Suchergebnisse

For decades, political scientists, sociologists, and historians have tracked the perils of residential segregation in the African American community. The consensus is clear: segregation has hampered African American socioeconomic mobility and social integration. Given the strong relationship between socioeconomic status and political participation, segregation, therefore, is at least partially responsible for low levels of political participation within the black community. Over the last 20 years, Latinos have started to experience segregation rates similar to African Americans. I argue that the detriments of residential segregation are not isolated to the black community and present similar barriers to Latinos. This finding has important political implications, indicating that Latinos are unlikely to realize their full potential at the ballot box because of the socioeconomic barriers of segregation.Related Articles:"English Proficiency and Latino Participation in U.S. Elections." (2011) http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1747‐1346.2011.00302.x/abstract"Racial Self‐Identification and Latino Political Engagement." (2009) http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1747‐1346.2009.00220.x/abstract"Boosting Latino and Black Political Participation." (2005) http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1747‐1346.2005.tb00803.x/abstract

Until recently, Latinos generally were well integrated geographically and did not live in concentrated Latino neighborhoods. That is changing. Latinos now are more likely than ever before to live in isolated Latino areas. If this trend continues, Latinos soon will surpass African Americans as the most segregated minority group in the United States. For decades, political scientists, sociologists, and historians have tracked the perils of residential segregation in the African American community, but the consequences of segregation for Latinos in the United States are far from clear. Using the Social Capital Benchmark 2000 survey, this article investigates the civic consequences of segregation. The data suggest that living in a segregated area decreases the likelihood that Latinos participate in community-building activities. These findings directly challenge previous research that purports to find benefits from living in racially homogeneous areas.

AbstractThis article examines the relationship between senators' personal religious affiliations and their roll-call voting record on organized labor's policy agenda. While an impressive body of literature now demonstrates clear connections between religion and representation in the U.S. Congress, fewer studies have linked religion to issues outside of the realm of cultural and moral policy. Based on a data set spanning 1980 through 2020, our findings show that evangelical Protestants are significantly the most opposed to organized labor's legislative agenda, while Jewish senators are the most supportive. Other religions fall in between, depending on the decade. The findings imply that the reach of religion in Congress may run even deeper than is commonly understood. It extends beyond the culture wars to one of the most salient issue cleavages in the modern history of the American politics.

This study investigates voter decision-making on two smart-growth components: land preservation and affordable housing. We seek to understand how voters make concurrent decisions about unpaired smart-growth components at the ballot box. Previous studies of smart growth, affordable housing, and environmental preservation have focused primarily on describing the attitudes and traits of voters on these policies, utilize aggregate voting outcomes, or are case studies of single towns in which there is a fairly homogenous group of residents either supporting or opposing the policy. We draw on a unique data set to investigate the different covariates of attitudes for environmental preservation and affordable housing: an exit poll of voters in the 2016 Rhode Island General Election on bond referendums for environmental preservation and affordable housing. We find that the coalition for smart growth that includes both land preservation and affordable housing is undermined by views of minorities and the poor as undeserving.

Is there a relationship between legislators' religious affiliations and the consistency of their voting records? Building on the theory of "the personal roots of representation," we argue that a legislator's likelihood of switching positions depends on whether the issue is central to their personal values. We evaluate this claim using a data set including senators' religious affiliations and "culture war" votes from 1976 to 2004 and find that different religious groups vary in their voting consistency on issues such as abortion, public prayer, and gay and lesbian rights.

ObjectivesResearch has suggested that geosocial exposure to out‐groups is associated with heightened threat perceptions on the part of the dominant white majority. However, findings are not consistent.MethodsDrawing on realistic group conflict theory and research in political science that privileges the role of the economic context, we test if the effects of geosocial exposure are conditioned on individual expectations about the health of the macroeconomy using a unique data set from the New England states.ResultsWe show that a perceived increase in the presence of immigrants in the community positively correlates with restrictionist immigration policy preferences (in this case support for Arizona's anti‐immigration law), but only when people are pessimistic about the future of the state's economy.ConclusionThe information provided by the social context becomes relevant for people's policy preference formation only when they experience or expect material loss.

Studies of descriptive representation have focused on the ability of minority and female legislators to push through legislation that is beneficial to these constituencies. However, little is known concerning the role of such legislators in preventing the enactment of bills noxious to their constituencies' interests. This research note investigates the role of Latino legislators in deterring the introduction and blocking the enactment of restrictive and punitive immigration legislation. Using state‐level data from 2007, our results suggest that the relationship between the size of the Latino caucus in a state legislature and the introduction of restrictive bills is not statistically significant, but there is a strong negative statistical correlation between the size of the Latino caucus and the enactment of such laws. The data suggest that descriptive representation may play a role in blocking the passage of legislation harmful to disadvantaged groups.

Partisan polarization in the Senate is in part a product of the increased sorting of evangelical Christians into the Republican caucus. The relationship between senators' religious identities, party affiliation, and ideology has changed since the 1970s. Whereas congressional party caucuses in the past were more diverse in their religious composition, evangelical Christian senators have sorted themselves into the party that most closely resembles the values of their religious identities, leading to greater overall polarization.