Gonzalez wrote about his findings in the Dallas Morning News earlier this month. He makes specific points about the cultural differences between Hispanics in the two mega-states that don’t get nearly enough attention. Here’s part of his essay:

Hispanics enjoy much better statistics across the board in the Lone Star State than in the Golden one.

The relative advantage that Hispanic Texans have in key cultural indicators is strongly related to the state’s dynamic economic growth and small government. But because Texas’ smaller government has allowed civil society to grow organically, there is a strong cultural background that must be considered.

In fact, when factoring in both economic and cultural factors, one can say that California and Texas stand for two completely different faces of the Hispanic experience in America or, more to the point, the Mexican-American experience. The question is whether the two states will continue to lead two different Mexican-American subcultures in the future, or whether one approach will come to be the dominant one nationwide. …

In 2013, Texas’ Hispanic population boasted an unemployment rate of 6.9 percent. That was more than 2 percentage points lower than the national Hispanic average (9.1 percent). More important, it was better than the overall national average of 7.4 percent and only six-tenths of a percent higher than Texas’ overall rate (6.3 percent).

Meanwhile, California’s Hispanics lagged across the aboard. Their unemployment rate of 10.2 percent underperformed all the national averages and was 1.3 percentage points higher than California’s overall unemployment rate of 8.9 percent.

One thing that may account for the lower Hispanic unemployment in Texas is that Hispanics in the Lone Star State are much more entrepreneurial than those in the Golden State. Texas’ rate of Hispanic-owned businesses as a percentage of the Hispanic population is 57 percent, whereas California’s is 45 percent.

Social stats somewhat better to much better in Texas

More from Gonzalez:

Texas’ Hispanics also score favorably on matters to do with the family. This is important, as two-parent households have proved to be the best anti-poverty program ever invented, and illegitimacy stands upstream from many social problems.

And in this key cultural indicator, Texas’ Hispanics also outperform California’s. According to the Census Bureau, the former are less likely to have had a child out of wedlock than the latter, 39.8 percent to 42.6 percent.

The following stats, again from the Census Bureau, are also noteworthy. Hispanics in Texas are 10 percent more likely to be married than those in California (47 percent to 43 percent), and close to 20 percent less likely never to have been married (36.9 percent to 43.5 percent), one-third more likely to have served in the military (4.1 percent to 2.8 percent), and one-third as likely to have received Supplemental Security Income public assistance (2.4 percent to 6.2 percent). …

In terms of religiosity, the General Social Survey does not break down information at the state level but shows that Hispanics in Texas are far more likely to attend church services regularly. One is tempted to assume that California Hispanics are less religious than the national average for Hispanics.

This raises lots of interesting questions, none readily answered.

Are Texas Hispanics more religious and more entrepreneurial because they live in a state that’s far more socially and politically conservative?

Conversely, are California Latinos less religious and more likely to rely on the government because they live in a state that’s extremely secular and in a state where the high cost of housing puts families whose income would be lower-middle-class in most states squarely in poverty?

I’d like to see more analysis of these questions. But whatever the answer is, that’s not the key takeaway from Gonzalez’s research. The headline is that it’s not just student test scores in which Latinos in Texas do better than Latinos in California. It is on many metrics of basic achievement and success — at least if you’re among those who think dependency on government is a bad thing.

Texas suburb is more like Irvine than any other city in CA

Gonzalez’s work helps with key context for the California vs. Texas debate. Another piece that does so is Joe Mathews’ exceptional column from this spring about the Texas suburb that might as well be a clone of Irvine. It breaks with what I see as a stale debate:

It’s insanely annoying how so many California defenders simply ignore basic facts like Texas is creating more middle-class jobs or that Texas’ Latino and black students do better than California’s in K-12 test scores such as the NAEP.

But it’s also pretty telling that so many Californians who tout Texas don’t acknowledge that for lots and lots of people, California’s lifestyle is so vastly more appealing that they’d rather live in a condo here than a 2,800-foot ranch home there.

Read more about the picture painted by Joe’s column here.

This is supposedly reflected in the priorities of Gov. Rick Perry. A phone message I got expressed disbelief that I praised Texas public schools and called them broadly better than California’s. A male voice said something along the lines of … “Have you seen how little they pay for K-12? It’s obscene.”

That is not a good argument. In fact, it’s another argument for Texas.

It’s time to bring in Chuck DeVore, Orange County assemblyman turned Austin think tanker. DeVore suggests the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) is a good baseline to compare states. It measures fourth- and eighth-graders in math, reading and science and breaks down the results by the performance of white, Latino and African-American students.

So guess what happened in an analysis of the NAEP results for the eight biggest states? According to what Chuck wrote last year for the San Francisco Chronicle, it’s a rout.

“Looking at the most recent NAEP testing data for fourth and eighth graders in math, reading and science as well as looking at race and ethnicity and considering the eight biggest states, there are 24 categories to measure (e.g., eighth-grade science results for African American students, etc.). The 2009 results showed Texas as having the strongest scores in 11 of 24 categories while California was last in 15 of 24 categories. Further, Texas showed no areas of weakness compared to the national average.”

Texas makes case for Gloria Romero’s CA civil-rights argument

So Texas, the hellhole that pays obscenely little for K-12 education, stomps California — including specifically with the Latino and African-American students who are supposed to be oppressed in a Southern state like Texas as opposed to an enlightened state like California.

Gloria Romero is so right: The biggest civil rights issue in California by far is that the needs of the majority Latino students in our public schools are trumped by the needs of the largely white California Teachers Association and California Federation of Teachers.

In Texas, where teachers unions don’t dominate public education, Latinos do much better. That is not a talking point. As the NAEP scores show, it is the truth.

It should matter in the CA debate over education far more than it does. When you look at California’s actual deeds — not its rhetoric — our state government certainly celebrates ignorance far more than Texas.

By Wayne Lusvardi

What draws working and middle class Californians to states like Texas is mostly a freer home sales market, which brings lower prices.  A zero state income tax rate and lower business tax rates that provide incentives for job creation also matter, but to a lesser extent.

The Texas advantage occurs even though its property base tax rates are double or triple those in California. However, although the tax rates are higher, because home prices are lower, the rates are applied to the lower values.

That is the conclusion of Jed Kolko, the chief economist for Trulia, an online home sales listing company.  Kolko found that net California out-migration (those leaving minus those coming in) is higher for the working and middle class than it is for the wealthy.  Kolko’s statistical analysis actually found that high-income households making $200,000 per year or more were holding steady in California.

Thus, the media hullabaloo about rich people fleeing California’s high income tax rates was not found, at least so far, after analyzing a large set of home price data.  Businesses may be fleeing California, but high-income households are not on a net basis.

Kolko’s study found that out-migration fell when home prices fell and vice versa. According to his analysis, Californians move to states like Texas because they have a freer real estate market and more market-produced affordable housing. It’s simple Econ. 101: Greater supply reduces prices.

In California, affordable housing is erroneously thought to be something that only government produces.  Actually, current median home prices in both California and Texas are nearly what they were in August 2008 before the Mortgage Meltdown and Bank Panic.

Texas still cheaper even with higher electric costs 

Expanding on Kolko’s findings, this writer additionally found that net out-migration from California to Texas is occurring despite higher property tax rates and electricity costs in Texas.  Because property taxes are higher in Texas, home prices are also lower.

Total housing costs — mortgage payment plus property taxes plus electricity bills — are 20 percent lower in Texas than California. That happens even though average electricity bills in Texas are $49.10 per month higher than in California. The Golden State’s lower cost is mainly due to more moderate weather and energy efficiency policies.

Total Housing Cost Comparison

Texas has something that draws working and middle class residents from California. It is lower total housing expenses, not just no state income tax.  And this is primarily due to a freer real estate market in Texas that is unburdened by growth controls, environmental restrictions, rent controls open space requirements and historic preservation laws.