Suchergebnisse

AbstractDespite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary, popular perceptions in the United States, especially among political elites, continue to believe that religious Muslims oppose American democratic traditions and values. While many studies find positive relationships between mosque attendance and civic participation among U.S. Muslims, an empirical and theoretical puzzle continues to exist. What is missing is research that examines the relationships between the multi-dimensional concept of religiosity and how this is associated with public opinion and attitudes towards the American political system among Muslim Americans. Using a unique national survey of Muslim Americans, we find a positive relationship between religious beliefs, behavior, and belonging and perceptions of compatibility with American democratic traditions. Quite simply, the most religious are the most likely to believe in political integration in the United States.

On January 8, 2008, the United States Supreme Court heard arguments
in Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, a case
related to the discriminatory effects of voter-identification laws
in the state of Indiana. Indiana has one of the most stringent
voting requirements in the nation, as voters are required to present
an up-to-date photo identification issued by the federal or state
government in order to cast a ballot. Plaintiffs argued that the
Indiana requirements prevent significant and unequal obstacles to
the right to vote. The state argued that Indiana had the right to
enforce strict requirements to prevent fraud and uphold confidence
in the electoral process. Similar laws have also been proposed in
many other states, typically related to charges of vote fraud, and
often times tied into the divisive debate regarding undocumented
immigrants or African American felons. Therefore the recent decision
of the Court has tremendous implications to the future of
photo-identification laws across the United States.

Homeownership's importance in America's culture and economy raises the possibility that status as a homeowner or renter constitutes a core aspect of personal identity, on par with race and ethnicity. A survey from the socially diverse Los Angeles region provides a unique data set to test the possibility that homeownership exaggerates or mitigates social cleavages, particularly those based on race or ethnicity. The analysis reveals renters as less upbeat than homeowners regarding a variety of opinion measures and distinctly divided in their opinions along racial and ethnic lines. Among homeowners, however, the authors find a confluence of opinion across racial and ethnic lines.

Objectives. The 1990s witnessed the growth and maturation of the Latino electorate in California and many scholars have posited as to the reasons. One argument is that naturalizations by way of the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) drove the increases in Latino participation. In this article we investigate the extent to which this is the case.Methods. Using unpublished INS data, we offer the first empirical test of the IRCA theory by examining Latino IRCA petitions by zipcode to determine whether or not IRCA legalizations and subsequent naturalizations were the force behind increased Latino turnout, and the overall growth of the Latino vote. We merge IRCA data with Registrar of Voter data to examine real growth in the Latino vote at the zipcode level from 1996–2000 in southern California.Results. Although Latino voting grew substantially, we find that IRCA naturalizations did not spur the increases in Latino voting in the 1990s as some have expected. Instead, demographic and mobilization variables explain why the Latino vote grew between 1996 and 2000.Conclusions. As Congress debates new proposals to "legalize" the millions of undocumented immigrants living and working in this country, many will inevitably ask what impact their citizenship will have on the electorate. This study sheds some light on the relationship between amnesty programs, citizenship, and voting among Latinos.

Objectives. The 1990s witnessed the growth & maturation of the Latino electorate in California & many scholars have posited as to the reasons. One argument is that naturalizations by way of the Immigration Reform & Control Act (IRCA) drove the increases in Latino participation. In this article we investigate the extent to which this is the case. Methods. Using unpublished INS data, we offer the first empirical test of the IRCA theory by examining Latino IRCA petitions by zipcode to determine whether or not IRCA legalizations & subsequent naturalizations were the force behind increased Latino turnout, & the overall growth of the Latino vote. We merge IRCA data with Registrar of Voter data to examine real growth in the Latino vote at the zipcode level from 1996-2000 in southern California. Results. Although Latino voting grew substantially, we find that IRCA naturalizations did not spur the increases in Latino voting in the 1990s as some have expected. Instead, demographic & mobilization variables explain why the Latino vote grew between 1996 & 2000. Conclusions. As Congress debates new proposals to "legalize" the millions of undocumented immigrants living & working in this country, many will inevitably ask what impact their citizenship will have on the electorate. This study sheds some light on the relationship between amnesty programs, citizenship, & voting among Latinos. Tables, Figures, References. Adapted from the source document.

Discusses key events in California's Latino politics & their major implications for other states & for Latino political elites. Due to developments in California, the image of Latino politics nationally has been altered. Three particularly salient features of this twenty-first- century image are: that Latinos are a politically active bloc; that Latino elected officials have authentic policy clout; & that both major parties vie for Latino support. All three aspects pointedly contrast with traditional assumptions about the Latino electorate. Tables. K. Coddon