Suchergebnisse

Frontmatter -- Contents -- List of Tables -- List of Figures -- Acknowledgments -- 1. Introduction -- 2. Studying the Newcomers -- 3. A Matter of Numbers: Immigrant Demographics and the Electoral Process -- 4. Are the Newcomers Exceptional? The Applicability of Traditional Models to Immigrant Political Participation -- 5. From Newcomers to Settlers: Immigrant Adaptation and Political Participation -- 6. Were They Pushed? Political Threat, Institutional Mobilization, and Immigrant Voting -- 7. Beyond the Ballot Box: Nonvoting Political Behavior Across Immigrant Generations -- 8. The Future of Immigrant Political Participation: Directions in Policy and Research -- Appendix -- Notes -- Bibliography -- Index

Our understanding of the politics of race, indigeneity, and ethnicity is informed not only by the work of scholars, but also by the work of leaders and practitioners, many of whom are pioneers in their respective fields. The Journal of Race, Ethnicity, and Politics (JREP) is proud to continue our Q&A series with Steve Phillips, founder of Democracy in Color, an organization focused on race and politics, and author of the New York Times and Washington Post bestselling book, Brown Is the New White: How the Demographic Revolution Has Created a New American Majority. Our hope is that forums like these will help advance our collective scholarship by better informing our research agendas, validating some of our claims, and building more bridges between the worlds of research, politics, and policy.

Our understanding of the politics of race, indigeneity, and ethnicity is informed not only by the work of scholars, but also by the work of leaders and practitioners. The Journal of Race, Ethnicity, and Politics (JREP) is proud to continue our Q&A series with Erik Stegman, executive director of Center for Native American Youth (CNAY) at the Aspen Institute. Our hope is that forums like these will help advance our collective scholarship by better informing our research agendas, validating some of our claims, and building more bridges between the worlds of research, politics, and policy.

Our understanding of the politics of race, indigeneity, and ethnicity is informed not only by the work of scholars, but also by the work of leaders and practitioners, many of whom are pioneers in their respective fields. The Journal of Race, Ethnicity, and Politics (JREP) is proud to continue our Q&A series with Christine Chen, executive director of Asian and Pacific Islander American Vote (APIAVote). Our hope is that forums like these will help advance our collective scholarship by better informing our research agendas, validating some of our claims, and building more bridges between the worlds of research, politics, and policy.

Our understanding of the politics of race, indigeneity, and ethnicity is informed not only by the work of scholars, but also by the work of leaders and practitioners, many of whom are pioneers in their respective fields. The Journal of Race, Ethnicity, and Politics (JREP) is proud to inaugurate this Q&A series with State Senator Ricardo Lara. Our hope is that forums like these will help advance our collective scholarship by better informing our research agendas, validating some of our claims, and building more bridges between the worlds of research, politics, and policy.

Objective. This article takes issue with the way that second-generation immigrants have been traditionally defined. In most studies, respondents are considered to be "second generation" if they are born in the US & if at least one of their parents was born outside the US. This article considers whether the experiences & outcomes of those with one US-born parent & one foreign-born parent (the "2.5 generation") are different from those with no US-born parents (the "2.0 generation") & those with two native-born parents (the "third generation"). Methods. The article analyzes data from the 1999-2001 March Current Population Survey. Results. The evidence indicates that the 2.5 generation is a numerically significant population & that it varies from other groups in age structure, racial identification, educational attainment, & income. Conclusions. In studying the US-born children of immigrants, scholars should avoid lumping together the 2.5 generation with those who have no native-born parents. The members of the 2.5 generation also should be treated as distinct from those born in the US to two native-born parents. 4 Tables, 3 Figures, 17 References. Adapted from the source document.

"October 5, 2013 was a big day for immigration and citizenship in the United States. Tens of thousands of protesters - undocumented immigrants, naturalized citizens, and native-born alike - rallied across more than 40 states around the country, from large cities like Los Angeles, New York, and Boston, to smaller places like Reading, Pennsylvania, Hobbs, New Mexico, and Yakima, Washington.1 In Minneapolis, nearly 2,000 demonstrators "marched from the Basilica of St. Mary, after an interfaith prayer service, to the plaza, hoisting flags and placards and chanting empowerment cries, including 'Si se puede!'"2 In Birmingham, Alabama, hundreds of rally participants listened to "the president of the N.A.A.C.P. in Alabama, [who] portrayed the immigration effort as part of broader civil rights activism in the state,"3 while in Reading, Pennsylvania, "demonstrators demanded that the congressmen sign onto or co-sponsor bipartisan immigration reform, speak on the House floor about the urgency of reform and oppose laws that promote racial profiling."4 These protests were all part of the National Day of Immigrant Dignity and Respect, as thousands of Americans joined President Barack Obama's call for Congress to pass immigrant legalization as part of a comprehensive reform package"--

Since 2004, the United States has seen a flurry of state and local laws dealing with unauthorized immigrants. Though initially restrictionist, these laws have recently undergone a dramatic shift toward promoting integration. How are we to make sense of this new immigration federalism? What are its causes? And what are its consequences for the federal-state balance of power? In The New Immigration Federalism, Professors Pratheepan Gulasekaram and S. Karthick Ramakrishnan provide answers to these questions using a mix of quantitative, historical, and doctrinal legal analysis. In so doing they refute the popular 'demographic necessity' argument put forward by anti-immigrant activists and politicians. Instead, they posit that immigration federalism is rooted in a political process that connects both federal and subfederal actors: the Polarized Change Model. Their model captures not only the spread of restrictionist legislation but also its abrupt turnaround in 2012, projecting valuable insights for the future

For many Americans, participation in community organizations lays the groundwork for future political engagement. But how does this traditional model of civic life relate to the experiences of today's immigrants? Do community organizations help immigrants gain political influence in their neighborhoods and cities? In Civic Hopes and Political Realities, experts from a wide range of disciplines explore the way civic groups across the country and around the world are shaping immigrants' quest for political effectiveness. Civic Hopes and Political Realities shows that while immigrant organizations play an important role in the lives of members, their impact is often compromised by political marginalization and a severe lack of resources. S. Karthick Ramakrishnan and Irene Bloemraad examine community organizations in six cities in California and find that even in areas with high rates of immigrant organizing, policymakers remain unaware of local ethnic organizations. Looking at new immigrant destinations, Kristi Andersen finds that community organizations often serve as the primary vehicle for political incorporation -- a role once played by the major political parties. Floris Vermeulen and Maria Berger show how policies in two European cities lead to very different outcomes for ethnic organizations. Amsterdam's more welcoming multicultural policies help immigrant community groups attain a level of political clout that similar organizations in Berlin lack. Janelle Wong, Kathy Rim, and Haven Perez report on a study of Latino and Asian American evangelical churches. While the church shapes members' political views on issues such as abortion and same-sex marriage, church members may also question the evangelical movement's position on such issues as civil rights and immigration. Els de Graauw finds that many non-profit organizations without explicitly political agendas nonetheless play a crucial role in advancing the political interests of their immigrant members. Recent cuts in funding for such organizations, she argues, block not only the provision of key social services, but also an important avenue for political voice. Looking at community organizing in a suburban community, Sofya Aptekar finds that even when immigrant organizations have considerable resources and highly educated members, they tend to be excluded from town politics. Some observers worry that America's increasing diversity is detrimental to civic life and political engagement. Civic Hopes and Political Realities boldly advances an alternative understanding of the ways in which immigrants are enriching America's civic and political realms -- even in the face of often challenging circumstances. S. KARTHICK RAMAKRISHNAN is associate professor of political science at the University of California, Riverside. IRENE BLOEMRAAD is assistant professor of sociology at the University of California, Berkeley. CONTRIBUTORS: Kristi Andersen, Sofya Aptekar, Maria Berger, Irene Bloemraad, Caroline B. Brettell, Els de Graauw, Shannon Gleeson, Rebecca Hamlin, Rahsaan Maxwell, Haven Perez, S. Karthick Ramakrishnan, Deborah Reed-Danahay, Kathy Rim, Laurencio Sanguino, Floris Vermeulen, Celia Viramontes, and Janelle Wong.

Since 2004, the United States has seen a flurry of state and local laws dealing with unauthorized immigrants. Though initially restrictionist, these laws have recently undergone a dramatic shift toward promoting integration. How are we to make sense of this new immigration federalism? What are its causes? And what are its consequences for the federal-state balance of power? In The New Immigration Federalism, Professors Pratheepan Gulasekaram and S. Karthick Ramakrishnan provide answers to these questions using a mix of quantitative, historical, and doctrinal legal analysis. In so doing they refute the popular "demographic necessity" argument put forward by anti-immigrant activists and politicians. Instead, they posit that immigration federalism is rooted in a political process that connects both federal and subfederal actors: the Polarized Change Model. Their model captures not only the spread of restrictionist legislation but also its abrupt turnaround in 2012, projecting valuable insights for the future. ; https://scholarcommons.scu.edu/faculty_books/1020/thumbnail.jpg