BJPS Leal

7/28/2019 BJPS Leal

1/18

B.J.Pol.S. 32, 353370 Copyright 2002 Cambridge University Press

Printed in the United Kingdom

Political Participation by Latino Non-Citizensin the United States

D A V I D L . L E A L *

This article examines the extent of political participation by Latino non-citizens across the United

States. The only previous national quantitative research on this topic is by Verba, Schlozman and

Brady, who found little difference between the participation rates of Latino citizens and

non-citizens. Using the Latino National Political Survey, large differences between citizen and

non-citizen participation are found. Although Latino non-citizens participated in non-electoral

political activities and in non-political civic groups, they were significantly less likely to do sothan Latino citizens. Examination of the non-citizen population shows that immigrants who

understood politics better, planned on naturalizing, had a stronger ethnic identity, were more

familiar with English and were younger were more likely to become involved. The traditional

socio-economic measures of education and income as well as length of stay in the United States

were non-significant predictors of non-citizen participation.

This article examines the political participation of Latinos who live in the United

States but are not citizens. Some scholars have noted that while non-citizens are

unlikely to vote in American elections, other types of participation might not

be unexpected. Garcia and Arce pointed out:

It should be noted that ineligibility from voting does not totally remove theMexican-born from the electoral process. They can, and many undoubtedly do,participate in campaigns, voice political opinions with family and friends, andcontribute to campaigns. However, the nature and extent of their involvement withthe electoral process is relatively unexplored.1

De la Garza and DeSipio similarly noted that Lack of citizenship serves to

exclude participation in electoral activities and can make involvement in

non-electoral political activities even less likely.2

* Department of Political Science, University at Buffalo, SUNY. The author would like to thank

Louis DeSipio, Michael LeMay, the anonymous reviewers and the Editor, David Sanders, for their

suggestions. A previous version of this article was presented at the Annual Meeting of the American

Political Science Association, Atlanta, 1999. The author can be reached at [email protected] John A. Garcia and Carlos H. Arce, Political Orientations and Behaviors of Chicanos: Trying

to Make Sense Out of Attitudes and Participation, in F. Chris Garcia, ed., Latinos in the Political

System (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1988), pp. 12551, at p. 147.2 Rodolfo de la Garza and Louis DeSipio, Overview: The Link Between Individuals and

Electoral Institutions in Five Latino Neighborhoods, in Rodolfo de la Garza, Martha Menchaca and

Louis DeSipio, eds, Barrio Ballots: Latino Politics in the 1990 Elections (Boulder, Colo.: WestviewPress, 1994), p. 18 (emphasis added). Hardy-Fanta similarly wrote that legal status is not a

prerequisite for political activism; there are Latinos who are not citizens and who may not be in this

country legally who contribute to political mobilization in Latina Politics, Latino Politics: Gender,

Culture, and Political Participation in Boston (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1993), p. 120.

7/28/2019 BJPS Leal

2/18

354 L E A L

While it might seem self-evident that citizens always participate more than

non-citizens, this is not the conclusion to be drawn from the only quantitative

examination of the topic. The recent Verba, Schlozman and Brady study of

political engagement in America reported that Latino citizens did not always

participate at higher levels than the overall Latino population.3 In addition, their

regressions showed that while citizenship was positively correlated with an

aggregate measure of political participation, the regressions on four specific

types of political activity revealed a statistically significant difference between

citizens and non-citizens only for voting. Because they used a combined sample

of Anglos,4 Latinos and African-Americans in the regressions, it is not clear to

what extent the findings applied specifically to Latino citizens and non-citizens.

This article re-examines Latino citizen and non-citizen participation in

non-electoral activities using the most extensive dataset on these populations:

the Latino National Political Survey (LNPS). It interviewed 2,817 respondentsof Mexican, Puerto Rican and Cuban heritage in 1989 and 1990. It is

representative of 91 per cent of these populations in the continental United

States, and it asked many useful questions about political participation. As will

be shown, the results differ from those of Verba et al. by showing more contrasts

between Latino citizen and non-citizen political activity than they suggest 5 but

nevertheless demonstrating the fact of some participation among non-citizens.

Even a small degree of non-citizen activity is potentially important both

because of the large number of Latino non-citizens and the significant length

of time they live in the United States before naturalization. If non-citizensquickly took the oath of citizenship, this issue might be of little interest. As

Jones-Correa noted, however, it takes a generation for even half of the largely

middle-class Latin American immigrant population in New York to become

citizens.6 In addition, because so many non-citizens are concentrated in

particular locales, a small percentage who participate will have a greater impact

than if they were more evenly distributed across the country.

Numerically, almost 38 per cent of Latino respondents in the LNPS

themselves identified as non-citizens. While non-citizens are certainly not all

Latino, Latinos make up the largest plurality of both legal and illegal entrants. 7

This article does not generalize to all non-citizen groups, but it does provide data

against which researchers interested in the non-citizen participation of other

ethnicities (in the United States and in other nations) can make comparisons.

The article also examines the determinants of political behaviour among the

Latino non-citizen population. While there are several hypotheses why one

3 Sydney Verba, Kay Lehman Schlozman and Henry Brady, Voice and Equality: Civic

Voluntarism in American Politics (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1995).4 Non-Hispanic whites.5

It should be noted that this issue is not central to the argument of the Verba et al. book, butis a finding they nonetheless found puzzling.6 Michael A. Jones-Correa, Between Two Nations: The Political Predicament of Latinos in New

York City (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1998), p. 65.7 Immigration and Naturalization Service, Immigration Fact Sheet, http://www.ins.usdoj.gov.

7/28/2019 BJPS Leal

3/18

Political Participation by Latino Non-Citizens 355

non-citizen participates while another does not, the LNPS allows a test of some

of these theories. Do the same variables apply to non-citizens as to citizens, such

as education and age, or are there additional relevant factors, such as English

language ability, length of stay in the United States, citizenship plans, or

knowledge of the political system? This article provides the first statistical test

of these factors.

Recent congressional hearings pointed out that federal law prohibits

campaign contributions by foreign nationals to federal campaigns, although

permanent residents of the United States may contribute money. Whether or not

non-citizens should participate in numerous other ways, however, is a normative

question that is rarely discussed. Should they be encouraged to volunteer for

political campaigns, and therefore try to convince others to vote for a candidate,

if they themselves cannot vote? Should distinctions be drawn between the

various types of non-citizens, such as permanent residents, the undocumented,refugees and those seeking asylum?

For much of American history non-citizens have been allowed, if not

encouraged, to participate in politics. Twenty-two states and federal territories

at some point in their histories allowed non-citizens to vote in a variety of

elections.8 These provisions were gradually eliminated during the first decades

of the twentieth century. As Aylsworth commented almost seven decades ago

in the American Political Science Review, For the first time in over a hundred

years, a national election was held in 1928 in which no alien in any state had

the right to cast a vote for a candidate for any office national, state, or local.9

While voting is still not allowed for non-citizens, there is no prohibition against

non-electoral participation.10

D I S C U S S I O N

There are good reasons to expect that non-citizens might want to become

involved in elections, reasons that would also apply to the citizen population.

First, there is the pull effect of political campaigns. In election years a

significant amount of political advertising is heard and seen by citizens and

non-citizens alike. The United States Federal Election Commission (FEC)

reported that in the 199798 election cycle, for example, $1,392m were spent

by all congressional candidates and political parties. In the 198788 election

cycle, which covers the elections inquired about by the LNPS, this figure was

$838m.11 In addition, the presidential candidates in the 1988 primary and

general elections received a combined total of over $178m in public funds from

the federal government, and spent additional private funds in the primary

8 Jamin B. Raskin, Legal Aliens, Local Citizens: The Historical, Constitutional and Theoretical

Meanings of Alien Suffrage, University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 141 (1993), 1391470.9 Leon Aylsworth, The Passing of Alien Suffrage, American Political Science Review, 25

(1931), 11416.10 With the above-noted exception of financial contributions to political campaigns.11 Federal Election Commission, http://www.fec.gov/finance/finmenu.htm.

7/28/2019 BJPS Leal

4/18

356 L E A L

campaigns.12 These figures do not include expenditures by state and local

candidates or on behalf of initiatives or referendums.

The various elements of the news media also extensively report on candidates

and campaigns (in both English-language and Spanish-language formats).

Non-citizens cannot avoid this flood of information, and it is reasonable to

assume that many will become more aware of and interested in politics.

Secondly, non-citizens and citizens alike are affected by the laws passed in

Washington and the state capitals. Verba et al. agree that non-citizens are

affected by American laws, and this should provide sufficient incentive for

many to become involved in affecting legislation.13 This is especially true for

those who expect to remain in the United States for the long term, such as

permanent residents, but also those who are currently undocumented but expect

to stay either with or without legal sanction.

While these two different but related factors might draw people into thepolitical arena, there are obstacles to the non-citizen. First, there is the question

of resources. Non-citizens often have difficulty with the English language,

which would make non-electoral political activities much more challenging.

They also possess lower socio-economic status (SES), and SES is generally

associated with participation. Verba et al. also point out that two key spurs to

activism are (1) membership in an organization that develops politically

relevant civic skills, and (2) others asking for your participation. Non-citizens

may have fewer friends and acquaintances who are involved in politics as well

as fewer group memberships.When non-citizens think about politics, they may also be more focused on

events in their native countries. Non-citizens are increasingly able to maintain

strong ties with the place of their birth,14 and constant immigration has sustained

ethnic communities.15 As Minnite, Holdaway and Hayduk noted, To the extent

that such transnational communities provide a buffer against mainstream

American culture and promote the retention of the language, traditions and

concerns of the home country, they may delay incorporation or foster a new

generation of immigrants with dual political allegiances.16

In addition, non-citizens may see their participation in political activities as

12 Anthony Corrado, Paying for Presidents: Public Financing in National Elections (New York:

The Twentieth Century Fund Press, 1993), p. 105.13 Verba, Schlozman and Brady, Voice and Equality, p. 231.14 Nina Glick-Schiller, Linda Basch and Christina Szanton Blanc, Transnationalism: A New

Analytic Framework for Understanding Migration, in Nina Glick-Schiller, Linda Basch and

Christina Szanton Blanc, eds, Towards a Transnational Perspective on Migration: Race, Class,

Ethnicity and Nationalism Reconsidered (New York: New York Academy of Sciences, 1992),

pp. 124.15

Nathan Glazer, Is Assimilation Dead?Annals of the American Academy of Political and SocialScience, 53 (1993), 12236.16 Lorraine Minnite, Jennifer Holdaway and Ronald Hayduk, The Political Incorporation of

Immigrants in New York (paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science

Association, Atlanta, 1999), pp. 56.

7/28/2019 BJPS Leal

5/18


inappropriate. While the law is silent on most types of non-electoral activities,

such as volunteering for a political campaign, non-citizens may know they

cannot vote and that contributing money is only allowed to permanent residents.

Given this patchwork, non-citizens may feel it is best to avoid all such activities

and delay participation until citizenship. Undocumented residents may be

particularly anxious to avoid any contact with the government, however

tangential.

Non-citizens may also be unaccustomed to a political system that allows

meaningful participation. They may theoretically know that such participation

is possible in the United States, but only gradually become aware of their options

for influencing elections. While these last two conclusions are different, they

are not mutually exclusive. It is possible that a person could be both unfamiliar

with the political system and believe that it is not yet appropriate to invest the

time to learn more.While there have been many studies of the political behaviour of immigrants,

they largely focus on those who have naturalized. This research agrees that the

naturalized participate at lower rates than do the native-born.17 There is also a

growing interest in the participation of the second generation, who are the

children of immigrants,18 and some have examined the third generation.19 Little

research, however, studies the behaviour of those who have immigrated into the

United States but are not citizens. By examining immigrant participation in this

period, we will have a fuller understanding of the incorporation of immigrants

into American politics.

17 Kevin Hill and Dario Moreno, Second-Generation Cubans, Hispanic Journal of Behavioral

Sciences, 18 (1996), 17593; Louis DeSipio, Making Citizens or Good Citizens: Naturalization as

a Predictor of Organizational and Electoral Behavior Among Latino Immigrants, Hispanic Journal

of Behavioral Sciences, 18 (1996), 194213; David Olson and Melissa Levitt, Immigration and

Political Incorporation: But Do They Vote? (paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Northeast

Political Science Association, Boston, 1996); Louis DeSipio and Jennifer Jerit, Voluntary Citizens

and Democratic Participation: Political Behaviors Among Naturalized US Citizens (paper presented

at the Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, 1998); Pei-te Lien,

Who Votes in Multiracial America? An Analysis of Voting Registration and Turnout by Race and

Ethnicity, 19901996 (paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political ScienceAssociation, Boston, 1998); John Mollenkopf, Tim Ross and David Olson, Immigrant Political

Participation in New York and Los Angeles (paper commissioned for the Negotiating Difference

Project, International Center for Migration, Ethnicity and Citizenship, New York, 1999).18 Mauricio Mazon, The Zoot Suit Riots: The Psychology of Symbolic Annihilation (Austin:

University of Texas Press, 1984); George J. Sanchez, Becoming Mexican American: Ethnicity,

Culture, and Identity in Chicano Los Angeles, 19001945 (New York: Oxford University Press,

1993); Peter Skerry, Mexican Americans: The Ambivalent Minority (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard

University Press, 1993); Louis DeSipio, The Second Generation: Political Behaviors of Adult

Children of Immigrants in the United States (paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American

Political Science Association, Atlanta, 1999).19

Marcus Lee Hansen, The Problem of the Third Generation Immigrant (Rock Island, Ill.:Augustana Historical Society, 1938); Rodolfo de la Garza, The Effects of Primordial Claims,

Immigration, and the Voting Rights Act on Mexican American Sociopolitical Incorporation, in

Wilbur Rich, ed., The Politics of Minority Coalitions: Race, Ethnicity, and Shared Uncertainties

(Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1996), pp. 16376.

7/28/2019 BJPS Leal

6/18

358 L E A L

From a larger perspective, Jones-Correa pointed out the contemporary lack

of interest in questions of how immigrants fit into political life: whereas a

hundred years ago the question of political incorporation seemed inescapable,

now it is hardly even an issue.20 Minnite et al. agree that research has focused

largely on the impact of immigration on labor markets and social welfare

policies, with less attention paid to the implications of mass immigration for the

political process.21

Previous work on participation is mixed in whether non-citizens are included

in their analyses. Scholarship using the LNPS has excluded non-citizens when

the subject was voting22 and included them (but not separately examined them)

when the focus was on non-electoral participation.23 This suggests an

assumption by scholars of Latino politics that while non-citizens do not vote,

some may participate otherwise in politics.

This article describes the amount of non-citizen activity in seven non-electoral forms of participation, ranging from volunteering for political

campaigns to petition signing. Regression analysis is then used to test if

citizenship status is a statistically significant influence while controlling for a

large number of personal and political factors. Thirdly, using regression

analysis, I examine the level of and determinants of Latino involvement in

non-political community organizations and see whether those determinants are

the same ones relevant to political activities. Lastly, I examine determinants of

political activism among non-citizens by using a sample restricted to this

population. Although immigrants are often described one-dimensionally, theremight be important differences between those who become involved and those

who stay home.

As noted above, the most comprehensive work to date on non-citizen political

participation is found in Verba et al. They compared the percentage of Latino

non-citizens and the overall Latino population who were active in eight types

of political activities. These data showed that Latino citizens participated more

than the overall Latino population in some activities, but not in others. 24 The

authors found no difference when it came to taking part in political protests, and

little difference for campaign work, political contributions and board member-

ship. However, they found somewhat larger differences for voting, contacting

20 Jones-Correa, Between Two Nations, p. 43.21 Minnite et al., The Political Incorporation of Immigrants in New York, p. 2.22 John Arvizu and F. Chris Garcia, Latino Voting Participation: Explaining and Differentiating

Latino Voting Turnout,Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 18 (1996), 10428; William Diaz,

Latino Participation in America: Associational and Political Roles,Hispanic Journal of Behavioral

Sciences, 18 (1996), 15474.23 Rodney Hero and Anne Campbell, Understanding Latino Political Participation: Exploring the

Evidence from the Latino National Political Survey, Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 18(1996), 12941; Robert D. Wrinkle, Joseph Stewart Jr., J. L. Polinard, Kenneth J. Meier and John

R. Arvizu, Ethnicity and Nonelectoral Political Participation, Hispanic Journal of Behavioral

Sciences, 18 (1996), 14253.24 A more direct approach would have compared Latino citizens with non-citizens.

7/28/2019 BJPS Leal

7/18


elected officials, informal community activity and affiliation with a political

organization. Verba et al. then ran regressions on the four dependent variables

of time-based acts,25 voting, political contributions and political discussion. For

these regressions they used their complete dataset of face-to-face interviews

including Anglos, African-Americans and Latinos. They found that citizen-

ship, of course, plays a significant role for voting, but, strikingly, for no other

activity.26

It is surprising that these findings of equal and near-equal participation of

citizens and non-citizens in many forms of non-electoral activities have not been

further investigated by scholars. Many would have assumed beforehand that

large differences must exist across all political activities for citizens and

non-citizens, but now we cannot be so sure.

Aside from Verba et al., there are only a few studies that examine the political

activities and opinions of non-citizens. De la Garza et al. were the first to publishdata from the LNPS, and they dedicated one chapter to various characteristics

of non-citizens, such as demographics, attachment to the United States, media

usage, ideological orientations and opinions of the US government.27 They did

not, however, present data for non-citizen participation in the types of political

activities discussed in this article.

While Minnite et al. surveyed non-citizens in their multi-ethnic New York

state immigrant survey, their data did not sample this group accurately.28 As they

acknowledged, this was probably because the respondents needed both to speak

English and to own a telephone to be included. Their data show that over 10 percent of non-citizens reported voting in the 1994 gubernatorial and the 1996

presidential elections, and non-citizens reported an average participation in

non-electoral activity of about 10 per cent. These results should be viewed with

some scepticism, and the authors spent little time discussing them. The sample

problems also highlight the value of the LNPS, particularly the English/Spanish

survey option and the face-to-face interview format.

Hill and Moreno, in a study of the political attitudes of second-generation

Cuban-Americans based on the LNPS, included a dummy variable for

citizenship status.29 They found it was significant in two of the seven regressions

they ran: non-citizens showed less political knowledge than citizens, but

conversely were more trusting of government. DeSipio examined partisanship

25 Working in a campaign, getting involved informally on a community issue or problem, and

serving on a local community board or attending its meetings (Verba et al., Voice and Equality,

p. 357).26 Verba et al., Voice and Equality, p. 359.27

Rodolfo de la Garza, Louis DeSipio, F. Chris Garcia, John Garcia and Angelo Falcon, LatinoVoices: Mexican, Puerto Rican, and Cuban Perspectives on American Politics (Boulder, Colo.:

Westview Press, 1992).28 Minnite et al., The Political Incorporation of Immigrants in New York.29 Hill and Moreno, Second-Generation Cubans.

7/28/2019 BJPS Leal

8/18

360 L E A L

according to stage in the citizenship application process, the policy perspectives

of those applying for citizenship and of those who planned to apply later, and

the political participation of the naturalized. His data included both the LNPS

and the National Latino Immigrant Survey (NLIS).30

D A T A

As mentioned above, the LNPS interviewed 2,817 respondents of Mexican,

Puerto Rican and Cuban heritage. It is representative of 91 per cent of these

populations in the continental United States.31 The respondents were given the

option of answering either in English or Spanish, an important improvement

over other surveys that include Latinos. One thousand and thirty-eight

respondents were not citizens.Of course, non-citizens are a diverse group and generalizations are risky, a

fact not often acknowledged in everyday political debate. Even experienced

journalists sometimes conflate all non-citizens together into a single group

called immigrants, despite the many differences between permanent residents,

refugees and asylum-seekers, illegal entrants, visa overstayers and other

categories. There is no way to tell which non-citizen respondents in the LNPS

belong to the legal or undocumented immigrant subgroups. There was a variable

for citizenship, and non-citizen respondents were asked about their citizenship

plans, but a large number did not respond to the latter question. The survey didnot ascertain whether the respondent entered the country without permission,

and perhaps to do so would have proved costly in terms of response rates.

As discussed above, Verba et al. found some basic differences between

Latino citizens and the overall Latino population, but their data are not nearly

as extensive as the LNPS. They interviewed 375 Latinos but noted, it is likely

that our sample is biased when it comes to Latino non-citizens, under-

representing migrant workers and undocumented residents. Hence, those in our

sample may well be relatively advantaged in comparison to non-citizens as a

whole. This may help explain the lack of differences they sometimes found

between citizen and non-citizen participation. The LNPS is less likely to have

these problems because it was designed and executed with the overall Latino

population in mind.

Unfortunately, the LNPS did not ask non-citizens about electoral activities,

such as voting or registering to vote.32 Given widely publicized accusations in

a 1996 California congressional election that Latino non-citizens changed the

30 Louis DeSipio, Counting on the Latino Vote: Latinos as a New Electorate (Charlottesville:

University of Virginia Press, 1996). The NLIS interviewed 1,636 Latino immigrant adults in 1988

who were either naturalized citizens or eligible for naturalization. It was a national survey, and likethe LNPS, all interviewers were bilingual. For more details, see Appendix I of DeSipio.31 De la Garza, Latino Voices.32 It did ask both citizens and non-citizens about voting in local school board elections. No

non-citizen reported such activity.

7/28/2019 BJPS Leal

9/18


outcome,33 it would have been useful to see if any had reported voting (albeit

six years before the election in question).

M O D E L S

Table 1 shows the number and percentage of Latino citizens and non-citizens

who participated in the seven types of non-electoral political activities inquired

about by the survey. These include: wearing a political button or displaying a

sign, signing a petition, writing a letter to an elected official, volunteering for

a political campaign, attending a public meeting, attending a political rally and

donating money.

Of course, non-citizens systematically differ from citizens in terms of age,

income and education.34 These factors, especially age and education, are known

to be associated with political activity.35 Perhaps non-citizens have not

participated at a lower rate than their socio-economic status would suggest. Thisis one interpretation of the Verba et al. finding that the citizenship variable was

insignificant in their regressions on specific types of political participation (with

the exception of voting).

Table 2 therefore presents regressions that test whether citizens were more

T A B L E 1 Comparison of Non-Electoral Political

Participation by Latino Citizens andNon-Citizens: Percentage Engaging in Each

Activity

Citizen Non-citizenPolitical activity participation participation

Sign a petition 23.72 6.25Wear a button 16.94 5.19Attend a public meeting 14.97 4.81Average rate 12.58 3.60Write to a politician 11.03 4.23Attend rallies 8.56 2.12Donate money 7.09 0.96Volunteer for a campaign 5.74 1.63

Source: LNPS (198990)

33 Outspoken conservative US Representative Bob Dornan lost to Democrat Loretta Sanchez by

only 984 votes in the California 46th District. The Republican-controlled House investigated his

charges but in the end refused to overturn the election.34

Descriptive statistics from the LNPS show that citizens have far higher incomes and levels ofeducation, are more likely to be female and are generally older than non-citizens.35 Raymond Wolfinger and Steven Rosenstone, Who Votes? (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University

Press, 1980); Steven Rosenstone and John Mark Hansen, Mobilization, Participation, and

Democracy in America (New York: Macmillan, 1993).

7/28/2019 BJPS Leal

10/18

362 L E A L

TABLE2

LogitRegressionModelExplainingNon-Electo

ralPoliticalParticipationbyLatinoCitizensand

Non-Citizens

Variable

Button

P

etition

Volunteer

Publicmeeting

Rally

Money

Write

Intercept

4.2

33***

3.0

90***

7.8

03***

4.8

93***

6.9

60*

**

7.2

29***

4.8

77***

(0.6

63)

(

0.6

04)

(1.1

81)

(0.7

12)

(0.9

74)

(1.1

38)

(0.7

86)

Citizen

0.8

82***

0.9

73***

0.7

21**

0.6

31***

0.8

53*

**

1.3

54***

0.4

14**

(0.1

71)

(

0.1

65)

(0.3

04)

(0.1

84)

(0.2

57)

(0.3

51)

(0.2

00)

Income

0.0

98**

0.1

94***

0.0

73

0.1

13**

0.1

60*

**

0.3

51***

0.0

91*

(0.0

46)

(

0.0

42)

(0.0

75)

(0.0

49)

(0.0

62)

(0.0

71)

(0.0

54)

Age

0.0

70

0.0

99**

0.0

07

0.0

05

0.0

24

0.0

95

0.0

34

(0.0

44)

(

0.0

43)

(0.0

72)

(0.0

47)

(0.0

60)

(0.0

70)

(0.0

52)

Education

0.1

23**

0.3

20***

0.1

74*

0.2

70***

0.2

32*

**

0.2

69***

0.3

16***

(0.0

57)

(

0.0

54)

(0.0

94)

(0.0

62)

(0.0

78)

(0.0

89)

(0.0

68)

Gender

0.2

17*

0.2

75**

0.5

40**

0.2

61*

0.2

10

0.0

49

0.3

36**

(0.1

31)

(

0.1

24)

(0.2

23)

(0.1

41)

(0.1

80)

(0.2

02)

(0.1

58)

Cuban

0.2

41

1.0

42***

0.3

29

1.0

33***

0.1

62

0.4

57

0.2

56

(0.2

31)

(

0.2

62)

(0.3

84)

(0.3

10)

(0.3

00)

(0.3

71)

(0.2

66)

Information

0.1

75***

0.1

81***

0.3

02***

0.1

47***

0.1

90*

**

0.2

33***

0.1

95***

index

(0.0

42)

(

0.0

40)

(0.0

69)

(0.0

45)

(0.0

57)

(0.0

64)

(0.0

50)

Party

0.1

34

0.0

17

0.2

04

0.0

31

0.2

18

0.3

84**

0.0

11

differences

(0.0

92)

(

0.0

82)

(0.1

65)

(0.0

93)

(0.1

37)

(0.1

70)

(0.1

07)

Degreelove

0.0

98

0.0

85

0.1

45

0.1

93**

0.2

62*

*

0.0

10

0.0

17

US

(0.0

79)

(

0.0

74)

(0.1

39)

(0.0

86)

(0.1

18)

(0.1

30)

(0.0

94)

Ethnic

0.1

08***

0.0

25

0.1

49**

0.0

71*

0.1

39*

**

0.0

46

0.0

29

consciousness

(0.0

36)

(

0.0

33)

(0.0

60)

(0.0

38)

(0.0

49)

(0.0

53)

(0.0

42)

Trust

0.0

09

0.2

05***

0.0

74

0.1

40*

0.0

09

0.1

02

0.2

18***

(0.0

69)

(

0.0

66)

(0.1

16)

(0.0

75)

(0.0

97)

(0.1

10)

(0.0

84)

Followpolitics

0.2

36***

0.2

69***

0.2

39***

0.2

00***

0.2

01*

*

0.3

16***

0.3

33***

(0.0

67)

(

0.0

63)

(0.1

19)

(0.0

75)

(0.0

97)

(0.1

17)

(0.0

84)

Skincolour

0.0

02

0.0

18

0.0

14

0.1

17*

0.0

18

0.1

76*

0.0

39

(0.0

66)

(

0.0

62)

(0.1

11)

(0.0

71)

(0.0

92)

(0.1

03)

(0.0

80)

Observations

2,4

50

2,4

48

2,4

50

2,4

50

2,4

49

2,4

49

2,4

50

2

181.0

2

3

84.2

5

100.4

2

186.3

1

148.16

206.9

7

170.3

7

Notes:Cells

consistofcoefficientsinnumerator,andstandarderrorsinparen

theses.

***p

0.0

1,

**p

0.0

5,

*p

0.1

0.

Source:LNPS(198990)

7/28/2019 BJPS Leal

11/18


or less predisposed to participate in particular political activities than were

non-citizens, ceteris paribus. A dummy variable for Cuban-Americans was also

included, as prior research shows they participate less in non-electoral activities

than do Mexican-Americans.36 A gender dummy was also included.

In addition, the model takes advantage of the comprehensive nature of the

LNPS by including measures for level of factual awareness of the American

political system, whether the respondent perceives a difference between the two

political parties, trust in government and other people, interest in politics, ethnic

consciousness and self-reported love of the United States.

The variable for political awareness consists of four measures of political

knowledge. Included were two types of questions that measured different

components of political awareness. The first asked the respondent to identify

certain political figures, and the second tested for broader knowledge of the

political system. The political figure identification questions asked therespondent to identify Dan Quayle, William Rehnquist and Cesar Chavez, and

the broader political knowledge item asked the respondent to identify the party

with the majority in the House.37

The interest-in-politics question asked respondents how much they followed

politics on a five-point scale, and self-reported love of the United States used

a four-point scale. The question for perception of party differences allowed three

responses. The LNPS did not ask any questions about political efficacy.

The trust measure is an aggregation of the questions for how much the

respondent trusts government as well as other people. Because many of thenon-electoral political participation activities require interaction with others, it

makes sense to include both measures. While trust has not generally

36 Maria Antonia Calvo and Steven J. Rosenstone,Hispanic Political Participation (San Antonio:

Southwest Voter Research Institute, 1989); Wrinkle et al., Ethnicity and Nonelectoral Political

Participation.37 The information index variable has five levels because it consists of four dummy variables

added together. It ranges from 0 (when the respondent could not correctly answer any of the 4

questions) to four (when the respondent correctly answered all four). This scaled information variable

is similar to those developed by Michael Delli Carpini and Scott Keeter (Measuring PoliticalKnowledge: Putting First Things First, American Journal of Political Science, 37 (1993),

1179206). Although they pointed out that there is no generally accepted measure of the publics

knowledge about national politics (p. 1180), they suggested a five-level scale using questions found

in the NES. Fortunately, two of the questions asked in the LNPS were among those chosen by the

above authors: identifying Dan Quayle and the party with the majority in the House. In addition,

research by John Zaller (Analysis of Information Items in the 1985 NES Pilot Study, report to the

NES Board of Overseers, Center for Political Studies, University of Michigan, 1986) and Shanto

Iyengar (Shortcuts to Political Information: The Role of Selective Attention and Accessibility, in

John Ferejohn and James Kuklinski, eds, Information and Democratic Processes (Chicago:

University of Illinois Press, 1990), pp. 16085; Whither Political Information? (report to the Board

of Overseers and Pilot Study Committee, National Election Studies, 1986)) on the 1985 NES pilotstudy showed that the best of the new information questions were those which asked respondents

to identify political figures. Because our measure asks respondents to identify the jobs of three people

involved in politics, we have some confidence that these questions are useful measures of political

information.

7/28/2019 BJPS Leal

12/18

364 L E A L

been found to affect political participation,38 it has not been explored specifically

in the Latino context.

Also included is a measure of ethnic consciousness that aggregates three

questions: do Latinos of various groups have a common culture; should

members of your group help each other out; and are you interested in what other

members of your group are doing? Researchers have often pointed to the

importance of group consciousness in stimulating political involvement,

particularly for African-Americans,39 but it has not been explored for Latinos.

The model for non-electoral political participation is therefore:

Pr(Y1)1/(1EXP(-XB)), where XBb1Citizenb2Age

b3Incomeb4Educationb5Genderb6CubanAmericanb7InfoIndex

b8PartyDifferencesb9FollowPoliticsb10LoveUSb11Trust

b12Consciousness.In addition, we might ask whether non-citizens are involved in other

community activities besides politics. Simply examining political activities

could leave the impression that non-citizens are more disengaged from their

communities than might be the case. Local community groups and activities

should be both less intimidating than political ones and more directly relevant

to everyday life. We can therefore specify a second equation that uses the same

independent variables as in the model above but that uses as the dependent

variable whether or not a person participated in a non-political citizen group.

These include charity, social, work, and sports groups. This is specified as adummy measure because most respondents participated in only one such

activity. This also allows logit analysis, which is the same technique used in the

other regressions, thus facilitating easier comparisons.

The third model that I specify attempts to learn more about the political

participation of the Latino non-citizen population. While some Latino

non-citizens participate in political activities, it will soon be clear that most do

not. What might explain the different choices? Perhaps the traditional factors

that influence overall citizen participation are most relevant to non-citizens. The

previous model is therefore used, with two differences. First, several additional

variables are added that are relevant largely to non-citizens. These include

length of time spent in the United States,40 plans for future citizenship status and

38 Jack Citrin, Comment: The Political Relevance of Trust in Government, American Political

Science Review, 68 (1974), 97388; Rosenstone and Hansen, Mobilization, Participation, and

Democracy in America.39 Sidney Verba and Norman H. Nie, Participation in America (New York: Harper and Row,

1972); Arthur Miller, Patricia Gurin, Gerald Gurin and Oksana Malanchuk, Group Consciousness

and Political Participation, American Journal of Political Science, 25 (1981), 494511; Richard

Shingles, Black Consciousness and Political Participation: The Missing Link, American PoliticalScience Review, 75 (1981), 7691.40 As Milbraith and Goel generally noted, The longer a person resides in a given community, the

greater the likelihood of his participation in politics. Hill and Moreno, in their study of

Cuban-Americans, found that the percentage of life spent in the United States was a significant

7/28/2019 BJPS Leal

13/18


English language abilities. While one might suspect that all the above factors

are at work in the decision of non-citizens to participate in politics, the LNPS

allows for regression analysis to test which have explanatory power. Secondly,

all citizens are deleted from the dataset in order to see which variables apply

specifically to non-citizens without using a large number of interaction terms.

The dependent variable was whether or not a person participated in any type

of non-electoral activity. Only a small number of people from this sample

participated in more than one type, so the data were truncated into a dummy

measure. The new model is therefore:

Pr(Y1)1/(1 exp(-XB)), where XBb1Ageb2Income

b3Educationb4Genderb5CubanAmericanb6InfoIndex

b7Party Differencesb8FollowPoliticsb9LoveUSb10Trust

b11Consciousness

b12YearsUS

b13CitizenshipPlans

b14English.

F I N D I N G S

Table 1 shows that Latino non-citizens took part in all the non-electoral political

activities examined, although their involvement was on average three and a half

times less than that of Latino citizens.

Participation rates for both non-citizens and citizens were highest for less

demanding activities, such as wearing a button or displaying a sign, signing a

petition or attending a public meeting. Rates were lowest for the moredemanding and time-consuming activity of volunteering for a political

campaign and for the one act that required disposable income, donating money.

One initial hypothesis was that non-citizens, especially the undocumented,

might avoid activities that maximized the risk of contact with the government,

but this was not the case. Signing a petition was in fact the most common of

the seven political activities, and writing to a politician was fourth. Like citizens,

non-citizens appear to participate most in activities that are the least demanding

and least in those that are not.

As previously noted, non-citizens differ from citizens in terms of age, income,

gender and education. Table 2 presents a logit regression model that tests

whether citizens were more predisposed to participation, ceteris paribus. The

results show that citizenship is positively correlated with all of the participation

measures. This suggests that even if there is no law against non-electoral

(Fnote continued)

predictor of non-electoral behaviour. In addition, Garcia found that length of stay in the United States

was the key variable predicting naturalization. The present study follows the lead of Milbraith and

Goel and Garcia and uses time spent in the United States but also controls for age (Lester Milbraithand Madan Goel, Political Participation: How and Why Do People Get Involved in Politics? 2nd

edn (Washington, DC: University Press of America, 1977), p. 113; Hill and Moreno, Second-Gen-

eration Cubans; John A. Garcia, Political Integration of Mexican Immigrants: Explorations into the

Naturalization Process, International Migration Review, 15 (1981), 60825).

7/28/2019 BJPS Leal

14/18

366 L E A L

T A B L E 3 Logit Regression Model Explaining Non-Political Group

Participation by Latino Citizens and Non-Citizens

Local group Local group

Variable participation Variable participation

Intercept 4.283*** Information 0.096**(0.589) index (0.038)

Citizen 0.329** Party 0.115(0.139) differences (0.082)

Income 0.250*** Degree love 0.157**(0.041) US (0.072)

Age 0.039 Ethnic 0.038(0.039) consciousness (0.032)

Education 0.196*** Trust 0.093

(0.051) (0.062)Gender 0.134 Follow politics 0.135**

(0.117) (0.058)Cuban 0.744*** Skin 0.052

(0.217) colour (0.059)

Observations 2,442 2 222.58

Notes: Cells consist of coefficients in numerator, and standard errors in parentheses.

*** p0.01, ** p0.05, * p0.10. Source: LNPS (198990)

political participation by non-citizens, they nevertheless participate less, even

when controlling for education, age, income and other factors.

What is the substantive difference in this participation? An analysis of the

coefficients using the program CLARIFY reveals that citizens are on average twice

as likely as non-citizens to participate in these non-electoral activities.41 This

contrasts somewhat with the conclusions of Verba et al., although the data for

their regressions included their entire sample, not just Latinos. Table 2 shows

differences between citizen and non-citizen participation in every category of

non-electoral activity.Table 3 considers the effects of the same set of independent variables on

participation in non-political local organizations, including social, charitable,

work and sport groups. Once again, the citizenship variable is statistically

significant. Even though local organizations are probably perceived as more

accessible by the non-citizen community than are political organizations,

especially for the undocumented, Latino non-citizens are less likely to join them

even controlling for income and education. Non-citizens are about 1.4 times less

likely to participate, a lower figure than that for the average of the non-electoral

activities. The reason might well be the accessibility idea mentioned above,

41 Gary King, Michael Tomz and Jason Wittenberg, CLARIFY: Software for Interpreting and

Presenting Statistical Results, Version 1.2.1 (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University, 1 June 1999).

7/28/2019 BJPS Leal

15/18


T A B L E 4 Logit Regression Model Explaining Non-Electoral

Participation by Latino Non-Citizens

Non-electoral Non-electoral

Variable participation Variable participation

Intercept 4.115*** Gender 0.211(1.008) (0.223)

Information 0.301*** Age 0.167*index (0.078) (0.094)

Citizenship 0.275** Cuban 0.239plans (0.123) (0.300)

Perceive party 0.267* Education 0.091differences (0.162) (0.092)

Degree love 0.106 Ethnic 0.191***

US (0.135) consciousness (0.069)Length in US 0.010 Trust 0.190*

(0.015) (0.113)English 0.263* Follow politics 0.182*

(0.158) (0.106)Income 0.105 Skin colour 0.313***

(0.085) (0.113)

Observations 786 2 75.54

Notes: Cells consist of coefficients in numerator, and standard errors in parentheses. All citizen

respondents dropped from dataset for this regression. *** p0.01, ** p 0.05, * p0.10.

Source: LNPS (198990)

although local organizations may be perceived as more relevant and even more

fun than political options.

The final step reported in Table 4 is to look more closely at the non-citizen

population.42 Uhlaner, Cain and Kiewiet analysed Latino non-citizen partici-

pation using a California telephone survey. Their dependent variables included

whether the respondent contacted elected officials, contacted the media, and

worked with a group on a community problem.They found the independent

variables (except age, percentage of life lived in the United States, and

perception of a problem related to ethnicity) were largely insignificant.43

42 A related issue is whether there is a general tendency among some non-citizens to become

involved in political and non-political organizational activity. Perhaps some non-citizens are simply

predisposed to activity while others are not, so it would be wrong to assume that those who participate

in political activities are doing so exclusively because of their interest in politics. The data, however,

do not entirely support this. While those who participate in political activities are more likely to be

involved in local organizations, those who eschew politics are also to be found. Of those with no

political involvement 9 per cent were members of local organizations, while the figure for those who

participated in at least one political activity was 24 per cent. Overall, about 11 per cent of Latinonon-citizens were involved in local groups, which is a higher percentage than for any of the political

activities detailed in Table 1.43 Carole Uhlaner, Bruce Cain and D. Roderick Kiewiet, Political Participation of Ethnic Minorities

in the 1980s, Political Behavior, 11 (1989), 195231.

7/28/2019 BJPS Leal

16/18

368 L E A L

The results show that for non-citizens, non-electoral participation is

significantly affected by political information and the perception of differences

between Democrats and Republicans. While the former was significant in the

previous regressions, the latter was not. This suggests that political awareness

may be a more important determinant of non-citizen than citizen political

activity. In addition, those who were interested in politics and had a greater sense

of ethnic identity were more likely to participate in politics, which reflects

previous findings using the overall Latino sample.

The variable for age is statistically significant but negative, which means that

younger non-citizens were more likely to be active than were their seniors. This

is contrary to previous understandings of electoral participation, where age is

seen as a close cousin of education; people are thought to gain more information

as they age and therefore grow more likely to participate. Perhaps younger

non-citizens saw a greater need for political activity as American politics grewincreasingly anti-immigrant. Two other distinctive features are the in-

significance of the socio-economic status (SES) variables of education and

income, which means that the traditional SES model does not appear to apply

to the non-citizen population.

Trust is again negatively associated with political participation. Non-citizens

who trust government and other people may see less reason to invest time and

energy in politics, while the sceptical may see a need for activism. Skin colour

was also negative, meaning that those coded by the interviewers as darker were

less likely to participate. They may have been discouraged by a greater level ofdiscrimination, although the data do not allow any certain conclusions to be

drawn. Those who expected to naturalize were also more likely to become

involved, as were those more comfortable with the English language.

The length of time lived in the United States was not significant, however.

It would therefore seem to matter less how long somebody lives in the United

States than what they learn while they are there. People who live in the United

States for twenty years may still not see any pressing reason to become involved

if they have little understanding of the political system and do not think it matters

which party has power. This may not be far removed from how many American

citizens decide to become involved in politics.

C O N C L U S I O N S

This article examined the extent of non-electoral political participation by

Latino non-citizens, along with their involvement in non-political group

participation. It also explored the determinants of political participation among

the non-citizen population. Latino non-citizens were involved in non-electoral

political activities, although far less often than were citizens. While the average

participation rate across all seven types of activities for citizens was 12.6 percent, the figure for non-citizens was 3.6 per cent, or over three and a half times

less.

An important question is whether or not this lower rate was due to lower levels

7/28/2019 BJPS Leal

17/18


of education, age and income among non-citizens, as these factors are often

associated with participation. The regressions in Table 2, however, showed that

this is not the case. The citizenship variable is statistically significant in all

regressions, although controlling for SES and other measures lowered the gap

between citizen and non-citizen participation from three and a half to two times.

These findings contrast with the only previous national study that analysed

this subject quantitatively. Verba et al. found differences between Latino

citizens and the overall Latino population in voting, contacting elected officials,

informal community activity and affiliation with a political organization.

However, their data showed no differences in political protest activities, and

only minor differences for campaign work, campaign contributions and board

membership. In addition, their regressions, using their overall United States

dataset, showed that while citizenship was a statistically significant variable

explaining voting and overall participation, it did not explain participation in thesort of non-electoral political activities examined in this article.

When it came to participation in local non-political groups, the analysis here

finds significant citizen/non-citizen differences though they are not as

pronounced as for political activities. Citizens were about one and a half times

more likely to participate. Although the data cannot conclusively reveal why,

it is likely not only that local group activities are less forbidding than political

activities, but also that they may be perceived as more directly relevant and

perhaps even more fun.

This article also examined why some non-citizens participated more inpolitical activities than did others. The results show that participation is not

random but boosted when the non-citizen is more informed about politics,

perceives differences between the two major parties, is interested in politics, has

a strong ethnic identity, is younger and plans to naturalize. The traditional SES

measures of education and income, along with length of time in the United States

and reported love of the United States, were not significant.

Whether or not non-citizens should be involved in political life is a normative

question this article cannot answer. Those who oppose non-citizen participation

might not find great cause for alarm, however. Not only is it a limited population

that becomes involved, but the individuals are not randomly self-selected. They

are better informed about American politics, more likely to plan on naturalizing,

and more likely to perceive differences between the parties than are the

non-participants.

What implications might these conclusions have for civic involvement? First,

they show that participation for all Latinos in all types of activities is associated

with political knowledge. The substantial growth of Spanish-language tele-

vision, newspapers and radio means that such information is more available to

Latino non-citizens today than at any time in recent history. Anecdotal evidence

also indicates that political candidates are spending more time than ever beforegranting interviews to and providing information to reporters from such media.

This suggests that Latino non-citizen political and community participation will

only continue to increase.

7/28/2019 BJPS Leal

18/18

370 L E A L

This article also has implications for the perception of non-citizens by

citizens. Immigrants are often viewed as coming to America in order to reap

government or economic benefits and not to become active stakeholders in the

nation. The findings reported here show that, contrary to stereotype, a number

of non-citizens are civic-minded and do invest their time in communities in

which some are not even legally allowed to live. In addition, community groups

should be aware that the common view of non-citizens as leading isolated and

perhaps even fearful lives44 is not entirely accurate. Latino non-citizens do

participate in community and political activities, so local groups who need

assistance in solving community problems should not overlook them.45 While

it is open to debate whether non-citizens should be active in political

campaigning, few should oppose their involvement in church groups,

parent-teacher organizations or Little League.

Lastly, as many non-citizens will eventually naturalize, by studying the civicorientations of non-citizens we can learn more about the future direction of

participation. We saw that those who are likely to naturalize are more likely to

participate politically, which means these future citizens are somewhat

predisposed to making contributions to civic life. In addition, if some Latino

non-citizens are willing to participate despite the legal ambiguities of such

involvement, then there are probably many others who will become active once

they naturalize. This further suggests that Latino immigrants are better prepared

to make civic as well as economic and cultural contributions to their adopted

country than may be commonly thought.What are the implications for future research? The LNPS is now eleven years

old and there is a need for a new national Latino survey. The Latino population

continues to grow, both in terms of citizens and non-citizens, but there is little

contemporary Latino survey data available for analysis. This article would make

a useful baseline of comparison for future studies, but unfortunately no

comprehensive surveys are under way. The results reported here suggest that

any such survey should be designed to encompass respondents not just of

Mexican, Cuban and Puerto Rican descent but also those from Central America

and the Caribbean. It would also be useful to try to ascertain the many categories

of non-citizen, such as permanent residents, refugees and asylum seekers, and

undocumented entrants. Lastly, the sampling of another non-citizen population

group in the United States, such as immigrants of Asian heritage who have not

naturalized, would allow important comparisons to be made.46

44 Either from a lack of understanding of society, in the case of legal residents, or fear of discovery

by law enforcement or immigration authorities, in the case of undocumented immigrants.45 Delgado similarly argued that unions should not overlook Latino non-citizens as potential

members. He discussed how non-citizens are not unorganizable, as is commonly thought, butcapable of taking an active role in union activities (Hector L. Delgado,New Immigrants, Old Unions:

Organizing Undocumented Workers in Los Angeles (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1993)).46 A measure of political efficacy might also be included, as it is a useful control variable for

research into political participation.

Documents

BJPS Leal