Embed
Email

Immigration_ Naturalization_ and Latino Empowerment

Document Sample

Shared by: ewghwehws
Categories
Tags
Stats
views:
0
posted:
1/18/2012
language:
pages:
20
Naturalization and Mexican

American Empowerment







Mexican Americans and Politics

Lecture 15

February 28, 2006

Exam – Thursday

 Two essays of which you will need to answer

one

 You may bring one 3x5 card with notes – no

more

 You will have the entire period, so use a few

minutes to outline your answer

 Strong answers will find evidence from both

the readings and class

 No need to bring a blue book

 We prefer answers in pen

From Last Time



Mexican American Influence

in State and Local Politics

Recall and Mexican

American Influence

 Review – Mexican American/Latino influence

occurs when

 Mexican Americans/Latinos are unified

 Other electorates are divided

 2003 California recall election

 Latinos divided (on recall)

 Electorate as a whole more unified (on recall

and replacement)

Recall, By Race/Ethnicity

Latinos Whites Blacks Asian

Americans





Recall 46% 60% 27% No data







No Recall 54% 40% 73% No data





Source: Los Angeles Times, exit poll

Governor, by

Race/Ethnicity

Latinos Whites Blacks





Schwarzenegger 31% 52% 17%



Bustamante 52% 28% 64%



McClintock 9% 13% 6%



Source: Los Angeles Times, exit poll

Urban Politics:

Los Angeles Case Study

 Minority exclusion (1961-1973)

 White-led coalition denied political opportunities to Blacks

and other minorities

 The Bradley Coalition (1973-1993)

 Blacks, Latinos, liberal whites (particularly Jews)

 Coalition declined as each group sought leadership

 Riordan and Hahn (1993-2005)

 Business-led coalitions

 Minority communities divided, internally and from each

other

The 2005 Mayoral Race(s)

 Primary – Group/region/ideology all

represented to varying degrees

 Race/Ethnicity

 Valley vs. Non-Valley

 Moderate vs. Liberal Democrats

 With so many candidates (5), little incentive to

build coalitions at first

 In runoff, winner had to reach beyond his

own race/ethnic group

Race/Ethnic Voting Los

Angeles Mayoral Primary

Alarcon Hahn Hertzberg Parks Villa-

raigosa



Whites 3% 23% 36% 5% 27%



Blacks 2% 23% 5% 54% 15%



Latinos 9% 17% 7% 3% 64%



Asians - 59% 12% 8% 19%

Source: Los Angeles Times, Exit Poll

Race/Ethnic Voting Los

Angeles Mayoral Runoff

Hahn Villaraigosa



Whites 50% 50%



Blacks 52% 48%



Latinos 16% 84%



Asian 56% 44%

American

Source: Los Angeles Times, exit poll

Was This an Example of

Raw Latino Power?

 Not really – Latinos had supported

Villaraigosa strongly in 2001

 What changed was division in non-Latino

electorates

 Whites split their votes evenly

 Young Blacks and Black leaders supported

Villaraigosa (and, so, the Black vote split)

 Asian American electorate is the outlier

Will the Los Angeles Experience

Reappear in Other U.S. Cities?

 No, at least in the short term

 Multiracial political coalitions are hard to form

 And, harder to sustain

 When multiracial coalitions have formed, blacks

have generally led

 Latino and Asian Americans most underrepresented in

electorate

 2001, 2003, 2005—New York and Houston

 Latino candidates defeated despite Latino

majorities/pluralities in city population

 Latino candidates defeated by undermining their White

support

Today’s Lecture



Naturalization and Mexican

American Political

Empowerment

Trends in Mexican

American Naturalization

 Historically, few Mexican immigrants naturalized

 Today, many more do

 But, they still naturalize at lower rates than most other

immigrants

 Why

 SES

 Proximity

 Lack of obvious benefits

 Complexity of application process

 Absence of community-based assistance

Naturalizations

1981-2004

1,200,000



1,000,000

Total

800,000 Naturalizations

600,000

Mexican

400,000 Immigrant

Naturalizations

200,000



0

1981 1986 1991 1996 2001 2004

Do Mexican Immigrants

Want to Naturalize?

 Best evidence – answer is yes

 Approximately 15 percent of all Mexican

immigrant adults report no interest in naturalizing

 Behavioral evidence

 Approximately, 2/3 of eligible have done

something concrete to naturalize

 Yet, only half of those who try, succeed

Why the Gap?

 Confusion

 Fear of consequences of failure

 Concern about loss of home-country citizenship

 Bureaucracy

 Form complex

 INS impenetrable

 Cost

 Absence of community-level assistance

 Naturalization often a collective experience

 Resources available 1996-1998 are no longer

Why The Change in the

Late 1990s?

 Changes in the law

 1996 Welfare and Immigration Reform bills

 IRCA beneficiaries become eligible for citizenship

 Changes in the attitude toward immigrants

 Proposition 187

 Rhetoric of Pat Buchanan and the nativist right

 Changes in administration

 Requirement to replace aging green cards

 Government promotion of naturalization

 But, Mexican American naturalization has slowed

since 1999, or so

Naturalization and Mexican

American Participation

 Do the naturalized vote at higher rates than the

native born?

 No, but possible exception in California among registered

voters (see Barreto article assigned for today)

 Why?

 Participation requires political socialization and adult

migrants have had less

 Political institutions don’t mobilize new citizens

 When immigrant issues top the agenda, this dynamic can

change

Themes to Consider for

Midterm

1. Importance of historical exclusion/discrimination

on the current shape of Mexican American politics

2. Immigration/tension over immigration as an

ongoing dynamic of change in Mexican American

politics

3. The shape and possible trajectories of Mexican

American (and by extension Latino) electoral

politics

4. Opportunities for Mexican American political

influence/comparison of the various races we read

about and discussed



Related docs
Other docs by ewghwehws
By registering with docstoc.com you agree to our
privacy policy

You are almost ready to download!

You are almost ready to download!