Suchergebnisse

The ongoing underrepresentation of racial and ethnic minorities in most levels of office continues to warrant our attention. However, scholars have only focused on what factors contribute to the electoral success of minorities, without attention to a vital precursor-the supply of minority candidates. Using data from the Local Elections in America Project, this study provides one of the first glimpses into the supply side of minority representation, detailing how demographic, electoral, and political factors affect the likelihood a black candidate is on the ballot, and the subsequent impact on the likelihood of a black candidate winning. Adapted from the source document.

The ongoing underrepresentation of racial and ethnic minorities in most levels of office continues to warrant our attention. However, scholars have only focused on what factors contribute to the electoral success of minorities, without attention to a vital precursor—the supply of minority candidates. Using data from the Local Elections in America Project, this study provides one of the first glimpses into the supply side of minority representation, detailing how demographic, electoral, and political factors affect the likelihood a black candidate is on the ballot, and the subsequent impact on the likelihood of a black candidate winning.

Despite 35 years of empirical research, the question of how electoral structure influences Latino representation continues to be debated. Motivated by the uncertainty surrounding electoral systems, in this article, I argue that the inconsistent and inconclusive results of previous research stem from two limitations -- one theoretical and the other methodological -- of commonly used models. In the following analysis, I use an alternative theoretical conceptualization and the appropriate methodological approach to shed light on several puzzles encountered in the literature. My findings suggest, for example, that electoral structure and voting strength are key components in determining the likelihood of Latino representation, but specific demographic and institutional contexts determine how these matter: Ceteris paribus, ward elections hurt Latino chances of representation, unless there are high levels of segregation within a district. Moreover, I find that the impact of the Latino population is in great part determined by the likelihood that the populace (a) has voting rights (i.e., U.S. citizenship), (b) is not in direct competition with Blacks for elected seats, and (c) resides in an area of the United States with a long history of Latino incorporation. In short, in the race toward representation, Latinos cannot simply tread the same path as their Black counterparts but must forge new roads to victory. [Reprinted by permission of Sage Publications Inc., copyright holder.]

Despite 35 years of empirical research, the question of how electoral structure influences Latino representation continues to be debated. Motivated by the uncertainty surrounding electoral systems, in this article, I argue that the inconsistent and inconclusive results of previous research stem from two limitations—one theoretical and the other methodological—of commonly used models. In the following analysis, I use an alternative theoretical conceptualization and the appropriate methodological approach to shed light on several puzzles encountered in the literature. My findings suggest, for example, that electoral structure and voting strength are key components in determining the likelihood of Latino representation, but specific demographic and institutional contexts determine how these matter: Ceteris paribus, ward elections hurt Latino chances of representation, unless there are high levels of segregation within a district. Moreover, I find that the impact of the Latino population is in great part determined by the likelihood that the populace (a) has voting rights (i.e., U.S. citizenship), (b) is not in direct competition with Blacks for elected seats, and (c) resides in an area of the United States with a long history of Latino incorporation. In short, in the race toward representation, Latinos cannot simply tread the same path as their Black counterparts but must forge new roads to victory.

Objective. Decades of research suggest that parental involvement is vital for positive student academic achievement and thus one often‐proposed solution to alleviate the poor educational outcomes of minority students is to increase their parents' participation in school. Building on a psychological motivation argument, I investigate how the symbolic effects of minority representation impact minority parent involvement.Method. I test my hypotheses with original survey data from 324 Latino parents in Chicago.Results. My analysis suggests that, as hypothesized in the symbolic representation literature, Latinos in positions of power within schools send important heuristic cues to Latino parents that change their orientations to participation and ultimately manifest as increased school involvement.Conclusions. These results support education policies that attempt to increase the minority presence in schools at the administrative and governance levels, and highlight the need for greater enforcement of current diversity requirements under NCLB.

Losing elections is a political reality for most candidates. While much fanfare was made of the historic number of women who won in 2018, three times as many women ran and lost. And although we know much about the reasons that motivate women to run in the first, far less is known about the decision-making processes of women who lose and run again. How do women who were once motivated rebound for another campaign and election? We address this question, working with a unique, exploratory data set of interviews with women who ran for Congress in 2018 and lost. Our analysis offers some important insights on how women who rebound think about their loss, and their decision-making processes. We find compelling evidence that women's paths to office continue to differ from men's, reminding us of the shortcomings of a one-size-fits-all model for candidate emergence or reemergence. We conclude with the foundation of a gendered theory of electoral persistence.

ObjectiveRecord numbers of first‐ and second‐generation immigrants have won elected office over the last few electoral cycles, yet we find immigrants are still underrepresented at all levels of government. What are the perceived barriers to entry into political life among these New Americans?MethodUsing a unique survey data set that includes an oversample of first‐ and second‐generation immigrants who have enrolled in civic leadership trainings, we examine the similarities and differences between immigrant and nonimmigrant leaders.ResultsWe find that immigrants are in many ways similar to their nonimmigrant counterparts in that access to structural resources help shape their political ambition. Yet immigrants, unlike their nonimmigrant counterparts, often have less of these resources and perceive their ability to capitalize on these resources as less feasible.ConclusionsWe find that the traditional barriers to office—lack of professional and political experiences, finances, and monied networks—all contribute to lower self‐perceived qualifications for office among both immigrants and nonimmigrants. Yet, the New American leaders who are highly politically involved, deeply rooted in their communities, and well‐positioned to run for office face the additional psychological barriers posed by their race and ethnicity, immigrant identity, citizenship status, language ability, and acculturation, barriers that are often offered in open‐ended essays as self‐evident and crippling. Leadership training programs play a crucial role in providing training and instilling confidence in would‐be immigrant candidates.