We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Shifting Allegiances provides a comprehensive analysis of the increasing presence and influence of Latino Republicans in Congress and state legislatures. Contrary to past assumptions, this Element reveals that Latino Republicans are a diverse group, no longer confined to Cuban Americans in South Florida. By examining election data and candidate characteristics since 2018, the authors uncover the factors contributing to the success of Latino Republicans, including district demographics, conservative values, and strategic campaigning. This shift in political dynamics highlights a broader trend of ideological realignment and offers insights into the evolving landscape of Latino political representation in the United States.
This paper utilizes original survey data to examine whether individuals believe they share views on public policy with members of their own racial or ethnic group and whether they place an importance on living in legislative districts with people from their own racial or ethnic group. We find strong evidence that Latino and African-American respondents have a sense of shared policy preferences within their own group. Our results also indicate white Republicans are very likely to view themselves as having shared policy preferences within their group. Respondents who have a strong sense of shared policy preferences with their racial group are also the most likely to think it is important to live in legislative districts with others from their own racial or ethnic group. This paper affords a deeper understanding of the extent to which voters express commonality with their racial and ethnic minority group on matters related to public policy.
This book argues that Latino representation in US legislative institutions is shaped not only by demographics but by legislative institutional design, as well as elite-driven methods, features of the electoral system, and the increasing mainstreaming of Latinos in American society. The election of Latino legislators in the United States is thus complex and varied. This book provides evidence on how successful Latinos have been in winning state legislative and congressional districts in which they have no natural advantage. In particular, this book demonstrates that Latino candidates benefit from higher percentages of Latino citizens in the state, more liberal citizenries and citizen legislatures. Jason Casellas argues that the legislatures most conducive to the election of Latino candidates are Florida, New Mexico and California, whereas the least conducive are the US House and New York.
“I don't carry a shield that says ‘I am a Democrat’ or ‘I'm a Latina’. I represent my district.”
– Rep. Fran Coleman (D-Denver)
Pennsylvania State Representative Angel Cruz (D-Philadelphia), a Puerto Rican who represents a majority-Latino district, recounted a story about one of his constituents – a little girl named Delimar Vera who was presumed dead after being kidnapped from her home when she was a newborn. The kidnapper subsequently set fire to the home so that the Fire Department would think that the newborn had perished in the fire. Delimar's mother never believed her daughter had perished in the fire, but because of her difficulty communicating in English, she was never able to pursue the matter any further. Then, one day six years later, Delimar's mother attended a birthday party for a friend and noticed a young girl who resembled herself and her other children. She now had a Latino representative and decided to contact him and recount her story in Spanish. She enlisted the help of Representative Cruz, who helped her pursue DNA tests and file the appropriate police reports. At the end of the day, Representative Cruz was able to reunite Delimar with her mother.
Thank you for agreeing to answer a few questions for my book on representation. This should not take more than fifteen minutes of your time. Of course, there are no right or wrong answers. I am only interested in what you think about your role as a legislator. You may choose not to answer a question if you feel uncomfortable doing so. Your answers will be used in my book. I would like to be able to quote you in my book, but if there are answers that you would like to be held in confidence, please let me know immediately before or after your statement. If you wish to complete this interview anonymously, let me know now.
Do you recall when and how you first became involved in elective politics?
What was the first office you were elected to? When were you first elected?
Did you run for any other office before you became a (current position)?
For your current seat, how many times did you run before your first election?
Did you defeat an incumbent or win in an open seat contest?
What was the name of the individual you defeated? Primary or general?
Tell me more about the competitiveness of your district. Do you draw serious challenges every two or four years, or are you in what you consider a safe district? What have been the margins of victory in recent elections?
If you have had primary opponents, what kinds of candidates have they been? What about general election opponents? Probe ethnicity, ideology, policy positions.
Do Latino members of Congress and state legislators vote differently than their non-Latino counterparts? If so, what are the implications for representative democracy? Do Latino legislators vote differently across states and chambers? If so, what are some of the reasons for this? Does the percentage of Latinos and African Americans in a district make a difference in terms of how members of Congress and legislators vote? Whereas the bulk of the literature on Latino representation has examined roll call voting patterns at the national level, very little attention has been given to examining the roll call voting patterns of Latino state legislators.
This chapter examines the roll call voting behavior of Latino legislators in Colorado, New Jersey, and Texas and compares how Latinos in Congress and in their respective states vote in legislative institutions, using new data from Nolan McCarty's research on state legislative polarization as well as the McCarty, Poole, and Rosenthal NOMINATE data used in many research studies. Although not one of the seven states thoroughly discussed previously, Colorado's recent political transformations make it an exciting state to study. Through the examination of key roll call votes cast by members of Congress from districts with similar proportions of Latinos, it is possible to make some conclusions regarding substantive representation. Even though previous studies have found that the percentage of Latinos makes no difference in the roll call voting patterns of members of Congress, new evidence suggests that in some states, the Latino population is beginning to exert influence, suggesting the continued mainstreaming of Latinos in American society.
Before the Voting Rights Act in 1965, few Latinos served in the U.S. Congress. Before 1912, only one Latino, California Republican Romualdo Pacheco, served in the U.S. House (Vigil 1996). With the exception of New Mexico and Louisiana, no state sent a Latino to Congress between 1912 and 1960 (Lublin 1997). The Congressional Hispanic Caucus began in 1976 through the efforts of Democratic Reps. Herman Badillo (NY), Baltasar Corrada (PR), E. Kika de la Garza (TX), Henry B. González (TX), and Edward Roybal (CA). Compared to the Congressional Black Caucus, the Hispanic caucus is newer and smaller. In 1992 and 1994, African-American representatives numbered thirty-eight whereas Latinos numbered seventeen (Lublin 1997). In 2005, the number of Latinos serving in Congress had increased to twenty-five. More groundbreaking, however, was the election of two Latinos to the U.S. Senate in 2004. By 2008, Sen. Robert Menéndez (D-NJ) was elected to the U.S. Senate, giving Latinos three U.S. senators for the first time in history. Until 2004, no Latino had served in the Senate since New Mexico's Joseph Montoya, who served until 1977.
As shown in Table 1.1 (both parts a and b), the number of Latinos in Congress had increased to twenty-five by 2008. As shown in Table 1.2, the growth of Latinos in Congress is partly a consequence of the national growth in the Latino population.
In recent political campaigns, candidates have adopted Spanish-language appeals in their efforts to woo the growing Latino vote. The reasons for such appeals are obvious: Latinos are the largest minority group in the United States, and the Pew Hispanic Center estimates that the Latino population will increase from 14 percent of the population in 2007 to nearly 30 percent of the population in 2050. However, although the growth of Latinos in American legislative institutions has slowly increased in the past decade, Latinos remain underrepresented in Congress and state legislatures. Even though Congress has long been the focal point for studies of representation, a comparative analysis of Congress and state legislatures has yet to be done. This book is the first systematic examination of the election of Latinos to U.S. state legislatures and Congress.
This book argues that Latino representation is dependent on subethnic diversity, distinct political backgrounds even among Mexican Americans, and nascent political experience. The central argument is that Latino representation in U.S. legislative institutions is shaped not only by demographics, but also by legislative institutional design, as well as elite-driven methods, features of the electoral system, and the increasing mainstreaming of Latinos in American society. The election of Latino legislators in the United States is thus complex and varied.
“There is no elevator to the top. You have to take the stairs, and take it one step at time.” – Dr. Juan Andrade on Latino electoral prospects
After having addressed the institutional and demographic determinants of Latino representation across all fifty states, this chapter delves into district-level determinants of Latino representation in states with significant Latino populations to estimate the probability of electing Latino candidates. In particular, this chapter addresses the following questions: How does the ethnic composition of a legislative district affect the probability that the district will elect a Latino candidate? Are Latino candidates advantaged when they run in districts with citizens who share their ethnic heritage? At what point does the ethnic composition of a district create an advantage for Latino candidates? Do districts need to be majority-Latino before they tend to elect Latino candidates, or is there a lesser threshold where Latino candidates become competitive? If so, what is that threshold? What about other minority groups? Does it matter how many African-American citizens reside in a district? Are Latino candidates advantaged when a district's African-American and Latino citizens outnumber a district's Anglo citizens?
Why might the ethnic composition of a district affect the chances of electing a Latino legislator? First, a district's composition affects the supply of candidates for potential office. In many instances, Latinos who have been successful in winning state legislative seats began their careers on school boards or city councils in heavily Latino districts. They first become well known in the local community.
“But we are different from Latinos in places like Texas, Florida, and California because we are extremely new to the state. We do not have an established Latino middle class.”
– Sen. Jarrett Barrios (D-Boston)
What accounts for the election of Latinos to districts in which Latinos are not a majority? Are Latinos elected primarily in majority-African-American districts or majority-white districts? Are Latinos winning by appealing to the Latino pluralities in their districts and then adding the minimum number of non-Latino voters? Are Latinos defeating incumbents? If so, are they white or African-American incumbents? Are they winning in multicandidate primaries? Do Latinos with Anglo names appear to have an advantage? To what extent has each political party been responsible for the growing number of Latinos elected in non-Latino majority districts? To what extent have features of the electoral system contributed to more Latino victories in such districts? Now that Latinos have become the largest minority group in the United States, it is fitting to examine the conditions under which Latinos are elected to legislative bodies. In particular, this chapter seeks to explore the conditions under which Latinos are elected to non-Latino majority districts. I argue that although demographics play an important role in the election of Latino candidates, we must look beyond the obvious Latino majority districts that elect Latino legislators. The growing mainstreaming of Latinos in American society is already manifesting itself in the election of Latino legislators in areas where traditionally they are not likely to be elected.
To what extent has the growing Latino population translated into more Latino legislators in Congress and state legislatures? Are Latinos as likely to serve in upper chambers as lower chambers? Are Latino candidates advantaged when turnover is high within legislatures? Does the imposition of term limits further advantage Latino candidates? Are states that are more liberal more likely than conservative states to elect Latino candidates? This chapter examines Latino representation in all fifty states by tracking the growth of Latinos serving in legislatures over the past decade and comparing the percentage of Latino citizens in the population with the percentage of Latinos in each legislature. At the state level, the Latino representation in the legislature is largely reflective of the percentage of Latinos in the population. Additionally, some states have much higher turnover rates in their legislatures, thus opening up more seats for talented Latinos to win. Similarly, Latinos may have better chances of being elected in states that have enacted term limits, which eliminates the incumbency advantage. Using the latest data on turnover and term limits, I help explain the impact of these variables on Latino representation in legislatures (Moncrief, Niemi, and Powell 2004). Chapter 3 explores the conditions under which Latinos are elected to seven of the nine state legislatures with the largest Latino memberships, and will provide precise estimates of district-level effects.