1. The Second Generation Political Science 126C / Chicano/Latino Studies 163 Lecture 10 February 10, 2009

2. Reminder: Research Paper Due Thursday Essay prompts appear in last Tuesday’s lecture notes (February 3) We each have office hours today or tomorrow Mine are today 4-6, SSPB 5283

3. From Last Lecture – Assessing Longer-Term Implications of Marches 1. Public opinion on immigration issues 2. Change in immigrant naturalization behaviors 3. Congressional/presidential politics 2006 2008 and beyond 4. New immigrant organizational infrastructure

4. 3. Ongoing Electoral Influences Potentially immigration-moderate Republicans made more strident Some surprise Democratic victories in border states/South – ran on anti-legalization platforms, dividing Democratic caucus Emergence of single-issue immigration candidates Reduces likelihood of compromise in the House

5. 2008 Pattern repeats to some degree in Presidential race Tancredo candidacy potentially pulling candidates to restrictionist position McCain more tepid in support for immigration reform (leaving it off agenda) Democrats not making immigration reform a key issue (though may be early for issue-based campaigns) Immigration comes up in Congressional races, but central to few Democrats elected from previously Republican districts (source of party’s gain) tepid on immigration reform Latino voters now more pro-legalization, immigration has tended not to top their issue agenda

6. 4. New Immigrant Organizational Infrastructure New coalition formed to mobilize protest Home-town associations/state federations Unions Churches Ethnic media Traditional immigrant service organizations Is this coalition issue specific? Criminalization provisions added urgency Not clear how committed transnational organizations are to long-term network development

7. Conclusions Mass opinion will not drive this debate – internally conflicted Electoral logic does not promise a moderate center in the House of Representatives Loci of compromise? White House (Obama can lead in a way Bush didn’t) Other issues will top agenda Immigrant rights organizations can pressure Democrats Lessons for immigrants and second generation unclear Initial victory not sustained Naturalizations show positive political learning

8. Today’s Lecture The [1.5 and] Second Generation

9. Human Capital Institutional Resources Group Dynamics Challenges to Immigrant Status Formal Incorporation Participation 1.5, 2 nd, 3 rd Generation Immigrants Parental Incorporation Human Capital & Group Resources Political Values, Attitudes, & Behaviors

10. Defining Terms 1 st generation – immigrants, people born in a country other than the country of their current residence 1.5 generation – people born in a country other than their country of residence who migrated as minors, presumably with their parents/guardians, who didn’t make the choice to migrate 2 nd generation – people born to immigrant parents in the country of migration 3 rd generation – people who had grandparents who were migrants

11. U.S. Population, By Immigrant Generation

12. Asian and Latino Populations, by Immigrant Generation Asian American Latino

13. General Pattern, Increasing Political Participation Across Generations Self Reported Registration and Voting, Latinos 2004 Election Source: Latino National Survey

14. And, Increasing Political Knowledge Source: Latino National Survey

15. The Second Generation and Political Incorporation Political socialization – Parents play key role in political socialization (training) Immigrant parents may have less understanding of U.S. politics and discuss it less Unauthorized parents fear political system Residential concentration Second generation likely to grow up in immigrant concentration neighborhoods Possible resource 2 nd generation sees barriers parents face and organize to overcome these barriers 2 nd generation serve as (political) interpreters for their parents, so possibly learn politics earlier than 3 rd + generation

16. Parental Immigration Status and the 1.5 / 2 nd Generation Is parental unauthorized status a scarlet letter for their children reducing the likelihood of civic and electoral engagement? If yes, predicts downward mobility – political underclass If no, offers an added incentive legalization programs Does parental naturalization engender a positive effect on their children's political engagement? Political payoff to investment in naturalization in the 2 nd generation

17. Findings Parental immigration status/parental naturalization have an inconsistent impact, but more often positive than negative 1. No effect on 1.5/2 nd generation participation in community organizations 2. Children of unauthorized Mexican immigrant parents more likely to be civically engaged (participation in community politics) 3. Children of naturalized Salvadoran/Guatemalan parents more likely to register to vote

18. Significance Unauthorized migration is not a political scarlet letter for the 2 nd generation – may increase political engagement Naturalization potentially pays off in 1.5 and 2 nd generation Caution – today’s unauthorized immigrants (and their children) may be different than those of the 1980s/early 1990s

19. Rhetoric of Marches – “Today we March, Tomorrow we Vote” Naturalization takes time and many eligible immigrants never naturalize Investment needed to increase naturalization rates Research needed on gap between immigrant interest and successful naturalization Political motivation matters to ensure connection between naturalization and voting Benefit extends into second generation Unauthorized status as an intergenerational resource Importance of participation of teens/young adults in the rallies

20. Applying Sociological Models to Political Incorporation Remember – there aren’t many third generation and beyond immigrants from the post-1965 immigration 1. [Traditional] assimilation 2. “New Assimilation” (attention to status at entry) 3. Segmented assimilation Take away points Increasing participation across generations – pattern of “assimilation” Connection between immigrant parents and children not well understood Downward mobility (segmented assimilation) limited by 14 th Amendment