Interesting Facts About the 1930 United States Federal Census
If you are interested in the 1930 census, you should read this article. It will give you some interesting facts about the 1930 census. For example, you will learn about the Questions asked, Changes in immigration patterns, and Questions asked of people with both American Indian and White lines of descent. This article will also discuss why people chose to participate in the 1930 census. And, of course, you’ll learn more about the American people who were enrolled in the 1930 census.
Questions asked in the 1930 census.
The 1930 United States Federal Census aimed to analyze American citizens’ social trends and conditions. It asked subjects about their household size, the value of their home, and the rent they paid monthly. The intent was to identify the reasons for poverty and wealth and to determine the level of economic inequality in various neighborhoods. It used the same population questionnaire as the 1920 census but made a few changes. For example, the 1930 census didn’t ask about the year a person became a naturalized citizen.
The Bureau of the Census temporarily employed 87,800 individuals as enumerators. Potential enumerators had to be U.S. citizens and had completed a test census schedule. The test schedule included a narrative description of a hypothetical community and a blank schedule. The potential enumerators filled in the schedule based on the narrative they had read. These questions were not included in the final 1930 census schedule but were included as an example for future enumerators.
Changes in immigration patterns
This study reveals changes in immigration patterns in the United States in 1935 and 1940. Those in the western U.S. were more likely to move to another part of the country than were those in the eastern U.S. In this period, the significant out-migration bands are in the north and south, one stretching from western Texas and New Mexico to the Dakotas and Montana, or roughly what we would call the Great Plains. These changes in immigration patterns are not the only reasons for these patterns.
The number of immigrants from countries outside the British Isles peaked in the early 1900s. While immigration from Europe was slow at first, several waves of immigrants arrived from Eastern Europe and Western and Scandinavian countries. By the 1930 United States Federal Census, the number of immigrants from these regions had soared to over 133,000. However, this number fell dramatically during World War I and the Great Depression, and by the time of World War II, the total number of immigrants had fallen to a mere two million.
Questions asked of naturalized citizens.
The 1930 United States Federal Census included a new question about naturalization: “Do you live in the United States?” This question aimed to gauge a person’s citizenship status, but it wasn’t as detailed as the previous ones. In addition, the 1930 census asked questions about race and racial hierarchy, but the answers had to reflect contemporary views of race. For instance, people born in both white and African-American countries were classified as “African-American.”
Those who had not yet completed the naturalization process were coded “AL” and reported as aliens. Those who had already started the process and declared their intention to naturalize were coded as PA. A further list of citizens then followed up on these codes. Similarly, those who had arrived in the country as a minor were given a citizenship column code, and those who had come after the 1920 census were listed as naturalized.
Questions were asked of persons with White and American Indian lineage.
Many people with mixed parentage in the 1930 United States Federal Census were enrolled in the federal census. This is a fact that is worth examining. The bureau’s instructions for enumerating mixed-race people were less clotted than in the 1930 Census. For example, a person with mixed parentage would be asked to specify whether they are employed or unemployed.
The census’s taxonomies were primarily political. Stanley Lieberson has argued that “the devilish principles of census enumeration are largely political.” Moreover, race and ethnicity are fixed categories disconnected from a fluid social reality. Thus, census-taking organizations are highly hesitant to change questions and coded responses. Despite these limitations, the 1930 census provides valuable historical and cultural insight.