Search

That U.S. immigration policy has shaped the demography, size, and potential for routine political influence of Latino and Asian American populations is a truism.  What is perhaps less acknowledged, but also increasingly clear is that debates over U.S. immigration policy (and Congressional and Executive inaction and posturing) are shaping the politics of Latino and Asian American communities for the next generation.  In this paper, I examine the factors that shape Latino and Asian American attitudes toward U.S. immigration policy with a particular eye to whether generational differences in Latino and Asian American communities predict different preferred outcomes of the national debate on immigration policy.  This generational question is one that will take on increasing influence in coming years as the children and grandchildren of today’s immigrants make up a larger and larger share of these panethnic populations.            This paper speaks to three sets of scholarly questions.  First, I analyze the predictors of attitudes toward immigration policies in the contemporary debate among Latinos and Asian Americans.  Second, I assess whether there are predictable differences in these attitudes across immigrant generations.  Finally, I compare Latino and Asian American attitudes.             I find that Latinos and Asian Americans do not speak with one voice on immigration reform.  Interestingly, the starkest differences are seen across immigrant generations in these communities.  Latino immigrants are more likely than other Latinos to prefer legalization as the core policy outcome.  Asian immigrants are more likely than other Asian Americans to prefer a policy outcome that creates opportunities for migrants with skills to migrate.  Needless to say, these are not mutually exclusive as bills being debated in Congress today include both elements, but they certainly offer a different staring point for shaping policy.

Asian Americans and Latinos are currently one of the fastest growing racial minority groups in the United States. However, much of this growth is due to immigration: over half of both communities are new immigrants. Thus, Asian American and Latino political incorporation is directly related to the challenges associated with immigration and in ensuring the transition from citizen adult to voter. This paper explores the effect of immigration on the Asian American and Latino political behavior. Applying DeSipio’s (1996) model of new electorates, we disaggregate immigrants from both communities into three non-voting categories: non-naturalized immigrant adults, citizen adults not registered to vote, and registered voter adults who did not vote in the 2000 or 2004 election. Using Current Population Survey (CPS) data we identify and compare the factors that differentiate these three non-voting categories from those who voted between both communities. We find that Asian American and Latino political incorporation cannot be predicted solely on the basis of individual socioeconomic factors. In addition, we must take into account influences related to immigration and political institutions such as labor unions.

This paper assesses the influence of Latino participation in community-based organizations on the likelihood of participation in community politics, on attachments to the United States and their countries of origin, and on their ethnic identity. The results provide two insights. Organizational activity spurs civic engagement. The skills, networks, and information provided through this group-focused community activity vest Latinos with the resources they need to take on more individualist forms of politics. The second finding is that the influence of organizational activities does not shape attitudes. While organizations undeniably offer contacts with other individuals and networks, these resources do not drive attitudes toward either the United States or a pan-ethnic identity. The paper relies on data from a survey of "emerging" Latino populations, Latinos who trace their origin or ancestry to El Salvador, Guatemala, the Dominican Republic, or Colombia.

The fundamental question that we ask in this paper is whether the public policy needs of immigrant Latinos can be understood as part of the civil rights agenda. Our tentative answer is that they are distinct. If this is the case, we indicate that the policy needs of immigrants will steadily eclipse the civil rights issues that have galvanized Latino elites and, to a lesser extent, Latinos as a whole from the 1960s to the present.Article can also be found at http://civilrightsproject.ucla.edu

[No abstract]