Jason Richwine, co-author of a controversial study by the Heritage Foundation on immigration reform, has stepped down in the middle of outrage about a doctoral thesis he penned indicating that Hispanics had markedly lower IQs than whites.
The Huffington Post reported that Richwine resigned May 10, with the Heritage Foundation not revealing any details as to why.
"Jason Richwine let us know he's decided to resign from his position. He's no longer employed by Heritage," spokesman Daniel Woltornist confirmed in an email to the Latin Times. "It is our long-standing policy not to discuss internal personnel matters."
In his Harvard dissertation, Richwine wrote that the IQ of Hispanic immigrants was lower to whites in part due to genetics and argues that this is reason enough to be wary of immigration reform that does not require a certain skill set or education level.
"The average IQ of immigrants in the United States is substantially lower than that of the white native population, and the difference is likely to persist over several generations. The consequences are a lack of socioeconomic assimilation among low-IQ immigrant groups, more underclass behavior, less social trust, and an increase in the proportion of unskilled workers in the American labor market," he wrote.
He was subsequently slammed by Latino organizations and Harvard students alike after the Washington Post revealed this information shortly after the Foundation's immigration study was released.
Around 1,200 Harvard students demanded an investigation into the 2009 dissertation in order to determine why it was considered acceptable research, Think Progress reported.
Lisa Navarette, spokeswoman for the National Council of La Raza told the Latin Times that Richwine's comments were "unspeakable," and a representation of underlying racism within the anti-immigration community.
"This gentleman's PhD dissertation shows that when you scratch the surface of extreme immigration opposition you find a disturbing and troubling history with racism, a belief in eugenics. It's just troubling and disturbing," she said. "It's bigotry disguised as science."
Furthermore, the Republican think tank's study itself received harsh criticism, even from Republicans themselves. The study reported that amnesty would cost the American taxpayer $6.3 billion, leading analysts to question the methodology employed by the Foundation.
Analysts suggested that due to the nature of Richwine's dissertation, a bias could be present in the immigration study, which examined the costs on taxpayers over the course of the lifetime of a migrant Hispanic family.
In a statement, the Foundation defended its study that Richwine authored alongside another Foundation scholar Robert Rector.
"Dr. Richwine did not shape the methodology or the policy recommendations in the Heritage paper; he provided quantitative support to lead author [Rector]. The dissertation was written while Dr. Richwine was a student at Harvard, supervised and approved by a committee of respected scholars," the statement read. "The Harvard paper is not a work product of The Heritage Foundation. Its findings do not reflect the positions of The Heritage Foundation or the conclusions of our study on the cost of amnesty to U.S. taxpayers, as race and ethnicity are not part of Heritage immigration policy recommendations."
© 2024 Latin Times. All rights reserved. Do not reproduce without permission.
