Redefining America: Key Findings from the 2006 Latino National Survey Luis Fraga Associate Professor of Political Science, Stanford University John Garcia Professor of Political Science, University of Arizona Rodney Hero Professor of Political Science, Notre Dame University Michael Jones-Correa Associate Professor of Government, Cornell University Valerie Martinez-Ebers Associate Professor, Texas Christian University Gary M. Segura Associate Professor, University of Washington
65
Embed
Redefining America: Key Findings from the 2006 Latino National Survey Luis Fraga Associate Professor of Political Science, Stanford University John Garcia.
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Redefining America: Key Findings from the 2006 Latino National Survey
Luis FragaAssociate Professor of Political Science, Stanford University
John GarciaProfessor of Political Science, University of Arizona
Rodney HeroProfessor of Political Science, Notre Dame University
Michael Jones-CorreaAssociate Professor of Government, Cornell University
Valerie Martinez-EbersAssociate Professor, Texas Christian University
Gary M. SeguraAssociate Professor, University of Washington
Sources of FundingSources of Funding
• Annie E. Casey FoundationAnnie E. Casey Foundation• Carnegie CorporationCarnegie Corporation• Ford FoundationFord Foundation• Hewlett FoundationHewlett Foundation• Irvine FoundationIrvine Foundation• Joyce FoundationJoyce Foundation• Kellogg FoundationKellogg Foundation• National Science FoundationNational Science Foundation• Russell Sage FoundationRussell Sage Foundation• Texas A&M University: MALRC, PERGTexas A&M University: MALRC, PERG
Percent Hispanic of U.S. Population, 1960-2030
3.64.8
6.9
9.7
13.2
16.4
19.3
22.5
0
5
10
15
20
25
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030
3.64.8
6.9
9.7
13.2
16.4
19.3
22.5
0
5
10
15
20
25
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030
Hispanic Births and Net Immigration by Decade: 1960-2030
2.61.3
3.2 34.4
5.57
8.19.2
7.6
11.2
7.3
13.4
8.1
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
1960-70 1970-80 1980-90 1990-2000
2000-10 2010-20 2020-30
Births Immigration
2.61.3
3.2 34.4
5.57
8.19.2
7.6
11.2
7.3
13.4
8.1
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
1960-70 1970-80 1980-90 1990-2000
2000-10 2010-20 2020-30
Births Immigration
Latino Diversity
44 million Latinos in the US
Census Bureau (American Community Survey, Released August 2006)
66.2% (5717)*Island-born PR 5.4% (467)*No high school diploma 37%*College graduate 16.2%
Separate but Related:Separate but Related:
The Realities of Pan EthnicityThe Realities of Pan Ethnicity within the Latino National Surveywithin the Latino National Survey
A Multiplicity of IdentitiesA Multiplicity of Identities
• Simultaneous strong Simultaneous strong sense of pan-ethnic sense of pan-ethnic identity, national origin identity, national origin identity, and American-identity, and American-nessness
Puerto Ricans illustrate Puerto Ricans illustrate best that identities are best that identities are not mutually exclusivenot mutually exclusive
Cuban pan-ethnicity Cuban pan-ethnicity surprisingly highsurprisingly high
Mexican sense of Mexican sense of American-ness high American-ness high considering the share considering the share foreign bornforeign born
AmericanAmericanNational National OriginOrigin
Pan-Pan-EthnicEthnic
MexicanMexican 61.761.7 84.084.0 87.487.4
CubanCuban 77.877.8 82.182.1 81.681.6
Puerto Puerto RicanRican 83.783.7 90.790.7 89.389.3
AllAll 65.065.0 84.084.0 87.287.2
Cells are percent expressing Cells are percent expressing “somewhat” or “very strongly”“somewhat” or “very strongly”
Extent of Pan Ethnic IdentificationExtent of Pan Ethnic Identification
by National Originby National Origin Variation among Variation among
national origin national origin groups modestgroups modest
Lowest groups Lowest groups are Cubans and are Cubans and SpaniardsSpaniards
Highest groups Highest groups are Central are Central Americans, Americans, Puerto Ricans, Puerto Ricans, and Dominicansand Dominicans
Order of bars- So. Amer; Order of bars- So. Amer;
Cen. Amer.;Cen. Amer.; Mex.; Puerto Mex.; Puerto Rican; Cuban; Dominican; Rican; Cuban; Dominican; Salvadoran; Guatemalan; Salvadoran; Guatemalan; SpaniardsSpaniards
A Basis for A Basis for Candidate Choice- Candidate Choice- Speaking Spanish Speaking Spanish
++ Stronger pan-ethnic Stronger pan-ethnic identifiers prefer identifiers prefer candidates who have candidates who have Spanish facilitySpanish facility
A Basis for A Basis for Candidate Choice- Candidate Choice- IssuesIssues
++ Stronger pan-ethnic Stronger pan-ethnic identifiers place high identifiers place high emphasis on issues emphasis on issues
Correlates of Pan Ethnic Identity and Sense of aPan Ethnic Community
Elements of a Pan-Elements of a Pan-ethnic Communityethnic Community
Positive Positive AssociationAssociation
Direction Direction
Linked fate with other Linked fate with other LatinosLatinos
++ Stronger pan-ethnic Stronger pan-ethnic identifiers have identifiers have
higher level of linked higher level of linked fatefate
Ethnic group’s Ethnic group’s socioeconomic status socioeconomic status as similar w/ other as similar w/ other Latinos Latinos
socioeconomic status socioeconomic status as similar w/ other as similar w/ other
Latinos Latinos
Ethnic group’s Ethnic group’s political status as political status as similar w/ other similar w/ other Latinos Latinos
++ Stronger pan-ethnic Stronger pan-ethnic identifiers perceived identifiers perceived their political status their political status as similar w/ other as similar w/ other
Latinos Latinos
Ethnic group’s sense Ethnic group’s sense of linked fate common of linked fate common to that of other to that of other Latinos Latinos
++ R’s sense of own sub-R’s sense of own sub-group’s status as group’s status as
linked w/ other linked w/ other LatinosLatinos
Levels of Pan Ethnicity and ConnectivenessLevels of Pan Ethnicity and Connectiveness
Of One’s Subgroup to Other LatinosOf One’s Subgroup to Other Latinos
One-half of LNS Latinos perceive a lot of One-half of LNS Latinos perceive a lot of commonalities with one’s group and other Latinos commonalities with one’s group and other Latinos
Stronger pan-ethnic identifiers are more inclined to Stronger pan-ethnic identifiers are more inclined to see this connection.see this connection.
Over three- fourths of the combined stronger pan-Over three- fourths of the combined stronger pan-ethic identifiers see their own national origin group ethic identifiers see their own national origin group as having a similar fate with other Latinosas having a similar fate with other Latinos
Forced Choice: Boxing in LatinosForced Choice: Boxing in Latinos
• However, forced choice reveals However, forced choice reveals more traditional patterns:more traditional patterns:
American-ness suffers American-ness suffers among foreign-born but among foreign-born but improves greatly across improves greatly across generationsgenerations
Puerto Ricans least Puerto Ricans least “Latino” and most stand “Latino” and most stand alone as a groupalone as a group
Share of Mexicans Share of Mexicans choosing pan-ethnicity choosing pan-ethnicity equalsequals share choosing share choosing national originnational origin
• We caution that this is an We caution that this is an artificial choice, one not artificial choice, one not required of people in the real required of people in the real worldworld
• Preference for pan-ethnicity Preference for pan-ethnicity still more than double what still more than double what was found in LNPS 1989was found in LNPS 1989
Distribution of Single-Identity Preference Distribution of Single-Identity Preference by National Origin Groupby National Origin Group
AmericanAmericanNational National OriginOrigin
Pan-Pan-EthnicEthnic
MexicanMexican 16.116.1 38.938.9 39.039.0
CubanCuban 27.727.7 36.836.8 26.726.7
Puerto Puerto RicanRican 21.221.2 43.943.9 27.927.9
AllAll 17.017.0 38.538.5 38.038.0
Cells are percent of group choosing that Cells are percent of group choosing that identityidentity
Less Separate and More Related: A Less Separate and More Related: A Broader and Integrated Latino Broader and Integrated Latino
CommunityCommunity
Clearer evidence of active Clearer evidence of active presence of pan-ethnicity presence of pan-ethnicity among Latinos among Latinos
Transcends nativity and Transcends nativity and immigrant background.immigrant background.
Reflects multiplicity of group Reflects multiplicity of group related identities for Latinos related identities for Latinos living in Americaliving in America
There is a political connection There is a political connection among those with stronger among those with stronger levels of pan-ethnicity and levels of pan-ethnicity and political involvements political involvements
Stronger pan-ethnic identifiers Stronger pan-ethnic identifiers more inclined to be politically more inclined to be politically aware and tied to their fellow aware and tied to their fellow Latinos. Latinos.
Partisan and ideological Partisan and ideological implications with stronger pan-implications with stronger pan-ethnic identifiersethnic identifiers
Real indicators of ongoing and Real indicators of ongoing and inter-related pan-ethnic inter-related pan-ethnic community and inter-group community and inter-group commonalities commonalities
Latinos and Racial IdentificationLatinos and Racial Identification
More complex than previously understoodMore complex than previously understoodwith confounding notions of phenotype and skin-tone.with confounding notions of phenotype and skin-tone.
Self-identification distribution among LNS Self-identification distribution among LNS respondents:respondents:
67.2% some other race67.2% some other race22.8% white22.8% white .8% black.8% black
Fully 51% of respondents say Latino/Hispanic is a Fully 51% of respondents say Latino/Hispanic is a different race!different race!
But… is Race the same as Skin-tone?But… is Race the same as Skin-tone?
Racial IdentificationRacial Identification
Determinants of Racial Self-Determinants of Racial Self-identificationidentification
Racial identification doesn’t obviously vary by Racial identification doesn’t obviously vary by citizenshipcitizenship or or generation in USgeneration in US. .
With one exception, no obvious differences by With one exception, no obvious differences by national national originorigin or or state of residencestate of residence. .
Cubans (and Floridians) are outliers (25% difference with six other Cubans (and Floridians) are outliers (25% difference with six other major Latino ethnic groups).major Latino ethnic groups).
As previously documented, Cuban Americans are more likely than As previously documented, Cuban Americans are more likely than other Latinos to self-identify as white.other Latinos to self-identify as white.
But…. Even Cuban response is a big shift from LNPS in But…. Even Cuban response is a big shift from LNPS in 1989.1989.
Cuban DistributionCuban Distribution whitewhite otherother19891989 92.592.5 3.8 3.820062006 49.949.9 43.043.0
BBuutt
Skin-tone Skin-tone
Question: “Latinos can be Question: “Latinos can be described based on skin described based on skin tone or complexion tone or complexion shades. Using a scale shades. Using a scale from 1 to 5 where 1 from 1 to 5 where 1 represents very dark and represents very dark and 5 represents being very 5 represents being very light, where would you light, where would you place yourself on that place yourself on that scale?”scale?”
A plurality selects the A plurality selects the exact middle category of exact middle category of skin-tone. skin-tone.
Cuban responses for skin-tone is not significantly different from Cuban responses for skin-tone is not significantly different from other groups:other groups:
9 % answering ‘dark’ or ‘very dark,’ compared to 10-11% of 9 % answering ‘dark’ or ‘very dark,’ compared to 10-11% of other national origin groups.other national origin groups.
Darker skin-tone is associated with lower outcomes in income and Darker skin-tone is associated with lower outcomes in income and home ownership but NOT with employment or education. home ownership but NOT with employment or education.
Darker skin-tone also associated with more negative incidents with Darker skin-tone also associated with more negative incidents with police, obtaining housing, and service in restaurants.police, obtaining housing, and service in restaurants.
A Closer Look at Skin-tone A Closer Look at Skin-tone
Skin-tone and “American” Skin-tone and “American” IdentificationIdentification
In general, how strongly or not do In general, how strongly or not do you think of yourself as you think of yourself as American?American?- Very strongly, somewhat- Very strongly, somewhat
strongly, not very strongly, strongly, not very strongly, or not al all.or not al all.
The plurality answer for all The plurality answer for all respondents was “very strongly” respondents was “very strongly” but the ones most likely to feel but the ones most likely to feel this way were the lightest skin-this way were the lightest skin-tone.tone.
Partisanship and the Bush Effect:Partisanship and the Bush Effect:Presidential ApprovalPresidential Approval
RegisteredRegistered Not Registered Not Registered
DemocratDemocrat 23.6 30.0 23.6 30.0
Republican Republican 52.7 37.952.7 37.9
IndependentIndependent 29.6 31.8 29.6 31.8
Don’t Know Don’t Know 28.5 30.728.5 30.7
Don’t Care Don’t Care 26.6 31.3 26.6 31.3
“How strongly do you approve or disapprove of how President Bush is doing as President?”
Partisanship and the Bush Effect:Partisanship and the Bush Effect:Presidential FavorabilityPresidential Favorability
RegisteredRegistered Not Registered Not Registered
DemocratDemocrat 24.1 29.3 24.1 29.3
Republican Republican 53.8 38.753.8 38.7
IndependentIndependent 31.4 31.3 31.4 31.3
Don’t Know Don’t Know 28.3 19.028.3 19.0
Don’t Care Don’t Care 27.1 22.2 27.1 22.2
“Now I would like to ask you about your feelings toward President Bush. Thinking about the kind of person he Is, would you say you view him very favorably, somewhat favorably, …?”
Foundations of Bush FavorabilityFoundations of Bush Favorability
His policy positionsHis policy positions 25.225.2
LikeabilityLikeability 9.59.5
LeadershipLeadership 25.425.4
Ability to speak SpanishAbility to speak Spanish 5.3 5.3
Relates well to LatinosRelates well to Latinos 19.119.1
Commitment to his Commitment to his Christian FaithChristian Faith 15.615.6
Citizenship and Issue Positions:Citizenship and Issue Positions:Problem Facing the CountryProblem Facing the Country
“Which political party do you think has a better approach to address this problem?”
Latinos in New and Traditional AreasLatinos in New and Traditional Areas
The Latino population, especially immigrants, has moved well The Latino population, especially immigrants, has moved well beyond traditional states such as California, Texas, and New York beyond traditional states such as California, Texas, and New York to include considerable and increasing presence in such states as to include considerable and increasing presence in such states as Arkansas, Georgia, Iowa and North Carolina.Arkansas, Georgia, Iowa and North Carolina.
These latter states -- Arkansas, Georgia, Iowa and North Carolina – These latter states -- Arkansas, Georgia, Iowa and North Carolina – are also states that had previously had little experience with are also states that had previously had little experience with immigrants and/or have substantially large African-American immigrants and/or have substantially large African-American populations.populations.
Latinos Seeing CommonalitiesLatinos Seeing Commonalitieswith Other Groups with Other Groups
Response Choices: nothing, little, some, a lot, DK/no answerResponse Choices: nothing, little, some, a lot, DK/no answer
QuestionQuestion:: Thinking about issues like job opportunities, educational attainment Thinking about issues like job opportunities, educational attainment
or income, how much do [selected ethnic term] have in common with or income, how much do [selected ethnic term] have in common with other racial groups in the United States today? Would you say other racial groups in the United States today? Would you say [selected ethnic term] have[selected ethnic term] have
… ….. .. in commonin common with African Americanswith African Americans
Results:Results: In all 7 statesIn all 7 states more respondents say “some” or “a lot” more respondents say “some” or “a lot” -- ranging -- ranging
from 46% to 57% -- than say “nothing” or from 46% to 57% -- than say “nothing” or “little.”“little.”
However, in the 4 “emerging states” 50 percent However, in the 4 “emerging states” 50 percent or lessor less of of respondents say “some” or “a lot,” while more in the other states say respondents say “some” or “a lot,” while more in the other states say “some” or “a lot”: CA (51%), TX (52 %), NY (57%)“some” or “a lot”: CA (51%), TX (52 %), NY (57%)
Question:Thinking about issues like job opportunities, educational attainment or income, how much do [selected ethnic term]have in common with other racial groups in the United States today? Would you say [selected ethnic term] have….. in common with whites:
Results:Varied pattern, hard to summarize, except that in all states fewer respondents answer “some” or “a lot” than they did for the similar question regarding Blacks. Also, CA only state where more say nothing /little than some/ a lot (47%/44%).
Socioeconomic Commonalities
Inter –Group Competition: Latinos and Others
Question:Some have suggested that [selected ethnic term] are in competition with African Americans
. …Would you tell me if you believe there is strong competition, weak competition or no competition at all with African Americans? How about… competition in getting jobs
Results:In all seven states (only) about a quarter (25-28 percent) perceived “strong competition” and about 15-20 percent or so sees “weak competition;” the plurality choice in every state is “no competition at all.”
New York stands out in having clearly the highest proportion, 36 percent, saying “strong competition.”
In 4 emerging states, 47-52 percent say “no competition at all;” consistently 25-27 percent in these states say “strong competition.”
Percent saying “strong competition” is highest in NY (35%) and TX (32%)
Competition in….having access to education and quality schools
…getting jobs with the city or state government
42 to 48% in emerging states say “no competition,” and roughly 28 % say“strong competition.” GA stands out in this group, with 33% percent saying “strong competition”
The other three states tend to have higher percentage (than “emerging”)saying “strong competition: CA 35%; TX 33% and, most strikingly, NY 43%.
Question:Competition in …“Having [selected ethnic term] representatives in elected office” Results:In all 4 emerging states “no competition” is the most common answer (41, 39, 42, and 28 percent for AR, GA, IA, and NC, respectively). GA is highest with “strong competition,” 36%.
IN CONTRAST
In the three others states, “strong competition” is the most common answer: CA 38%, TX 38%, and NY 42%
Competition in… Political Representation
Concept of “Linked Fate” with Others
Question:How much does [Latinos] doing well depend on African Americansdoing well?
Results:Percent saying “some” or “a lot” in 4 emerging states ranges from 58% (NC) to 65% (AR).
Interestingly, percent saying “some” or “a lot” is highest in NY (67%). In TX is 64% and in CA 53% say this.
IMMIGRATION POLICY
Preferred Immigration Policy by Generation
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
ImmediateLegalization
Guest WorkerLegaliz
Guest Worker Seal Border None of These
Preferred Immigration Policy
Perc
en
t w
ith
in G
en
era
tion
Preferred Immigration Policy First
Preferred Immigration PolicySecond
Preferred Immigration Policy Third
Preferred Immigration Policy Fourth
Preferred Immigration Policy All
Opinion of Effect of "Minutemen" Organizations on US Border
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Improved BorderControl
Little Difference More Hostilitytoward
Immigrants
More Hostilitytoward all
Latinos
No Opinion Don't Care
Perc
en
t w
ith
in G
en
era
tion
First
Second
Third
Fourth
All
THE DECLINE OF TRANSNATIONALISM
Plans to Return Permanently to Country of Origin, among First Generation Latinos, by Years in US
Cases weighted by WT_NATIO
Years in US
4946434037343128252219161310741
Inte
nti
on t
o R
eturn
Perm
anen
tly
.5
.4
.3
.2
.1
0.0
Remittances to Country of Origin Once a Month or More, among First-Generation Latinos, by Years in US
Cases weighted by WT_NATIO
Years in US
4946434037343128252219161310741
Send R
emit
tance
s O
nce
a M
onth
or
More
.7
.6
.5
.4
.3
.2
.1
0.0
Frequent Contact (more than once a month) with Family in Country of Origin, among First-Generation Latinos,
by Years in US
Cases weighted by WT_NATIO
Years in US
4946434037343128252219161310741
Conta
ct O
nce
a M
onth
or
More
1.2
1.0
.8
.6
.4
.2
Spanish as Primary Language of Media Use, among First-Generation Latinos, by Years in US
Cases weighted by WT_NATIO
Years in US
4946434037343128252219161310741
Spanis
h a
s P
rim
ary
Langu
age o
f M
edia
Use
.9
.8
.7
.6
.5
.4
.3
.2
.1
Contact with Friends and Family in Country of Origin Once a Month or More, among Latinos in the US, by Generation
Cases weighted by WT_NATIO
Generation in the US
4321
Mean o
f C
onta
ct O
nce
or
More
Per
Month
.9
.8
.7
.6
.5
.4
.3
.2
.1
Remittances to Country of Origin Once a Month or More, among Latinos in the US, by Generation
Cases weighted by WT_NATIO
Generation in US
4321
Mean R
em
itta
nce
Once
a M
onth
or
More
.5
.4
.3
.2
.1
0.0
Spanish as Primary Language of Media Use, among Latinos in the US, by Generation
Cases weighted by WT_NATIO
Generation in US
4321
Mean P
rim
ary
Spanis
h M
edia
.5
.4
.3
.2
.1
Follow Politics in Country of Origin a Lot, among Latinos in the US, by Generation
Cases weighted by WT_NATIO
Generation in US
4321
Mean F
ollo
w P
oliti
cs in C
ountr
y of
Ori
gin
A L
ot
.16
.14
.12
.10
.08
.06
.04
BEING AMERICAN
"Very Strong" Identification
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
First Second Third Fourth
Generation
Perc
en
t Latino/Hispanic
Country of Origin
American
Choice of Primary Identifier, by Generation
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
First Second Third Fourth
Percent
Gen
era
tion
in
US
Latino/Hispanic
Country or Origin
American
Perceived Importance of Speaking English
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
First Second Third Fourth
Generation
Perc
en
t w
ith
in G
en
era
tion
Not Important
Somewhat
Very Important
Perceived Importance of Being White
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
First Second Third Fourth
Generation
Perc
en
t w
ith
in G
en
era
tion
Not ImportantSomewhatVery Important
Perceived Importance of Being Christian
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
First Second Third Fourth
Generation
Perc
en
t w
ith
in G
en
era
tion
Not Important
Somewhat
Very Important
The Latino National Survey Presentation at the The Latino National Survey Presentation at the Woodrow Wilson Center, including:Woodrow Wilson Center, including: