona U.S. 2005 Arizona U.S. Arizona All Groups All Groups Hispanics All Groups All Groups Hispanics All Groups All Groups Hispanics 1,039.1 972.7 931.1 869.0 785.6 769.9 798.8 772.5 849.2 Heart Disease 412.1 346.3 307.3 257.6 206.1 204.7 211.1 186.9 189.6 Cancers 207.9 191.3 160.3 199.6 170.4 156.9 183.8 161.8 165.9 Cerebrovascular diseases 96.2 74.9 72.5 60.9 51.7 51.2 46.6 40.6 51.0 Chronic lower respiratory diseases** 28.3 47.4 26.0 44.2 47.4 24.4 43.2 46.8 31.6 Accidents (unintentional injuries) 46.4 57.9 58.8 34.9 41.1 41.6 39.1 51.1 54.8 Suicide 12.2 17.5 11.3 10.4 14.6 7.2 10.9 15.4 10.5 All Causes Diabetes 18.1 16.0 28.3 25.0 19.0 41.1 24.6 20.1 46.0 Chronic liver disease and cirrhosis 15.1 17.0 23.5 9.5 12.8 15.8 9.0 12.7 19.4 Assault (homicide) 10.4 10.4 15.9 5.9 7.6 13.0 6.1 8.2 14.6 * Adjusted to the 2000 standard U.S. population. ** Chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases in 1980. Figure 6-2. Age-Adjusted Mortality Rates for Cardiovascular Diseases Among Total Population and Latinos by Sex, Arizona 2006 50 2000 2007 181.1 124 170.2 100 50 0 Cardiovascular Cardiovascular Disease of Arizona L Heart - L 43.9 Latinos Females 32.1 Native American Males 37.3 60 150 All 149.8 Age Age Black 200 181 Asian MortalityRates Rate Mortality 70 250 258.3 300 White Non-Latinos All Groups 216.4 80 243.8 (Source: Mrela CK, Torres C. Differences in the Health Status among Race/Ethnic Groups. Arizona, 2007. In Arizona Department of Health Services, (ed): Arizona Department of Health Services 2008: 97) 203.2 Figure 6-1. Median Age at Death from All Causes Cerebrovascular L The State of Latino Arizona   2009 All Males Females 0 All type - AZ All type - L Lung - L 13.1 15.8 14.2 21.4 50 13.8 100 31.6 98.7 MortalityRate Rates Mortality 124.7 150 131 154.7 200 160.9 187 Figure 6-3. Age-Adjusted Mortality Rates for Selected Types of Cancer Among Total Population and Latinos by Sex, Arizona 2006 Colorectal - L 72.9 0 Unintentional Unintentional Injury - AZ Injury - L Suicide AZ Unintended and Intended Injuries Arizonans suffer high rates of unintentional or intentional injuryrelated mortality (figure 6-4). Most traffic injuries, drowning accidents, and fire-related injuries are classified as unintentional. Homicide, suicide, and war-related deaths are classified as intentional injuries. The injury mortality rate in Arizona was 68.5 deaths per 100,000 for the general population compared to 72.9 for Latino men. An important gap exists between the sexes: women are less likely to die from unintended injuries. Injuries are also a critical health problem affecting Latino children, Suicide L 21.6 13 Homicide AZ 3.3 2 10 3.1 6.6 20 8.5 13.5 15.4 30 8.2 14.2 40 Males Females 24.7 50 34.3 60 67 All 32.2 70 52.4 68.5 80 51.2 reducing colon, prostate, breast, and cervical cancers. Latino males show higher mortality than Latino females for every type of cancer (figure 6-3). Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death in the United States. In Arizona, the risk for lung-cancer mortality was 2.2 times higher in Latino males than in Latino females. Latino males also have a 20% higher mortality for colorectal cancer. Limited education, low household incomes, and lack of health insurance are some of the reported barriers associated with the lack of cancer screening among Latinos regardless of gender. MortalityRates Rate Mortality Noncommunicable Diseases The major preventable risk factors for cardiovascular disease are tobacco use, physical inactivity, and an unhealthy diet. When comparing mortality for cardiovascular diseases among Latinos, men in Arizona have the highest mortality (figure 6-2), with their cardiovascular mortality rates 40% higher than rates for Latino females. Several types of cancers are highly preventable with changes in health behaviors. Smoking reduction; a diet rich in vegetables, fruit, and fibers; access to immunizations (for example, human papilloma virus); and regular screening programs are all critical for Figure 6-4. Age-Adjusted Mortality Rates for Unintentional and Intentional Among Total Population and Latinos by Sex, Arizona 2006 Homicide L who are overrepresented among childhood fatalities with 45% of all childhood deaths in the state (ADHS 2006). Drowning and car accidents are the top causes of death and injury for children in Arizona. Latino children have lowerthan-average drowning rates but the second-highest death rate due to car accidents (ADHS 2005 and 2006). Educational efforts, including bilingual awareness campaigns and community-action programs, can help prevent deaths due to unintentional injuries. Suicide rates among Latinos in Arizona increased 27.8% from 2000 to 2007 (ADHS 2008). In 2006, the risk of suicide among men in Arizona (24.7/100,000) community commentary 68 “ The struggle to influence our health status will be directly felt in all areas of community life because of the competitive nature of the American experience. The principle that has made this country great includes the notion of merit and equal opportunity as part of the benefits of citizenship... The unmet challenge of Latino health is primarily a phenomenon of an unresponsive public sector... The public sector still sits on data that has demonstrated health disparities for decades and wonders why that is so, without examining its institutional roles and responsibilities and without trying to change these in a primary and fundamental way that... addresses these institutional barriers.” Miguel Medina, Community Leader was 3.7 times higher than the risk among women (6.6/100,000). Suicide rates among Latino men (14.2/100,000) were seven times higher than the risk of suicide for Latinas (2/100,000). The most common method of suicide for Latinos was firearms, followed by hanging and poisoning. According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Latino students were almost two times more likely than white non-Latino or black non-Latino students to attempt suicide (Child and Adolescent Health Measurement Initiative 2005). In Arizona, the age-adjusted rate for death by homicide for Latino males was 60% higher than the homicide rates for all males, and for Latino females, 6% higher when compared to all females. Premature Mortality Years of Potential Life Lost (YPLL) is an indicator assessing the risk of premature mortality (table 6-2). According to this data, unintentional injury and cancer account for more than one-third of potential life lost across all groups. Among Arizona Latinos, unintentional injuries account for a significantly larger proportion of all YPLL (24.5%). The YPLL was similar for Arizona Latinos and White non-Latinos, but Arizona Latinos had a 50% higher YPLL compared to Latinos nationally. In terms of YPLL, homicides rank third among Arizona Latinos and account for 10.6% of potential life lost in the state. The YPLL associated with homicide was three times higher for the state’s Latinos compared to White non-Latinos and almost double compared to Latinos nationally. Although premature mortality affects all race and ethnic groups, Latinos seem to experience a greater burden. The median age is an indicator that helps illustrate premature mortality because it divides the total number of deaths into two equal groups. Among Latinos, the median age for premature mortality dropped by 12 years from 2000 to 2007 (Figure 6-1). In 2007, the median age at death for all causes among Latinos was 54 years, whereas among White non-Latinos, it was 78 (ADHS 2008, 97) Therefore, half of Latinos in Arizona in 2007 are likely to die at age 54 or earlier. Latino males have a higher mortality than do Latino women. Child and Maternal Health Access to family-planning programs is critical for avoiding unintended pregnancies. It is estimated that almost half of the 6 million pregnancies that occur annually in the United States are unintended. As a result, approximately 1.4 million American women experience unplanned births and an- The State of Latino Arizona   2009 69 Table 6-2. Rate of Years of Potential Life Lost (YPLL) before Age 70 per 100,000 Population, Latinos and White non-Latinos in Arizona and U.S. Latinos for 2006, Selected Causes of Death (Source: CDC 1999–2006.) Arizona Latinos Primary Cause White Non-Latinos Ageadjusted Percent of total YPLL All causes 5451.2 100 Unintentional injury 1320.0 Cancers 597.33 Ageadjusted U.S. Latinos Rate Ratio LAZ? WNL* Rate Ratio LAZ? WNL* Percent of total YPLL Ageadjusted Percent of total YPLL 5709.9 100 4472.4 100 1.0 1.2 24.2 1285.59 22.5 890.18 19.9 1.0 1.5 11.0 940.13 16.5 691.95 15.5 0.6 0.9 Homicide 576.78 10.6 189.84 3.3 309.2 6.9 3.0 1.9 Heart disease 465.16 8.5 665.88 11.7 461.4 10.3 0.7 1.0 Perinatal period 394.23 7.2 307.70 5.4 314.59 7.0 1.3 1.3 Suicide 278.05 5.1 507.5 8.9 165.51 3.7 0.5 1.7 Congenital anomalies 260.44 4.8 159.0 2.8 206.04 4.6 1.6 1.3 164.8 3.0 131.8 2.3 155.79 3.5 1.3 1.1 Diabetes mellitus Liver disease 150.06 2.8 107.9 1.9 115.76 2.6 1.4 1.3 Cerebrovascular disease 133.28 2.4 102.37 1.8 129.68 2.9 1.3 1.0 *Latinos in Arizona: White Non Latinos. **Latinos in Arizona: U.S. Latinos. Luz Sarmina The State of Latino Arizona   2009 Figure 6-5. Arizona Birth Rates, 2004-2006 Average Live Births per 1,000 Women 15-44 years (Source: PeriState. Birth rates by race/ethnicity: Arizona, 2004-2006 Average 2009 March of Dimes Foundation 2009.) 120 110.5 100 92.5 80 60.5 60 69.9 68.7 40 20 0 Latina White Non-Latina Black Native American Asian Figure 6-6. Inadequate Prenatal Care 2004-2006 (Source: PeriState. Birth rates by race/ethnicity: Arizona, 2004-2006 Average 2009 March of Dimes Foundation 2009.) 30 25 27.1 23.4 92.5 20 Percent although rates have decreased steadily since 2000 (ADHS 2008). Pregnancy among Latinas aged 15 to 17 was 85.6% higher than the state average and for those aged 18 and 19, it was 65.7% higher (ADHS 2008). Overall, in Arizona, Latinas have the highest birth rate among all women of reproductive age, defined as 15 to 44 years (figure 6-5). Access to adequate prenatal care is associated with positive health outcomes for both mothers and children (figure 6-6). However, in 2007, Latino mothers in Arizona reported the lowest level (67.8%) of prenatal care during the first 3 months of pregnancy, whereas white non-Latina women had the highest level (86.6%). A proxy measurement of the quality of prenatal care services in Arizona— the Index of Adequacy of Prenatal Care—shows that from 2004 through 2006, the level of inadequacy of prenatal care service among Latina mothers (23.4%) was almost 3 times higher than the observed rates among white non-Latinas (8.6%) (PeriStats 2009). According to the CDC, infant mortality is increasing in the United States for the first time in more than 40 years (MacDorman, Callaghan, Mathews et al. 2007). From 2000 through 2007, Percent other 1.3 million pregnancies end in abortion. Half of the unintended pregnancies occurred among couples using some type of birth control during the month when the pregnancy occurred, so ineffective use of contraceptives is an issue. The other half of unintended pregnancies occurred in women who were not using any birth control method even though they did not intend to become pregnant (all data are from the Guttmacher Institute 2006a). In Arizona, it is estimated that approximately 123,000 women become pregnant annually. Of these pregnancies, 70% resulted in live births, 15% in induced abortions, and the remainder ended in miscarriages (Guttmacher Institute 2006b). The availability of contraceptive services and programs facilitating access to education and information are two important factors for reducing the incidence of unintended pregnancies. According to the Guttmacher Institute (2006b), Arizona ranks 32nd nationally for availability of reproductive services, 38th in public funding allocated to reproductive health programs, and 14th in laws and policies facilitating women’s access to contraceptive information and services. In Arizona, Latinas have the highest teen pregnancy rates, 16.4 15 9.5 8.6 10 5 0 Latina White Non-Latina Black Native American Asian 71 72 Arizona had a slight increase in its overall infant mortality rate, from 6.7 deaths per 1,000 live births to 6.8 deaths (ADHA 2008). However, the infant mortality rate for Latinos was 17.5% higher in 2007 compared to 2000 (ADHA 2008). One way to address children’s negative health outcomes in Arizona is diminishing the number of unintended pregnancies among Latinas and increasing access to quality prenatal care. Medical Insurance The lack of health insurance is an important barrier in the prevention and treatment of diseases for Latinos. Nationally, nearly 33% of Latinos under the age of 65 did not have health insurance in 2007. In Arizona, 35.8% of Latinos in that group were not eligible for or waive this benefit (Urban Institute and Kaiser Commission 2008). Non-citizen children and adults under the age of 40 seem to be the population at the highest risk of being uninsured (Burkholder 2002). Uninsured people are more likely to forego needed health care due to cost concerns. Almost one in four Latinos in Arizona reported that they could not afford needed health care (ADHS 2008). The association between maintaining good health and access to health care is well known. Figure 6-7. Uninsured Children in Arizona (Source: Child and Adolescent Health Measurements Initiative, 2005, National Survey of Children’s Health, Data Resource Center on Child and Adolescent Healty.) Latino 35% Non-Latino 65% Although it is estimated that nationally 20% of Latino children are uninsured (DeNavas-Walt, 2008), it has been documented that approximately 7 out of 10 Latino uninsured children who might be eligible for coverage through the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System (AHCCCS) or the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (S-CHIP) are not enrolled in either program (Child and Adolescent Health Measurement Initiative 2005). Out of the total population of uninsured children, 35% are Latino (figure 6-7). Conclusion Addressing the health needs of Arizona’s Latinos requires full consideration of the complex variables that define this population from an epidemiological perspective, including migration, poverty, shelter quality, work conditions, and age. Regardless of which explanation is correct, the Latino community in Arizona faces specific health needs that diverge from the health priorities of an aging U.S. population. Although the Latino community has strong needs in the reproductive health area, mainstream America is more concerned with health care at retirement age. Latinos are also disproportionately exposed to social stressors, such as discrimination and lack of edu- cational and labor opportunities, which increases the risk of physical and mental health problems. In summary, a health profile of Arizona’s Latinos should consider the following: 1. Data suggest an urgent need to address factors inducing premature mortality. Public health priorities should target noncommunicable diseases, including cancer and heart diseases. 2. Obesity and lack of physical activity are two major factors contributing to noncommunicable diseases in the Latino community. Preventable health-risk behaviors are often established during childhood and adolescence and can underlie leading causes of illness and death among adults. Obesity, a major and growing problem across all ethnic and racial groups in the United States, is a highly preventable chronic condition. According to the 2007 Arizona Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), almost three-fourths of adult Latinos in Arizona are overweight (37.1%) or obese (36.5%) (CDC 2007). These statistics are highly correlated with a high level of sedentarism, common in this population. BRFSS data show Nelba Chavez community commentary 74 “ When I was the Maricopa County Health Services Director, one morning I saw an elderly Latino patient after she had seen the physician and received her medicine with clear instructions on dosage, diet, and so forth. I stopped the lady as she was leaving the clinic...and I asked her if she understood the instructions given to her... Her answer was simply, “Sabrá Dios!” (Only God will know!)... She had no idea what to do to help herself get well. The instructions had been given to her quickly and in English... Cultural competency was the missing element in quality service.” Adolfo Echeveste that scarcely 48% of Latino adults reported that they engage in the type and amount of physical activity needed to improve and maintain good health. 3. Overall mortality in Arizona tends to be higher for males than females. Latino males have the highest mortality for noncommunicable diseases, unintentional injuries, suicide, and homicide overall. Public health policy that is sensitive to gender differences should be also a priority in Arizona. The experience of targeted, community-based programs in California and elsewhere could lead to a set of best practices appropriate for the Latino male population in Arizona. 4. YPLL is generally higher for Arizona Latinos compared to the state’s White non-Latinos and the nationwide Latino population. The social and economic burden of premature mortality for Latino families, and for Arizona in general, should be an area of concern for state policy makers. A prosperous society and economy in Arizona is clearly connected to the state’s Latino community living a longer and healthier life. 5. Maternal health should be another priority. Reproductive health programs that are cultur- ally appropriate and responsive to the needs of mothers and their children would reduce perinatal deaths. 6. Infant mortality is an indicator that is highly sensitive to maternal age and prenatal care, so it is necessary to reduce unintended pregnancies among adolescents, increase the access to prenatal care, and improve the adequacy of prenatal care services offered to Latino mothers. 7. In analyzing whether inequality in access to contraceptive services and women’s lack of reproductive-health information explain differences in fertility rates across race and ethnic groups, the rapid fertility-rate declines in some Latin American countries, such as Mexico, suggest that culture is not the strongest predictor of fertility. Instead, it may be that women’s education, access to familyplanning information, and public funding for contraceptive services play a greater role. Although Arizona has advanced with laws and policies that facilitate the access to information and contraceptive services, more resources need to be allocated to this effort. 8. From a public health perspective, Latinos’ relative youth presents a unique opportunity for health planning and policy development. Unfortunately, many Latinos face economic and social barriers that keep them from obtaining preventive health-care services. This, in turn, increases the risk of suffering from preventable diseases. The lack of health insurance is an important obstacle to the prevention and treatment of disease among Latinos in Arizona. n The State of Latino Arizona   2009 Hilda García-Pérez (Ph.D. in Epidemiology) is an assistant professor in ASU’s Department of Transborder Chicana/o and Latina/o Studies. Her research and teaching expertise includes women’s and immigrants’ health, community development and disease prevention, and border health policy. Seline Szkupinski Quiroga (Ph.D. Medical Anthropology) is an assistant professor in ASU’s Department of Transborder Chicana/o and Latina/o Studies. She has a commitment to community-based participatory research, and a research focus on health disparities and the lived experience of illness among vulnerable populations as revealed through narratives. She has been engaged in Latino health research since the early 1990s. References and Additional Readings ADHS (Arizona Department of Health Services). 2005. Drowning Deaths, Arizona, 1994-2004: Key Findings. Phoenix, AZ: ADHS. ______. 2006a. Arizona Child Fatality Review Program Annual Report. Phoenix, AZ: ADHS. ______. 2006b. Arizona Health Status and Vital Statistics. Table 2B-3. Available at http://azdhs.gov/plan/report/ahs/ ahs2006/pdf/2b3.pdf (last accessed on July 10, 2009). ______. 2008. Differences in the Health Status among Race/Ethnic Groups, Arizona 2007. Available at http://www. azdhs.gov/plan/report/dhsag/dhsag07/ ethnic07.pdf (last accessed on July 11, 2009). Phoenix, AZ: ADHS. Burkholder, B. 2002. Magnet Force: Immigrants, Health and Social Policy in Arizona. An Arizona Health Futures Background Report. Phoenix, AZ: St. Luke’s Health Initiatives. CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention). 1999–2006. WISQARS Years of Potential Life Lost (YPLL) Reports. National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, National Center for Health Statistics. Available at http://webappa. cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/ypll10.html (last accessed on July 11, 2009). ______. 2008a. Arizona 2008: Overweight and Obesity. Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. Available at http://apps.nccd.cdc.gov/brfss/display. asp?cat=OB&yr=2008&qkey=4409 &state=AZ (last accessed on July 11, 2009). ______. 2008b. Arizona 2008: Exercise. Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. Available at http://apps.nccd.cdc. gov/brfss/race.asp?cat=EX&yr=2008& qkey=4347&state=AZ (last accessed on July 11, 2009). Child and Adolescent Health Measurement Initiative. 2005. National Survey of Children’s Health, Data Resource Center on Child and Adolescent Health. Available at www.nschdata.org (last accessed on July 18, 2009). DeNavas-Walt, Carmen, Bernadette D. Proctor, and Jessica C. Smith. 2008. Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2007. U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Reports, P60-235. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. Available at http://www.census.gov/ prod/2008pubs/p60-235.pdf (last accessed on July 19, 2009). Guttmacher Institute. 2006a. Contraception Counts: Ranking State Efforts. Available at http://www.agi-ny.org/ pubs/2006/02/28/IB2006n1.pdf. (last accessed on July 11, 2009). ______. 2006b. Contraception Counts: Arizona. Available at http://www.agi-ny. org/pubs/state_data/states/arizona.pdf. (last accessed on July 11, 2009). MacDorman, Marian F., William M. Callaghan, T. J. Mathews, et al. 2007. Trends in Preterm-Related Infant Mortality by Race and Ethnicity: United States, 1999-2004. National Center for Health Statistics. Available at http:// www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/pubs/ pubd/hestats/infantmort99-04/infantmort99-04.htm (last accessed on July 18, 2009). PeriStats. 2009a. Early Prenatal Care by Race/Ethnicity: Arizona, 2004-2006 Average. March of Dimes Foundation. Available at http://www.marchofdimes. com/Peristats/level1.aspx?dv=ms® =04&top=2&stop=4&lev=1&slev=4& obj=1 (last accessed on July 11, 2009) ______. 2009b. Inadequate Prenatal Care by Race/Ethnicity: Arizona, 2004-2006 Average. March of Dimes Foundation. Available at http://www.marchofdimes. com/Peristats/level1.aspx?dv=ls®= 04&top=5&stop=37&lev=1&slev=4&o bj=1 (last accessed on July 11, 2009). Urban Institute and the Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsured. 2008. Arizona: Uninsured Rates for the Nonelderly by Race/Ethnicity, States (2006-2007). Data from the Current Population Survey 2008. Available at http://www.statehealthfacts.org/ profileind.jsp?ind=138&cat=3&rgn=4 (last accessed on July 19, 2009). U.S. Census Bureau. 2007. State and County Quick Facts. Available at http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/ states/04000lk.html (last accessed on July 11, 2009). U.S. Census Bureau. 2009. State and County QuickFacts. Available at http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/ states/04000.html (last accessed on July 1, 2009). 75 the arts “Impressively, this art emerged from the Chicano insistence on relevance and multiplicity of identity that people too often perceived as misspent rage, exotic symbols, and statements seeking justice and resolution.” The State of Latino Arizona   2009 genesis and development of latino/a expressive culture in arizona: theater, literature, film, music, and art by Carlos Vélez-Ibáñez, Paul Espinosa, James Garcia, Marta Sanchez and Michelle Martinez Influenced by Spain, the Catholic Church, and Mexico’s indigenous peoples, Mexican arts came to Arizona beginning in the colonial period when Spanish friars introduced European artistic cultural expression, much of it based on the Roman Catholic liturgy. Paintings and figurines that blend Christian and native motifs can still be seen today in the San Xavier del Bac mission church, south of Tucson. During family celebrations and at public events, early Españoles Mexicanos also developed a secular version of the arts, which included sharing music, participating in pantomimes, poetry and prose readings, and elaborate and often music-filled parades and processions. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, festivities around Mexican national holidays—like the fiestas patrias, celebrating Mexican Independence, or Cinco de Mayo, commemorating the Battle of Puebla in 1862—also included similar artistic expressions. By the early 20th century, Arizona had a thriving Mexican and Spanish theatrical, musical, arts and crafts, and expository religious-secular tradition that expressed much of the cultural and ideological values of its Mexican-origin communities. Art, in its many forms, was an integral part of both public and private life for Mexican-origin people. This tradition of artistic expression continues in a variety of forms to this day throughout the state. Theater The theater arts have flourished among Arizona’s Latino population, although waning and waxing according to economic vicissitudes. A contemporary explosion in theater owes its beginnings to some key early efforts. Two theaters, Teatro Cervantes and Teatro Americano, appeared in Tucson in the 1870s. They hosted traveling troupes like the Compañía Dramática Española, whose director, Pedro C. de Pellon, founded the first group of amateur actors in the town—the Teatro Recreo—in 1878. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, other theaters included El Principal, El Clifton, El Lírico, and El Royal, which was an important venue for La Nacional Dramatic Company. However, Carmen Soto Vásquez built Tucson’s first theater explicitly for Spanish-language performances, Teatro Carmen. The Sonoran-mission-style building was designed by renowned architect, Manuel Flores. The inaugural performance of Cerebro y Corazon (Brains and Heart) was on May 20, 1915. Until 1923, Teatro Carmen performed Spanish-language literary productions, operas, musicals, and melodramas (Sheridan 1986). Today’s flourishing theater-arts scene owes its beginnings to these early efforts. Teatro Bravo, founded in 1999, is led by artistic director Guillermo Reyes, an acclaimed playwright and a professor of theater at Arizona State University. It produces three to four new or established works in English and Spanish each year. Among the company’s most noteworthy productions are Women of Juárez by Rubén Amavizca—staged in both English and Spanish; Places to Touch Him by Guillermo Reyes, which drew strong gay and Latino community support; and a Spanish-language adaptation of Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet by Latin American author and poet Pablo Neruda. The New Carpa Theater Company, founded in Phoenix in 2002 by award-winning playwright James E. Garcia (this essay’s co-author), stages Latino and multicultural works—mostly in English. Major productions have included Garcia’s plays Voices of Valor, Dream Act, American Pastorela, and A Boy Named Cesar. The Phoenix Valley Theater is home to at least two 77 78 other fledgling Spanish-language community theater companies: Bru’s Musical Theater and Teatro Wirrarika. Tucson’s Borderlands Theater Company is an internationally recognized professional troupe. It focuses on “Latino/Chicano” theater, although it also presents work “that reflects the diversity of the voices of the Southwest border region.” Over the years, Borderlands Theater has presented the works of Bernardo Solano, Elaine Romero, Luis Alfaro, Victor Hugo Rascon, and Guillermo Reyes. Since 1988, the company’s Border Playwrights Project has helped develop the work of more than 50 writers. Romero, a Tucson-based playwright, has noted that Borderland’s reputation for professionalism and its unconventional approach to live theater have made it an important voice in the nation’s Latino theater community. Professional theater companies in Phoenix have begun offering audiences more Latino-themed works in recent years. Arizona Jewish Theater recently premiered Parted Waters, an original work about crypto-Judaism in the Latino community. Since 2001, Actors Theater has staged Spic-O-Rama by John Leguizamo, Bordertown by Culture Clash, and Speak Span- ish to Me, a commissioned work by Bernardo Solano. During the past decade, the Arizona Theater Company (ATC) has staged La Malinche by Carlos Morton and Anna in the Tropics, Nilo Cruz’s Pulitzerprize-winning play. ATC also hosts a nationwide competition, the National Latino Playwriting Award. Winners present their plays as staged readings, although Felix Pire’s The Origins of Happiness in Latin received a full production. Literature Through the Second World War, members of Arizona’s Mexican communities maintained a rich correspondence in Spanish with relatives living elsewhere. Much of this source of literature and fund of knowledge has unfortunately been lost, removed by the Arizona educational system, so that later generations of Mexican Americans had little or no acquaintance with their parents’ or grandparents’ knowledge. But the central point is that the Mexican community was largely literate and fairly well read in Mexican and Latin American literary classics. The people enjoyed reciting poetry, participating in declamation, and writing prose. Between about 1877 and 1921, literary works—including essays, poetry, short stories, and moral- ity tales—were published in 32 Spanish-language newspapers and magazines in Tucson (Sheridan 1986). Early writers included Francisco Dávila, Amado Cota-Robles, Carmen Celia Beltrán, and Ramón Soto, with Beltrán publishing through the 1940s. Before the 1960s, Arizona’s “Hispanic” writers produced few literary works in English. Some exceptions can be found among the newly minted veterans returning from the Second World War. In 1947, Mario Suárez was the first Arizona Latino to have a short story published, in the Arizona Quarterly. Although he continued to write prolifically, only one other story was published during his lifetime. “Chicanos,” as Mr. Suárez referred to his stories’ characters, were not seen fit to be protagonists of published works. His short stories were published only posthumously as Chicano Sketches: Short Stories by Mario Suárez (2004), fully 57 years after the appearance of his first story. In the case of Frank Mesa, another Tucson veteran, two orange crates full of manuscripts and rejection letters filled a corner of his small apartment—a rejection experience not uncommon among Latino writers. With the emergence of the Chicano movement, publishers began to pay some attention to Latino and Latina writers although most initially self-published their work. El Espejo-The Mirror, published in 1968 by Octavio Romano-V, was the first anthology of Mexican American literature. Miguel Méndez and Carlos G. Vélez-Ibáñez (this essay’s co-author) each contributed two stories. Throughout the Southwest, an explosion of literary works followed. Bisbee-born Méndez selfpublished Peregrinos de Aztlán (1974; in translation, Pilgrims in Aztlán [Bilingual Review Press, 1992]). It became one of the most highly regarded Chicano novels of twentieth-century change and migration. Many more works followed Peregrinos, including Los criaderos humanos: épica de los desamparados y Sahuaros (poems; 1975), Cuento para niños precoces (1980), The Dream of Santa María de las Piedras (1989)), and Entre letras y ladrillos (1996, in translation, From Labor to Letters: A Novel Autobiography [1997]). These works earned him high honors in both academic and international circles. Similarly ensconced in the humor and vitality of Mexican-origin peoples are Gary Keller’s early four short stories, Tales of El Huitlacoche (1984). He followed that with Zapata Rose (1992) and Zapata Lives! (1994), among the very The State of Latino Arizona   2009 first serial creative short stories. A highly respected literary figure, Gary Keller is singularly responsible for much of the renaissance in Chicano literature through his establishment of the Bilingual Review Press at ASU. As prolific as Méndez, Tucsonborn Patricia Preciado Martín produces touching, poignant, feminist, and universal works. Her award-winning oral histories, short stories, and documentary novellas include Images and Conversations: Mexican Americans Recall a Southwestern Past (1983), Songs My Mother Sang to Me: An Oral History of Mexican American Women (1992), and El Milagro and Other Stories (1996). [1] Like Preciado Martín, Nogalesborn Alberto Ríos is universalistic, prolific, and poetic. He has authored nine books and chapter books of poetry, three collections of short stories, and a memoir. His poetry includes The Theater of Night, winner of the 2007 PEN/Beyond Margins Award; The Smallest Muscle in the Human Body, finalist for the National Book Award; and Whispering to Fool the Wind, which won the Walt Whitman Award. His short story col- lections include The Iguana Killer, which won the first Western States Book Award for Fiction, judged by Robert Penn Warren. Ríos’s award winning memoir, Capirotada: A Nogales Memoir (1999), like Preciado’s work, simultaneously treats universal human issues in local and border contexts. It is filled with Mexican wit, Anglo hope, and a borderlands mix of drive and wonder. [2] Margarita Cota-Cárdenas, born in California’s Imperial Valley, echoes the border foci of Méndez and Ríos, and like Preciado filters her characters through a feminist looking glass. Living in Arizona since 1970, she has had a distinguished literary career as a novelist, poet, and teacher. Set within the context of a murder by police of a working-class Chicano, her Puppet (1985) is considered to be the first novel in Spanish by a Chicana (an English translation appeared in 2000). Sanctuaries of the Heart = Santuarios del corazón: A Novella in English and Spanish appeared in 2005. She is the cofounder of Scorpion Press, which published her poetry, including Noches despertando in conciencias and the declaration of outrage over the treatment of farm workers, Marchitas de mayo: sones pa’l pueblo. Like Preciado and Cota-Cárdenas, Stella Pope Duarte’s literary lenses and award-winning books are universal and particularistic. Born and raised in South Phoenix, Duarte’s major works include Fragile Night (1997), a collection of short stories owing much of their genesis to a dream about her deceased father. Let their Spirits Dance (2003) is a novel about the yearnings for reconciliation after the death of a son in Vietnam. If I Die in Juárez (2008) follows three young women to their tragic deaths alongside hundreds of others who have met similar fates in that border town. All these authors represent different genres, styles, modes of perception, and cultural experiences. Individually their corpuses of works make up significant and important creations of Mexican, Chicano, and Latino literatures in the literary and artistic explosion that has marked the 1990s to the present. Film For Arizona Latinos, films have not only been great sources of enjoyment but also important educational and enculturative sources. Since the early 20th century, films shown in Mexican theaters like the Orpheum in Phoenix and the Plaza in Tucson served as mediums of cultural production and reproduction. For generations of tucsonenses—from those who were descendants of the original 18th-century settlers to those who arrived after the Mexican Revolution and during and after World War II—films featuring Cantinflas, Pedro Armendáriz, Pedro Infante, María Félix, the Soler Brothers, and of course Tin Tan—the famous El Paso influenced “pachuco”—helped ensure language maintenance, cultural recognition, and social connection. They were also an important basis for a transborder and transnational identity. Rather than traveling to Mexico, second- and third-generation Mexicans in Tucson took the Laos Bus line to the theater on Congress Street. Across the street was the Lyric Theater, which showed second-run American movies at prices affordable to a large working-class population. Here Mexican families had the opportunity to see Humphrey Bogart, Gary Cooper, [1] Other works by Preciado Martín include Amor Eterno: Eleven Lessons in Love and Days of Plenty, Days of Want. Less known but historically and culturally authentic and beautifully told are Plumas (1996), The Dancer (1996), and The Legend of the Bellringer of San Agustin (1980). [2] Additional works by Alberto Ríos include The Dangerous Shirt, Teodoro Luna’s Two Kisses: Poems, The Curtain of Trees: Stories, and Pig Cookies and Other Stories. 79 Bettina Nava The State of Latino Arizona   2009 Barbara Stanwick, Tom Mix, Betty Grable, and Roy Rogers, among many others, in diverse genres. Language was learned, colloquialisms practiced, and the films’ optimism often coated over this population’s reality of hard work, low pay, and exploitative practices. For those generations, films were very much a family affair, indulged in once a month. Yet, Latino actors and actresses, for the most part, did not get to play positive roles on screen. Instead, they stereotypically occupied negative roles—criminals and loose women, among other things— mostly because of their skins’ melanin. This seems to have abated with the Chicano Movement and because of the pressure exerted by Latino actors themselves, like Ricardo Montalbán. Films made about or by Arizona Latinos have been few. Most are documentaries or docudramas elucidating social, economic, or cultural issues. An exception is Roosters (1994) written by Milcha Sanchez-Scott, which depicts the struggle of a former inmate, whose dream is to balance out the time served by spending the rest [3] of his life doing something worthwhile. This theme of struggle is the subject of many of Paul Espinosa’s films. He has written awardwinning films, like Los Mineros (1991), a 50-year history of the struggles of Mexican miners in the Clifton-Morenci copper mines, aired by PBS. He has written, directed, or produced many other films that engage the entire border region, like The Trail North (1983) and 1492 Revisited (1992). [3] Other documentaries include David Lee Guss’s The Border Real and Imaginary, Past and Present (1979), a visual essay using photographic still images and music, and Joaquin Rodrigo’s Concierto de Aranjuez, unfolding the contradictions and alienation of border life. Louis Hock’s La Mera Frontera (1997) is about a 1918 border clash between Mexican and U.S. troops in Nogales. Una Segunda Vista (A Second Look: Arizona’s Hispanic Heritage) (1992), produced by William McCune Productions for Television, is a history of the Spanish and Mexican presence in Arizona from the early explorations to the pres- More films by Paul Espinosa: Ballad of an Unsung Hero (1984), The Lemon Grove Incident (1986), In the Shadow of the Law (1988), Uneasy Neighbors (1990), The New Tijuana (1990), The Hunt for Pancho Villa (1993), … And The Earth Did Not Swallow Him (1996), The U.S. Mexican War: 1846-1848 (1998), The Border (1999), Visiones: Taco Shop Poets (2004),and California and the American Dream (2006). ent. Los Veteranos of World War II: A Mission for Social Change in Central Arizona is Pete Dimas’s fine documentary of the men and women who founded VFW Post 41 after they were refused membership in other American Legions. It depicts their fight against discrimination and ill-treatment in postSecond-World-War Phoenix. Most works engaging the Arizona Latinos have explored central issues they face and, importantly, as they continue to do today, how they overcame those issues and won their rightful place in American society. Music Music has always played a major role in the lives of Latino families in Arizona. In Mexican neighborhoods to this day, melodies from conjuntos, bandas, and trios are often heard floating from houses and patios. Almost every extended family has at least one musician or vocalist who is called upon to perform at ritual activities and family festivities. Often generational mixes of rap, corridos, cumbias, and bachatas will be played. There is no more eclectic representation of musical tastes than the music played at a baptismal party after a child’s christening. Eclecticism is, indeed, the hallmark of the music played in Arizona. The Club Filarmónico de Tucson, founded in 1897 by Federico José María Ronstadt, born in Delicias, Sonora, played original orchestral compositions, classical pieces, and American music as well. Ronstadt’s daughter, Luisa, became an internationally known interpreter of Spanish song and dance in the 1930s, under the name of Luisa Espinel. His granddaughter, Linda Ronstadt, is one of the most famous, versatile singers of recent times. Other famous musical groups that played between 1917 and the mid-1930s include the Quintero Popular Mexicano, the Orquesta Navarro, the Orquesta León, and the Orquesta Típica Mexicana (Sheridan 1986). Other influences have blended easily into Arizona’s Latino communities, including música tropical, introduced by visiting Mexican orchestras, like that of Luis Alcaraz. The 1950s saw the popularization of Cuban and Puerto Rican versions of the mambo, cha-cha, and danzón and jarocho music from Veracruz. Yet, undoubtedly American swing, jazz, rhythm and blues, and the “big band” sound of the 1940s profoundly influenced the music Latinos played, including Mexican and Chicano versions of Tommy Dorsey and Glenn Miller. Bands, 81 82 like The Music Makers, directed by Pete Bugarin, played a variety of music. Ralph Amado Chavarria’s Chapito Chavarria Orchestra also played “jaiton” (“high tone,” that is, danzones and boleros). Louis León and his Orchestra (Orquesta Luis León) played everything from rancheras to Dixieland. Tucson-born Lalo Guerrero was an iconic figure who represented the Mexican-American generation of the late 1930s and 1940s. Raised on traditional Mexican trio music, when he played in Hollywood clubs in the 1940s, American jazz, swing, and boogie-woogie strongly influenced him. His music was always varied, and he experimented with corridos, danzones, boleros, salsas, mambos, música tropical, and even the protest music of the Chicano movement. Although eclecticism reigns, certain sounds are better known than others. The Mexican corrido is an icon in the state. The Mexican Revolution produced a very large array of these songs and with them, the conjunto, consisting of an accordion player, two violinists, and a bass viola. A countless number of conjuntos spread throughout Arizona, and anywhere American Sonorans lived, conjuntos were present at parties, rituals, public settings, restaurants, schools, and homes. A quintent, Los Charritos Alegres, also formed by Pete Bugarin, played traditional Mexican music and rancheras on KOY Radio in a thirty-minute, early-morning show on Tuesdays in 1935. Mariachi music, of course, is now a staple played throughout Arizona, but it is a relatively recent arrival, having been introduced in Los Angeles in the 1950s from central Mexico. In the early 1960s, a Catholic priest in Tucson’s Santa Cruz Church organized a group of youngsters into Arizona’s first Mariachi band, the Changitos Feos (Ugly Little Monkeys). Former members of that band founded the first professional group, Mariachi Cobre, in 1971. Tucson’s annual Mariachi Conference has given a strong impulse to this genre. The Arts Today, Tucson is home to 133 murals painted by Mexican-origin artists (Vélez-Ibáñez 1996; Pima Arts Council 1993). However, the first mural-frescos in Arizona were painted by unidentified HispanoMexicanos in the late 1700s. Examples still survive at San Xavier del Bac. The early religious frescoes not only were a statement of religious beliefs but also pictorial overlays that functioned to spatially replace indigenous reli- gious values with European ones. From the American period until the 1960s, painting by Latinos was largely restricted to work made for theater broadsides and festival posters or for personal familial showings. In many Mexican households, daughters painted scrollwork on wooden serving dishes, cups, and trays, and this type of “household” art could be seen on walls or hanging over arches and entranceways. Scrollwork on iron or wood doors was not unusual, and prominent non-Mexican families in Tucson often ordered it specially made for their homes. The same ornamental motifs that were popular in the 18th century are today found on security bars for doors and windows. Needlepoint, home altars, and gardens organized around principles harkening back to the Alhambra also are part of the artistic sense of beauty and expression. Many working-class houses had artistic motifs on their adobe-plastered walls that mimicked the art on the interior patio walls at San Xavier. “Art,” then, in many Mexican neighborhoods not only was utilitarian and decorative but also reflected a broader appreciation of artistic expression. It was highly likely that in most Mexican households there was at least one “artista,” who excelled in school and used her or his talents for the backdrops in theater presentations as well as presented annual in-school showings. However, few if any were ever afforded the opportunity to display their works in any formal manner and only rarely were they exhibited in public museums, galleries, or in private venues. As was the case with Latino literature, it was not until the advent of the Chicano Movement that any attention was paid to the artistic talents of Mexican-origin populations. The Movement laid the foundations for the individual showings of the present day. In the 1970s, the Phoenix area saw the start of MARS (Movimiento Artístico del Rio Salado or the Salt River Artistic Movement). And in 1975, Xicanindio (now Xico, Inc.) was launched. One of the founders, Zarco Guerrero, is among the best-known artists, Latino or otherwise, in Arizona. A sculptor, mask maker (featured in a PBS documentary), and playwright, he has had one of his plays performed at the Kennedy Center in Washington. Guerrero is also a performance artist and founded one of the oldest Day of the Dead festivals (apart from the very traditional one held in Guadalupe). His wife, Carmen, is an arts activist. A communal versus individualis- The State of Latino Arizona   2009 “ A kaleidoscope of artistic expression reflects the cultural shift from communal art to highly individualistic interpretations of hybrid ideas, people, and events. No longer necessarily framed by the communal insistence of the mural period, Latino artists use satire as a central mode to criticize how Chicano art is treated as an add-on in public venues. These artists use hybrid modes of expression including performance, plastic, wood sculpture, and canvas renditions.” tic approach is what distinguishes the art of the 1960s and 1970s from that of today. The mural movement was largely a community and communal approach that began in Tucson in 1975, painted by Antonio Pazos and his group. They produced at least 10 murals, strongly identified politically and culturally with ongoing cultural revitalization actions and educational protests. In the 1980s, 55 murals were commissioned by artists-in-residence programs, community centers, city and county agencies, and a few private businesses. At least 45 more were painted between 1990 and 1993. Another 23 murals are undated, but most were probably painted in the post-1980 period. The largely unheard and unstated artistic and political desires of Mexican-origin populations are the inspiration for these murals. Their themes range from ecological concerns to mythological depictions of indigenous heroes to pedagogical statements regard- ing education and family. Often transborder, transethnic, and transnational, the themes of these many murals expressed a definitive cultural statement of identity and sought to balance the inequities of educational, economic, and political representation. The Día de los Muertos (Day of the Dead) has inspired an annual outpouring of semi-traditional art and craftwork. Traditional altars incorporating photos, food, flowers, sugar skulls, and the deceased’s personal items have always been at the center of this ritual. However, in recent years, art inspired by the festivities has appeared in exhibits around the state. Venues such as the Phoenix Public Library, the Mesa Arts Center, ASU’s Museum of Anthropology, Visions Gallery in Chandler, Cuervo Studio and Gallery, and the City of Guadalupe in conjunction with Calaca Cultural Arts Organization each host an annual call for altars and artwork that attract submissions by professional artists as well as individuals, families, students, and groups both within and outside the Latino community. Although this practice seeks to reclaim the tradition of the Day of the Dead and is rooted in ancient Mexican indigenous practices, Latino artists blend the traditional imagery and sentiment with modern techniques, including video installations, paintings, found-object sculptures, mixed-media paintings, and digital photography. Calaveras adorned with glitter, figurines of the Virgen de Guadalupe set on a pedestal made of discarded circuit boards, and heavily adorned cigar boxes dedicated to popular celebrity figures like Frida Kahlo, Selena, and Rita Hayworth are among the modern altars displayed. This interest has coincided with the national tragedies the United States has faced in the 2000s, including the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks; the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan; and Hurricane Katrina. The modern artistic rituals associated with El Día de los Muertos have provided an outlet for public grief. In 2007, in the Phoenix area, Monorchid art space invited Chicano artists John Jota Leanos and Tlsiza Jaurique to show their work. Both incorporate imagery inspired by the Day of the Dead. Leanos uses digital photography to recreate the human body by combining images including precontact indigenous bodies and futuristic cyborg limbs. These imaginings play with the idea that the past and future are interconnected and that science is not something exclusive to the present and future. Jaurique’s work also pays tribute to an indigenous past by recreating imagery depicting corn and recreations of Mayan drawings in glitter. She has captured images seen in the Popol Vuh, the Mayan creation myth, and other ancient stories, such as faces in corn stalks and yucca plants. Where one would expect to see paint, in a technique reminiscent of sand paintings, Jaurique has meticulously and delicately 83 84 used glitter. Other galleries, including the Trunk Space and the Eye Lounge, have featured work by many Latino artists, including photographer Annie Lopez and sculptor, painter, and installation artist Marco Albarrán. Most recently, members of the Latino community have launched galleries. Martín Moreno founded Cuervo Studio and Gallery. This muralist was heavily involved in the 1960s Chicano Movement, and he has helped bridge the gap between the generations by hosting young Chicano artists in his gallery. Nydia Cortez, of Puerto Rican descent, opened Lo Nuestro gallery to help promote artistic work by the Latino diasporas in the Phoenix area. The Mesa Arts Center provided space for the Latino arts and culture organization Xico, Inc. The center’s inaugural exhibit, Spiritual Frontera was inspired by El Día de Los Muertos, and included drawings, sculptures, and prints by celebrated Chicano artist Luis Jimenez. In the permanent collection, the Mesa Arts Center includes works by Daniel Martín Diaz, an artist who blends cultural memory with religious iconography, renaissance styling, surrealism, and musings on what dwells in the subconscious. Since opening, the museum has featured installations by local artist Melissa Martinez, whose delicate work references nature, literature, politics, and identity. Many Latino artists have included images from the Mexican game La Lotería in their work, but Teresa Villegas brings it to life in her series that reinterprets it in bright paintings, which were featured in early 2007. The Mesa Arts Center also hosted a traveling exhibit of Cheech Marin’s personal art collection: Papel Chicano. Marin gave a lecture at the opening of this collection of work on paper by notable artists who emerged out of the Chicano Movement, such as Raul Guerrero, Patssi Valdez, Diane Gamboa, Gaspar Enríquez, and many others. In September 2008, the Mesa Arts Center opened an exhibit entitled Slow and Low, which featured low riders and art inspired by low-rider culture. The Phoenix Art Museum has only a few pieces by Americanborn Latinos in their permanent collection. One is a papier-mâché sculpture installation by Tucsonbased artist Michael Cajera. However, the museum has hosted a few exhibits featuring American Latino artwork, including A Century of Retablos that exhibited colorful wood panels painted with religious iconography based on eighteenth- and nineteenthcentury New Mexican tradition. In July 2009, the museum hosted a touring collection Phantom Sightings: Art After the Chicano Movement. Locals Only was the first-ever show featuring Latino artists living and working in the valley. It featured twelve local Chicano artists, including Martín Moreno. His work incorporates the aesthetic of the muralists like Diego Rivera and José Clemente Orozco and tackles themes stemming from the Chicano Movement. Other featured artists included a recent MFA graduate from ASU, Claudio Dicochea’s mixed-media work depicts American popular icons like Debbie Harry, Michael Jackson, Prince, Paris Hilton, Princess Diana, Dorothy from the Wizard of Oz, and the Creature from the Black Lagoon. He inserts images of Mexican Balladeer Pedro Infante within these densely layered paintings that play with the traditional Spanish casta system of social stratification, mixing race and class hierarchy with double images and different levels of completion. Photographer Annie Lopez’s cyanotype images are of antique photographs she has reimagined. In one series, “Spic Inglish,” she has inserted text spelled phonetically next to the picture, making a statement about the pressure on Latinos to speak in English and poking fun at the accent at the same time. Her other series, “The Almost Real History of Art in Phoenix,” comments on the city’s historical lack of support for Latino artists, or perhaps art in its most general sense. Fausto Fernandez calls attention to garment-industry workers in his series of paintings. A mix of fabric, paint, factory blueprints, pattern instructions, and images of machine parts make a bold statement in these paintings. The underrepresentation of Latino artists, however, is changing drastically with the efforts of the Advocates for Latin@ Arts and Culture Consortium, Inc. (ALAC). With the intention of opening a Latino cultural center similar to those in other major cities with substantial Latino populations, ALAC has held fundraisers and festivals along with workshops and performances. When it became clear that the Museo Chicano— Phoenix’s only museum dedicated to Latino art, history, culture, and education—was closing, ALAC mobilized to find a brick and mortar home. In July of 2009, ALAC was granted a lease by the Phoenix City Council to occupy an 8,000-foot storefront space in downtown Phoenix. A kaleidoscope of artistic expression reflects the cultural shift from communal art to highly individualistic interpretations of hybrid ideas, people, and events. No longer necessarily framed by the The Adjutant General of Arizona Major General Hugo Salazar Mary Lou Valenzuela The State of Latino Arizona   2009 communal insistence of the mural period, Latino artists use satire as a central mode to criticize how Chicano art is treated as an addon in public venues. These artists use hybrid modes of expression including performance, plastic, wood sculpture, and canvas renditions. This shift, however, also reveals the multiplex and multidimensions of the very identities that the Chicano movement interpreted from its early, complex identity frame. This individualistic art, as a recent newspaper article (Nilsen 2009) articulated, blurs working-class and elite art; is satirical; uses local and pop culture motifs, bright colors, hybrid cultural expression; and emphasizes community and family as central features. Like its predecessors, however, this new individualist art continues the traditional use of an almost baroque penchant for detail. Equally important, it recognizes and expresses that most hybrid of experiences— living in the borderlands. Impressively, this art emerged from the Chicano insistence on relevance and multiplicity of identity that people too often perceived as misspent rage, exotic symbols, and statements seeking justice and resolution. Whether individualistic or communal, Chicano and Latino Art like its artistic brethren in literature, film, music, and theater all emerge from the complex historical and cultural creativity of populations too often reduced to intemperate labels. This short description of Latino arts in Arizona cannot do justice to the complex history of Latino theater, literature, music, and plastic art in the state. This array of work not only illustrates the enormous changes that Mexican and Latino populations in Arizona have experienced as the generations pass but it also reveals the heterogeneity of popular culture, reflecting the much broader demographic and historical changes since the 19th century. Latino arts in Arizona will not decline; instead, we are seeing an explosion in all the expressive arts. n Carlos G. Vélez-Ibáñez is Presidential Motorola Professor of Neighborhood Revitalization, professor and chair in ASU’s Department of Transborder Chicana/o and Latina/o Studies, and emeritus professor of Anthropology, University of California, Riverside. His research and five books have won numerous academic prizes. He is an elected Fellow of the American Association of the Advancement of Science, the Society for Applied Anthropology, and the American Anthropology Association, and a former fellow at the Center for Advanced Studies in the Behavioral Sciences, Stanford University. James E. Garcia is a Phoenix-based journalist, playwright, university instructor, and media consultant. He is the founder and producing artistic director of Phoenix’s New Carpa Theater Company; a board member of the Arizona Latino Research Enterprise; and the president of the Phoenix chapter of the National Association of Latino Independent Producers. Garcia has written and produced more than a dozen plays. His upcoming work includes, among others, The Tears of Lives (Playhouse on the Park). The Crossing won the national short play competition at the Kennedy Center American College Theater Festival in 2003. Michelle J. Martinez is an Arizona born writer, poet, artist, and community college and university instructor who teaches courses in Chicano/a and Latino/a studies and cultural production, film, and literature for various programs at South Mountain Community College and Arizona State University. Paul Espinosa is a Filmmaker and a Professor in the Department of Transborder Chicana/o and Latina/o Studies at Arizona State University which he joined in 2004. Through his company, Espinosa Productions (www.EspinosaProductions. com), he has been involved with producing award-winning films for nearly 30 years, specializing in documentary and dramatic films focused on the U.S.-Mexico border region. His films have been screened at festivals around the world and have won many awards including eight Emmys. Espinosa received his B.A. degree from Brown University and his Ph.D. from Stanford University. Marta E. Sánchez is Professor of Transborder Chicana/o and Latina/o Studies at Arizona State University. She is the author of Contemporary Chicana Poetry: A Critical Analysis of an Emerging Literature (UC Press, 1985), the first critical analysis of poetry by Chicanas, and “Shakin’ Up” Race and Gender: Intercultural Connections in Puerto Rican, African American and Chicano Narratives and Culture 1965- 1995 (U Texas Press, 2005). She is a book series Editor of Latinidad: Transnational Cultures in the United States for Rutgers University Press. Contributors: Rick Rodriguez, Ruben Hernandez, Devon Leal Bridgewater, and Patricia Bonn References and Further Readings Albarran, Marcos. Personal interview with Michelle Martinez. 11 July 2009. Cano-Murillo, Kathy. Personal interview with Michelle Martinez. 11 July 2009. Diocechea, Claudio. Personal interview . with Michelle Martinez 11 July 2009. Gonzalez, Rita, Howard N. Fox, and Chon A. Noriega. 2008. Phantom Sightings: Art After the Chicano Movement. Los Angeles: Los Angeles County Museum of Art. Mesa Arts Center. Mesa Arts Center. Available at http://www.mesaartscenter.com (last accessed on July 8, 2009. Moreno, Martin. Personal interview with Michelle Martinez. 11 July 2009. Nilsen, Richard. 2009. Chicano Art: A New Vision Chicano Art Shifts Focus from Cultural Identity to Larger World. The Arizona Republic. July 8. Pima Arts Council. 1993. Murals [booklet with map]. Tucson: Tucson/Pima Arts Council. Sheridan, Thomas. 1986. Los Tucsonenses: The Mexican Community in Tucson, 1854-1941. Tucson: University of Arizona Press. Vélez-Ibáñez, Carlos. 1996. Border Visions: Mexican cultures of the Southwest United States. Tucson: University of Arizona Press. 87 credits and acknowledgments This report would not have been possible without the generous support of many people. Thank you to all those who participated in the discussions and planning, who took part as readers, writers, and editors, contributing ideas, photos and time to this report. In particular, we acknowledge the following individuals and groups. Arizona Latino Research Enterprise Paul Berumen James Garcia Eric Gudiño Sal Rivera Lisa Urias Arizona Public Service Miguel Bravo Arizona State University ASU Department of Transborder Chicana/o and Latina/o Studies Edward Escobar Paul Espinosa Hilda García Pérez Lisa Magaña Miguel Montiél Marta Sánchez Seline Szkupinski-Quiroga Carlos Vélez Ibáñez ASU Office of Public Affairs Paul Berumen William Dabars Liza del Mundo Sandra Ferniza Eric Gudiño Kenja Hassan Nancy Jordan Virgil Renzulli Terri Shafer Barbara Shaw-Snyder Shawna Tibbett ASU Office of the Vice President of Educational Partnerships Eugene Garcia Mehmet Dali Öztürk J. Luke Wood Creative Services Jennifer Bostick Allison Perlis Tom Story Steve Swain Kyle Thompson ASU WP Carey School of Business Loui Olivas Photography Tom Story Tim Trumble - p. 48 & 49 ASU Office of the President Michael Crow Denise Quiroz ASU Center for Community Development and Civil Rights College of Public Programs Patricia Bonn James Garcia Alejandro Perilla Bárbara Robles Raul Yzaguirre ASU School of Historical, Philosophical, and Religious Studies, College of LIbaral Arts and Sciences F. Arturo Rosales Hayden Library Archives and Special Collections Christine Marín ASU Senior Vice President and General Counsel Jose Cardenas Patricia Rosas Translations Patricia Rosas Community Reviewers and Contributors Amanda Aguirre Catherine Anaya Frank Barrios Devon Leal Bridgewater Richard De Uriarte Adolfo Echeveste Tupac Enrique Margie Emmerman Maria Felix Peter Granillo Adelita Grijalva Zarco and Carmen Guerrero Linda Mazon Gutierrez Ruben Hernandez Yolanda Kizer Paul Luna Manuel Medina Jaime Molera Danny Ortega Mike Ortega Tony Reyes Salvador Reza Pete Rios Rick Rodriguez Tio Tachias Paulina Vasquez-Morris Santos Vega Mary Rose Wilcox Photographs Edith Auslander Ernest Calderón, President, . Arizona Board of Regents Carl Hayden High School . Robotics Club Students Governor Raul H. Castro Nelba Chavez Councilman Adam Diaz . with Francis Diaz Daniel Fontes Mary Jo French Congressman Raúl M. Grijalva Senator Alfredo Gutierrez . with David Ramirez Matt Molina The Honorable . Barbara Rodriguez Mundell Bettina Nava with Bianca Nava Congressman Ed Pastor Council Member Regina Romero Luz Sarmina The Adjutant General of Arizona . Major General Hugo Salazar Kent Paredes Scribner Mary Lou Valenzuela Printing of the report was made possible through the generous donation of Arizona Public Service.