Chip Lupo and the States With the Most Racial Progress
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): The Good Men Project
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/02/01
Chip Lupo is an experienced personal finance writer currently contributing to WalletHub. With a background in journalism from Elon University, he has worked across various sectors, including finance, sports, politics, and religion. Chip has expertise in SEO best practices, content creation, editing, and proficiency in Microsoft and Adobe applications. His career spans over two decades, during which he has held roles as a compliance analyst, wire editor, and night city editor. Chip’s passion for media and communications drives his commitment to high-quality content. Lupo discussed racial progress and integration in the United States. They analyzed disparities between African Americans and whites across 21 indicators, emphasizing employment, wealth, education, and civic engagement. New Mexico, Hawaii, and Arizona excelled in integration. At the same time, Mississippi, Texas, and Wyoming showed progress in specific areas like health, education, and poverty reduction. Employment and wealth were prioritized due to their domino effect on other categories. However, challenges persist in health care, particularly in the Deep South. Lupo highlighted geographic and economic factors influencing disparities, concluding that progress remains uneven across states.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Oh my gosh, once again, we are here with Chip Lupo from WalletHub. How long have you been with WalletHub as an analyst?
Chip Lupo: I’ve been with WalletHub since 2018, primarily as a writer. About a year and a half ago, I transitioned to a writer-analyst role.
Jacobsen: Okay, great. Today, we will discuss racial progress, focusing on the states that have made the most significant strides and those that have lagged. To start with a broad question, how are you quantifying racial progress?
Lupo: That’s a great starting point, Scott. To identify the states that have made the most racial progress, we measure the disparities between African Americans and whites across 21 key indicators of equality in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. These indicators span median annual household income, standardized test scores, voter turnout, and homeownership rates.
Jacobsen: I see. Regarding the top three—New Mexico, Hawaii, and Arizona—they’ve achieved the most racial integration. How did they manage that?
Lupo: These states have made notable progress. All three rank highly in employment, wealth, education, and social and civic engagement. This progress is largely due to effective public policies that create more opportunities for minorities in education or business. For instance, Hawaii ranks first in social and civic engagement.
However, there is still room for improvement in health care. In Hawaii and Arizona, there are significant gaps in the quality of hospitals and access to health insurance. On the other hand, New Mexico consistently ranks high across all four dimensions: employment and wealth, education, social and civic engagement, and health care. While Hawaii and Arizona rank well in most areas, healthcare remains a critical area for improvement.
Now, let’s talk about employment and wealth. All three states rank very highly in this area. For instance, New Mexico ranks 6th, Hawaii 2nd, and Arizona 4th. Indicators such as median household income show that racial income gaps are narrowing in these states. Unemployment rates are also levelling off, which is promising for achieving a better balance in employment.
Additionally, homeownership rates are improving, or at least the racial gaps in homeownership are shrinking. Poverty rates are declining, business ownership rates are increasing, and the representation of minorities in executive positions is growing. These advancements can largely be attributed to sound public policy and educational initiatives, which help raise awareness and support efforts to close racial disparities.
Arizona has seen an influx of new residents, which could be contributing to its progress. People moving to Arizona may be coming from states where racial disparities are not improving as much as they would like.
Jacobsen: Despite these positive trends, about 44% of Americans feel somewhat or very pessimistic about racial equality in the United States. This raises an important question: are public perceptions aligned with the data? In other words, even though the public may feel pessimistic, does the data indicate a more optimistic reality?
Jacobsen: It’s somewhere in the middle. And again, by state, you can feel some of this optimism in certain states, while in others, not so much. Let’s take a look at the bottom of the rankings.
Lupo: Sure. At the bottom, the District of Columbia ranks last at 51st. For discussion purposes, we’ll set D.C. aside and focus on the remaining states. Some lowest-ranking states include Wisconsin, Iowa, Minnesota, Montana, Michigan, Illinois, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, and South Dakota.
Geography plays a role here, whether we want to admit it or not because these are upper Midwestern cold-weather states. That geographic trend was particularly noticeable. Additionally, many states in the Deep South are in the bottom half of the rankings, such as Missouri at 32nd, my home state of South Carolina at 34th, Arkansas at 38th, and Louisiana at 40th.
Jacobsen: Do geography and climate influence these rankings significantly?
Lupo: Yes, they do. Geography and climate impact the economy, influencing integration and progress.
Jacobsen: This study separates integration and progress into distinct metrics. Why were those categorized differently?
Lupo: That’s a good question, Scott. Integration refers to the assimilation of races into society, which has been an ongoing process since the 1960s. Racial progress takes a more comprehensive approach by combining various measures to assess how well integration works—or where it’s not working.
Integration metrics look at how well different racial groups blend into society. In contrast, racial progress metrics highlight areas needing improvement and assess overall effectiveness.
Jacobsen: Three states stood out in this study—Texas, Wyoming, and Mississippi. Can you elaborate on their performance in terms of integration and progress?
Lupo: Absolutely. Each state has made specific strides:
- Texas: Significant progress was achieved by closing healthcare gaps between whites and African Americans.
- Wyoming: Reduced the earnings gap, reflecting economic progress.
- Mississippi: Closed the poverty gap by 27 percentage points since 1970.
Jacobsen: How would you characterize their performance in integration and progress overall?
Lupo: One area where all three states rank highly is education. Wyoming is 1st, Texas is 4th, and Mississippi is 7th in education metrics. Key indicators include:
- Public high school dropout rates (the gap is narrowing).
- Standardized test scores.
- Share of adults with at least a high school diploma.
- Share of adults with at least a bachelor’s degree.
All three states are performing well in these areas, which is crucial.
Jacobsen: What about their weakest areas?
Lupo: Mississippi shows a noticeable drop in its social and civic engagement rank, coming in at 25th. Key indicators here include:
- Share of single-parent households.
- Share of the adult population on parole.
- Voter turnout rates (an important area for improvement).
- Share of veterans.
Mississippi’s lower ranking in this category suggests that more work must be done to foster civic participation, particularly to get more people to the polls.
Jacobsen: That’s another interesting one. How did Mississippi do in that category?
Lupo: They did pretty well. Texas, on the other hand, is ranked 16th there. So, Mississippi still has some work to do regarding social and civic engagement, particularly in encouraging minorities to vote. This could be addressed through better campaigning, education, or awareness programs.
Jacobsen: What about the categories being weighted? Employment and wealth dominate, followed by a tie between education, social and civic engagement, and health.
Lupo: That’s correct. Employment and wealth have a full weight of 5.71 points, while education and social and civic engagement are each weighted at 5 points. Health, however, is weighted lower at 2.86 points.
Jacobsen: Why is health weighted less than the other categories?
Lupo: That’s because there are more subcategories within health. For example, there are seven different subcategories in health alone. The emphasis on employment and wealth stems from these gaps being the most discussed and widely recognized.
The theory is that narrowing the income gap creates a domino effect: better income can lead to improved education opportunities, better access to health care, and a higher quality of life. That’s why employment and wealth are given more weight—40 points versus 20 points for the other dimensions. Closing the income gap is foundational for addressing inequalities in other areas.
Jacobsen: Based on this study, how would you assess racial progress and integration in the U.S.?
Lupo: There’s still a long way to go, especially in rural and Deep South states. Key areas needing improvement include the quality of hospitals, health care, and access to affordable insurance.
The data shows narrowing gaps in some areas, but when you look at healthcare rankings, many low-income states in the Deep South rank poorly. This confirms that healthcare remains a critical area for improvement.
Jacobsen: We’ve covered the categories, rankings, weightings, and broader trends. Is there anything else to add?
Lupo: No, I think that’s everything. We’re starting to streamline these discussions, which is great.
Jacobsen: All right. Thank you very much for your time today. I’ll get started on this.
Lupo: Thanks, Scott. Anytime.
Jacobsen: You too.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
In-Sight Publishing 