The briefing "struck a nerve" not only with Washington policymakers but also with the mass media, as coverage was significant. Next-day articles by the Associated Press (AP) and Research USA, as well as a June 2 piece in the well-regarded science policy publication Washington Fax publicized the research message in the briefing. The AP article appeared in Newsday, CNN, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, the Boston Globe, and MSNBC, and other significant circulation outlets.

Pictured at left: Troy Duster, Jerry Sanders, and Brian Smedley.

At the briefing, researchers discussed the question of whether public and private agencies should collect statistics (e.g., through the census, public surveys, administrative databases) that allow comparisons among racial and ethnic groups. This issue is currently under contest, particularly in California where the Racial Privacy Initiative (RPI) has found a place on the March 2004 statewide ballot. If approved, RPI would bar state agencies from collecting racial/ethnic classification data from its citizens (with a few exceptions).

In response to the public debate in California and scientific discussions about the role of "race" in scientific inquiry, the American Sociological Association (ASA) released a policy statement, The Importance of Collecting Data and Doing Social Scientific Research on Race, demonstrating the importance of these activities to the development of informed, evidence-based public policy, program implementation, and meaningful scientific research. Similarly concerned about the threat to sound policy and scientific work involving racial data, the California Institute for Federal Policy Research, the Council of Professional Associations on Federal Statistics, and the Population Resource Center) collaborated with ASA in convening the briefing.

A distinguished group of scientists and practitioners presented evidence arguing the central importance of racial and ethnic category data to public policy affecting business, education, housing, criminal justice, and health. The speakers included Troy Duster, sociology professor at New York University; Brian Smedley, a psychologist with the Institute of Medicine (IOM) at The National Academies; and Gerald R. Sanders, COO of Virtual Capital of California, and former San Diego Police Chief. The moderator was Honorable Thomas C. Sawyer, Vice Chair of the Board of the Population Resource Center and former Representative of Ohio [pictured on the right].

“Empirical data based on how society groups people into racial categories are indispensable to developing scientific and public understanding of social processes as well as the efficacy of policies designed to affect them,” said ASA Executive Officer, Sally Hillsman. “It is antithetical to good government, and to good decision-making in the private sector, to blind our nation to the reality of race and its role in our society. Were governments at any level to limit their own ability to collect data based on race/ethnic classifications, our nation would suffer a scientific and statistical 'blind spot' that would significantly handicap us from developing strategies to hold our institutions accountable for improving social outcomes for all groups.”

Duster, a race and genetics expert, spoke about the ongoing debate over the collection of statistics that allow comparisons among racial and ethnic groups for the census, public surveys and administrative databases. "It can be both whimsical and arbitrary and also deeply embedded," he remarked. Although race may be inconsequential to studying molecular biology, Duster said, the color of one's skin has major implications for some types of research. The information is vital “so long as race is used as a basis of access or denial," he said.

Smedley said medical studies have shown persistent disparities in the treatment of black and white patients, regardless of insurance or income. “We couldn’t find a single area of disease or illness where these disparities were not evident,” he said.

The speakers recognized that relations among racial groups have historically been hierarchal, especially when they are embedded in social practices such as “profiling” by police, “red-lining” by mortgage lenders, and “tracking” by educators. As a result, race as it is recognized socially, is a central method for sorting people, into neighborhoods, schools, jobs, and jails.

In health policy, for example, the IOM recently highlighted the need for racial and ethnic data and related issues in influential reports on U.S. health care disparities across racial and ethnic groups. Members of Congress and other private- and public-sector national leaders participated in an IOM-organized National Press Club symposium that specifically acknowledged the need to protect such data collection in efforts to eliminate serious health care disparities that threaten community economies and the economic well-being of the United States.

The counter argument that eliminating data on race would better cultivate a race-blind society ignores strong evidence from countries that have taken this path (e.g., Brazil, France). The consequences of race in a wide range of social institutions cannot be scrutinized and addressed when public officials and scientists lack the necessary data.

For more information contact Johanna Ebner (public.affairs@asanet.org or 202-383-9005 x332), Roberta Spalter-Roth (spalter-roth@asanet.org), or Lee Herring (herring@asanet.org).