DAPA Matters

8/20/2019 DAPA Matters

1/42

DAPA Matters

The Growing Electorate Directly Affected

by Executive Action on Immigration

By Manuel Pastor, Tom Jawetz, and Lizet Ocampo November 2015

WWW.AMERICANPROGRESS.O


2/42

DAPA MattersThe Growing Electorate Directly Affected

by Executive Action on Immigration

By Manuel Pastor, Tom Jawetz, and Lizet Ocampo November 2015


3/42

1 Introduction and summary

5 The road to DAPA

7 Changing demographics and the electorate’s connection

immigration policy

9 The potential electoral impacts of DAPA-affected voters

10 DAPA-affected voters in the states

13 Florida

14 Nevada

16 Colorado

17 North Carolina

19 Arizona

20 Georgia

22 Conclusion

23 Methodology

31 About the authors and acknowledgments

33 Endnotes

Contents


4/42

1 Center for American Progress | DAPA Matters

Introduction and summary

In he year since Presiden Barack Obama’s November 2014 execuive acions

announcemen,1 much has been writen abou he poenial beneficiaries o hese

execuive acions and he effec ha hese iniiaives would have on he U.S.

economy and various saes.2 Te expansion o Deerred Acion or Childhood

Arrivals, or DACA,3 and he creaion o Deerred Acion or Parens o Americans

and Lawul Permanen Residens, or DAPA 4ogeher wih he original DACA

program ha was announced in June 2012would allow approximaely 5 mil-

lion5 unauhorized parens and DREAMers o gain emporary proecion romdeporaion and he opporuniy o apply or a work permi.

Previously, he Cener or American Progress demonsraed ha DACA, DAPA,

and expanded DACA would dramaically raise he wages o all Americans by a

cumulaive $124 billion over a decade.6 Over his same period, he U.S. gross

domesic produc would increase cumulaively by $230 billion, and an average

o 29,000 jobs would be creaed each year.7 Similar benefis would be realized in

saes all across he counry.8 Te Cener or he Sudy o Immigran Inegraion,

or CSII, addiionally demonsraed in a March 2015 repor ha increased wages

or DAPA-eligible amilies would lif American children ou o poverymore

han 40,000 children in Caliornia aloneand improve educaional oucomes or

hese uure workers and voers.9

Bu litle has been writen o dae abou he poliical impac ha U.S. ciizen amily

members o DAPA-eligible individualsan ofen-overlooked populaionmigh

have on uure elecions. By definiion, many o he people who would receive

proecion hrough DAPA have children who are U.S. ciizens who are now, or

who soon will become, eligible o voe. Many also have oher relaives and loved

ones who are U.S. ciizens.

Tis repor represens he mos exensive effor o dae o analyze he impac ha

hese U.S. ciizen amily members could have on he 2016 and 2020 elecions. Te

repor builds upon CAP’s previous elecoral simulaions ha demonsrae ha


5/42


changing demographics hroughou he counry give voers o color in general

greaer poenial o influence elecions in key batleground saes,10 and i uses new

sae-by-sae projecions by CSII o he number o U.S. ciizens who are relaed o

DAPA-eligible individuals.

What is DAPA?

Under DAPA, the Department of Homeland Security, or DHS, would make case-by-

case decisions regarding whether to grant deferred action to certain parents of U.S.

citizen children and lawful permanent residents, or LPRs. With deferred action, such

parents would be protected from deportation temporarily—for renewable three-

year periods, for example—and would be permitted to apply for work authorization.

To qualify for DAPA, individuals would have to meet a number of initial requirements,

such as having a child who is a U.S. citizen or an LPR as of the date of the announce-

ment and having already lived in the United States for five years.11 To be eligible,

applicants also must not fall within any of DHS’ enforcement priorities, which include

threats to national security, border security, and public safety.12 Finally, an individual

determination must be made that there are no other reasons to deny deferred action

as an exercise of discretion.13

Approximately 3.7 million unauthorized immigrants could qualify for DAPA.14 In

November 2014, the Migration Policy Institute estimated that the vast majority—

more than 3.5 million—are the parents of U.S. citizens, while the remainder—an

estimated 180,000—are the parents of LPRs.15

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, a component of DHS, planned to begin

accepting DAPA applications on May 19, 2015.16 But on February 16, 2015, a federal

court in Texas issued a preliminary injunction barring the administration from taking

any steps to implement DAPA or expanded DACA.17 On November 9, 2015, the U.S.

Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit upheld the injunction blocking implementa-

tion of these programs.18 The Department of Justice has announced that it will be

petitioning for certiorari in the U.S. Supreme Court.19


6/42


Tis repor looks a he number o U.S. ciizens o voing age who live wih unau-

horized amily members who would be eligible or DAPA under he presiden’s

planDAPA-affeced voers. We esimae ha 6.3 million U.S. ciizens live in he

same household as a DAPA-eligible relaive. More han 5.3 million o hese ciizen

amily members are he children o hose eligible or DAPA, and abou 1 million

are heir spouses and oher relaives. By 2016, 1.5 million o hese 6.3 millionciizen relaives will be eligible voers, and by 2020, ha figure will rise o 2.25

million as addiional children and amily members reach voing age.

FIGURE 1

Total number of DAPA-affected voters, by year

2016 2020 2032

Source: See Methodology for an explanation of Manuel Pastor's calculations.

1.5 million 2.25 million 6.3 million

Tis repor urher provides sae-by-sae DAPA-affeced voer daa or 36 saes.

o bes undersand he significance o hese voers, we compare he margins o

vicory in recen elecions wih he proporion o his margin ha DAPA-affeced

voers will comprise in 2016 and 2020. For insance, Presiden Obama won he

sae o Florida in 2012 by slighly more han 74,000 voes;20 by 2016, 80 percen

o ha margin o vicorynearly 60,000 voesmay be cas by DAPA-affeced

voers in he sae, and by 2020, here will be nearly 85,000 DAPA-affeced Florida

voers, exceeding he 2012 margin o vicory enirely.

We find ha DAPA-affeced voers will comprise sizable and poenially decisive

porions o key and emerging batleground sae elecoraes by 2016 and beyond.

Tese saes include boh hose Presiden Obama won in 2012 and saes where

ormer Massachusets Gov. Mit Romney (R) claimed vicorysuggesing ha

hey could swing eiher way in upcoming elecions. Furhermore, DAPA-affeced

voers’ influence will increase in he 2020 elecion and beyond. o illusrae his, we ocus paricular atenion on hree saes ha Presiden Obama won in 2012

Florida, Nevada, and Coloradoand hree saes ha Gov. Romney won in

2012Norh Carolina, Arizona, and Georgia:21


7/42


• In 2016, DAPA-affeced voers will comprise 80 percen o Florida’s 2012 mar-

gin o vicory, 40 percen o Nevada’s, and 15 percen o Colorado’s. Tey will

comprise 26 percen o Norh Carolina’s 2012 margin o vicory, 29 percen o

Arizona’s, and 11 percen o Georgia’s.

•In 2020, DAPA-affeced voers will increase significanly as a proporion ohe 2012 margins o vicory or hese saes, oaling 114 percen in Florida, 60

percen in Nevada, 26 percen in Colorado, 46 percen in Norh Carolina, 44

percen in Arizona, and 17 percen in Georgia.

Because elecions depend on voer urnou and pary preerence, he large

number o voers in key batleground saes who have a srong personal ineres

in a candidae’s posiion wih respec o DAPA could have an imporan impac

on upcoming elecions. Moreover, depending upon when and wheher DAPA

implemenaion begins, he nex presiden may have he power o eiher exend or

erminae he iniiaive or o explore alernaives o DAPA ha similarly offer ami-lies emporary proecion rom separaion. Tis growing segmen o he elecor-

aecriical or boh pariesis likely o be waching careully how candidaes

rom boh paries alk abou DAPA and he issue o immigraion more broadly.


8/42


The road to DAPA

Voers o color played a criical role in he 2012 presidenial elecion, as did he

candidaes’ posiions on immigraion reorm. Following a campaign in which Gov.

Romney promoed a policy o “sel-deporaion”making lie as difficul as pos-

sible so ha millions o unauhorized immigrans would leave he counry 22he

received only 27 percen o he Hispanic voe and 26 percen o he Asian voe.23

Tis represened a significan drop rom he 44 percen George W. Bush received

in 2004 rom each group.24 In conras, Presiden Obama received 75 percen o

he Laino voe25 and 73 percen o he Asian American voe,26 breaking all recordsse by previous presidenial candidaes or boh groups.

Jus wo days afer he 2012 elecion, hen-House Speaker John Boehner

(R-OH) described immigraion reorm as “an imporan issue ha I hink ough

o be deal wih” and said “a comprehensive approach is long overdue.”27 Vice

Presiden Joe Biden sounded a similarly opimisic noe abou he prospecs o

reorm, observing in he days afer he elecion, “i’s a differen day.” 28 Several

monhs laer, he Republican Naional Commitee, or RNC, issued is “auopsy

repor” o wha wen wrong in he elecion, describing he pary’s urgen need

o gain ground wih minoriy voers.29 Explicily disavowing Gov. Romney’s

sel-deporaion plan, he repor observed ha, “I Hispanic Americans perceive

ha a GOP nominee or candidae does no wan hem in he Unied Saes

(i.e., sel-deporaion), hey will no pay atenion o our nex senence.” 30 Soon

afer, in June 2013, a biparisan comprehensive immigraion reorm bill wih a

pahway o ciizenship passed he U.S. Senae. However, Speaker Boehner never

brough he bil l o he House floor or a voe, and he House o Represenaives

never considered alernaive proposals.31

Wih legislaion salled, in November 2014, Presiden Obama announced a serieso execuive acions on immigraion ha were inended o jumpsar he process o

fixing he immigraion sysem under exising law. One o he cenral pars o hose

effors expanded he successul DACA iniiaive announced in June 2012 by provid-

ing emporary relie rom deporaion and he opporuniy o apply or work auho-

rizaion o addiional unauhorized immigrans who came o he Unied Saes as


9/42


children.32 A second par, DAPA, offered cerain parens o U.S. ciizens and lawul

permanen residens similar work auhorizaion and proecion rom deporaion.33

Up o 3.7 million parens are believed o be eligible or DAPA, and an addiional 1.4

million DREAMersunauhorized immigrans who came o he Unied Saes as

childrenare believed o be eligible or DACA and expanded DACA.34

Weeks afer he presiden’s announcemen, 26 saes and atorneys generalled

by exasbrough a lawsui o preven DAPA and expanded DACA rom going

orward.35 Tese iniiaives remain on hold pursuan o a preliminary injuncion

issued by a ederal cour in exas, which was upheld by he 5h Circui Cour o

Appeals and may soon be on is way o he Supreme Cour.36


10/42


Changing demographics and

the electorate’s connection to

immigration policy

Earlier his year, CAP analyzed he poliical implicaions o he demographic changes

ha are aking place hroughou he counry.37 As has been well-documened, people

o color are becoming an increasing share o saes’ elecoraes and are projeced o

make up a majoriy o he overall populaion by 2055.38 Wha ha earlier repor illus-

raed is haaking he demographic shifs ino accouni he 2016 Democraic

presidenial candidae is able o reain he high urnou and voer preerence amongpeople o color ha Presiden Obama received in 2012, he or she will more easily

win batleground saes such as Colorado, Florida, and Nevada and will poenially

even win in a sae such as Norh Carolina, which Presiden Obama los in 2012. Bu

even i he Republican candidae regains he relaively high voer preerences across

all racial and ehnic groups ha Presiden Bush achieved in 2004, ha candidae

would sill sruggle o win key batleground saes such as Ohio and Nevada.39 Tis

also is rue in saes such as Colorado, Nevada, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Virginia

even when he Republican candidae’s suppor rom voers o color revers o 2004

levels bu suppor rom non-Hispanic whie voers remains a 2012 levels.40

Te imporan akeaway rom ha earlier repor is ha rapid demographic changes

are providing voers o color wih grea poenial o influence uure elecions. And

he key o realizing his poenial comes down o voer urnou and pary preerence.

So wha influences urnou and pary preerence or voers o color? For Laino

and Asian American voers, immigraion is a key limus-es issue. According o

2014 elecion-eve polling by Laino Decisions, immigraion was he number one

issue or Laino voers.41 In similar polling by Asian American Decisions, abou

hal o Asian American voers cied immigraion as he mos or one o he mosimporan issues in deciding how hey planned o voe.42 A subsequen Laino

Decisions poll also showed ha, across pary affiliaion, 89 percen o Laino vo-

ers suppored he presiden’s execuive acion on DAPA.43 Te Public Religion

Research Insiue, or PRRI, similarly showed ha 8 in 10 Lainos and Arican


11/42


Americans suppor execuive acion on immigraion.44 While here is no exen-

sive polling on Asian American suppor or execuive acion, he Asian American

Legal Deense and Educaion Fund ound ha 65 percen o “Asian American

voers in 11 saes srongly suppored execuive acion.”45

Tese poll numbers should come as no surprise because he vas majoriy o unau-horized immigrans affeced by immigraion reorm and he execuive acions are

people o color. An esimaed 77 percen o unauhorized immigrans are rom

Mexico, Cenral America, and Souh America; 14 percen are rom Asia; and 5

percen are rom Arica and he Caribbean.46 Nearly wo-hirds o Laino regis-

ered voers have a amily member, riend, co-worker, or oher acquainance who

is unauhorized.47 Tese voers, hen, likely care deeply abou how he candidaes

and he paries speak abou immigraion reorm and execuive acion.

Te quesions ha his repor se ou o answer are: How many eligible voers

have a direc, personal connecion o DAPA-eligible individuals; and wha influ-ence could hose voers have on he 2016 elecion cycle and beyond?


12/42


The potential electoral impacts

of DAPA-affected voters

In our analysis, we idenified he number o eligible voersU.S. ciizens over age

18who live in he same household as a relaive who would be eligible or DAPA.

Tese amily members include children, parens, spouses, siblings, grandparens,

in-laws, and oher relaives o such people who likely have a deep personal ineres in

wheher heir relaive is able o obain DAPA. o ge a sense o heir voing power,

we hen projeced heir numbers or he 2016 and 2020 elecion cycles.

As explained in he Mehodology secion o his repor, o ge a he number opoenial DAPA-affeced voers, we firs esimaed he oal unauhorized populaion

and he populaion ha would likely be eligible o apply or DAPA, and hen we esi-

maed he number o amily members living in he same household as hese DAPA-

eligible individuals. From his, we esimaed he number o amily members who are

U.S. ciizens who would be old enough o voe in he 2016 and 2020 elecions. For

various reasons explained in he Mehodology, hese numbers are likely conserva-

ive. For insance, here are surely relaives living ouside he household and oher

voers who may be riends or colleagues o DAPA-eligible individuals who would

similarly care abou a candidae’s posiion on he issue. I also may be worh noing

ha we ocused on DAPA-affeced voers and noe DACA-affeced voers. While

he number o U.S. ciizen amily members who are affeced by DAPA is so much

greaer, ideniying DACA-affeced voers is similarly imporan. Noneheless, hese

figures represen a significan, and unil-now overlooked, voing populaion.

TABLE 1

2016 and 2020 DAPA-affected voters nationwide

Citizen children

of DAPA-eligible

parents

Citizen spouses

and additional

relatives of DAPA-

eligible parents

Total number of DAPA-affected voters by

2016 2020 2032

5,338,000 942,000 1,488,000 2,252,000 6,280,000

Note: The numbers in this table are rounded to the nearest 1,000.

Source: See Methodology for an explanation of Manuel Pastor’s calculations.


13/42


We ound ha he esimaed 3.7 million individuals who are DAPA eligible have

nearly 6.3 million amily members who are U.S. ciizens living in he same house-

hold. Ou o his number, more han 5.3 million ciizens are he children o DAPA-

eligible individuals, and abou 1 million ciizens are heir spouses and oher relaives.

Because he majoriy o hese ciizen relaivesmainly, he children o hose haare DAPA eligibleare under age 18 and hus no ye eligible o voe, he ull voing

power o his populaion will no be realized or some ime. As shown in Figure 1, we

esimae ha nearly 1.5 million amily members o DAPA-eligible individuals will be

eligible o voe in 2016, and as more ciizen children urn 18 and become eligible o

voe, his number is projeced o increase dramaically. In 2020, DAPA-affeced eli-

gible voers are esimaed o exceed 2.25 million in numbera 50 percen increase

rom 2016. Te vas majoriy o DAPA-affeced voers are Laino or Asian American

and Pacific Islander82 percen and 8 percen, respecively, in 2016.48

And hese are jus he medium-erm elecoral dynamics and consequences. Aleas 4 million remaining amily member voers will reach age 18 by 2032, and

our esimaes do no include DAPA-affeced relaives who are currenly lawul

permanen residens and who may choose o nauralize, in par, as a resul o heir

concern abou he one o he debae and he need o find soluions ha beter he

lives o heir amilies.

DAPA-affected voters in the states

Te significance o his growing elecorae is mos noable a he sae level. In

able 2, we esimae he number o DAPA-affeced voers in 22 saes and com-

pare ha number wih he margin o vicory in each sae’s presidenial cones in

2012 o illusrae he poenial impac ha hose voers could have in 2016 and

2020. In able 3, we show 14 addiional saes ha were no capured in able

2 ha will have more han 5,000 DAPA-affeced voers in eiher 2016 or 2020,

ordered by number o voers in 2016.


14/42


TABLE 2

2016 and 2020 DAPA-affected voters and 2012 presidential election

margins of victory, by state

State

Electoral

votes

2012 margin

of victory,

in votes

2016 DAPA-

affected

voters

2016 share of

2012 margin

of victory

2020 DAPA-

affected

voters

2020 share of

2012 margin

of victory

Florida 29 74,000 60,000 80% 85,000 114%

Nevada 6 68,000 27,000 40% 41,000 60%

Arizona 11 208,000 60,000 29% 92,000 44%

North Carolina 15 92,000 24,000 26% 42,000 46%

Texas 38 1,262,000 276,000 22% 428,000 34%

New Mexico 5 80,000 15,000 19% 22,000 28%

California 55 3,014,000 531,000 18% 784,000 26%

Colorado 9 138,000 21,000 15% 36,000 26%

Virginia 13 149,000 20,000 13% 29,000 20%

Georgia 16 305,000 34,000 11% 53,000 17%

Illinois 20 884,000 77,000 9% 120,000 14%

Oregon 7 216,000 15,000 7% 25,000 11%

Washington 12 465,000 28,000 6% 45,000 10%

Iowa 6 92,000 5,000 5% 8,000 9%

New Jersey 14 648,000 32,000 5% 47,000 7%

Pennsylvania 20 310,000 12,000 4% 16,000 5%

Kansas 6 250,000 10,000 4% 16,000 6%

New York 29 1,995,000 79,000 4% 115,000 6%

Ohio 18 166,000 7,000 4% 9,000 5%

Indiana 11 269,000 9,000 4% 15,000 5%

Minnesota 10 226,000 7,000 3% 11,000 5%

Wisconsin 10 213,000 6,000 3% 12,000 5%

Note: The numbers in this table are rounded to the nearest 1,000.



15/42


Below, we delve ino six curren and emerging batleground saes. Presiden

Obama won he firs hree ha we discussFlorida, Nevada, and Coloradoin

2012, and Gov. Romney won he final hree saesNorh Carolina, Arizona, and

Georgia. We explain he exen o which DAPA-affeced voerswho likely have

srong moivaions o care abou candidaes’ immigraion posiionscould play

a criical role in deermining which way saes’ elecoral voes go. Imporanly, all

o hese saes, wih he excepion o Colorado, joined exas as a plainiff in he

lawsui ha is currenly prevening implemenaion o DAPA.49 DAPA-affeced

voers in hese saes may hereore have addiional moivaion o be engaged in

upcoming elecions.

Providing in-deph analysis o DAPA-affeced voers in hese saes is paricu-

larly relevan given ha immigraion has become a prominen opic in he 2016presidenial race.50 Poliical analyss opine ha ani-immigran sances may affec

he presidenial race, as Proposiion 18751 did in Caliornia. Proposiion 187 was

a highly conroversial ballo iniiaive championed by hen-Gov. Pee Wilson (R)

TABLE 3

2016 and 2020 DAPA-affected voters by state

State Electoral votes 2016 DAPA-affected voters 2020 DAPA-affected voters

Maryland 10 16,000 22,000

Michigan 16 10,000 18,000

Utah 6 11,000 18,000

Massachusetts 11 14,000 20,000

Arkansas 6 7,000 11,000

Connecticut 7 7,000 11,000

Nebraska 5 5,000 8,000

Idaho 4 6,000 8,000

Hawaii 4 4,000 6,000

Oklahoma 7 10,000 15,000

South Carolina 9 4,000 7,000

Tennessee 11 10,000 16,000

Missouri 10 5,000 7,000

Alabama 9 5,000 8,000

Note: This table presents states with more than 5,000 DAPA-affected voters that were not included in Table 2 for 2016 or 2020. States notincluded in either Table 1 or Table 2 had fewer than 5,000 DAPA-affected voters for 2016 or 2020. The numbers in this table are rounded to

the nearest 1,000.



16/42


ha denied public services, including healh care and educaion, o unauhorized

immigrans. Te iniiaive played a key role in Gov. Wilson’s 1994 re-elecion cam-

paign, helping mobilize he civic engagemen o minoriy voers and significanly

weaken he Republican Pary’s sanding in Caliornia.52

In all six saes, voers will be considering no only candidaes or he presidency bu also or he U.S. Senae. And many o hese Senae races are expeced o be

very close.53 Consequenly, he resuls o hese elecions will help deermine

which pary has conrol o he Senae and how srong ha conrol is. Republicans

won conrol o he Senae in he 2014 elecion cycle and currenly hold a our-voe

majoriy.54 However, because he wo independen senaors caucus wih Senae

Democras, Republicans need o gain six seas o make hemselves filibuser-

proo. o regain conrol o he chamber in 2016, Democras would need o gain

our or five seas, depending on he oucome o he presidenial elecion. In 2016,

Republicans have 24 seas o deend, while Democras have only 10.55 And voer

numbers presened here could affec he 2020 Senae races as well, which will seeelecions in many saes wih high DAPA-affeced voer influence.

Florida

For he pas our presidenial elecions, Florida’s elecoral voes have been

won in exremely close elecions. Many recall he 2000 presidenial elecion in

which George W. Bush won he sae by a mere 537 voes afer a recoun and a

conroversial Supreme Cour ruling.56 In 2012, Presiden Obama won he sae

by only abou 74,000 voesonce again he smalles margin o any sae in he

naion a 0.9 percen.57

Te proporion o voers o color in Florida is one o he larges in he naion, and

i is an increasingly significan share o he sae’s elecorae. In he las elecion,

people o color made up 33.6 percen o Florida’s eligible voers58 and will reach

37.9 percen in 2016.59 In 2016, Laino voers will comprise 20.2 percen o he

sae’s elecorae, and Asian voers will comprise 2.2 percen.60

CAP previously demonsraed ha i he 2016 Democraic presidenial candi-dae reains he same level o suppor rom Florida voers o color ha Presiden

Obama achieved in 2012, he Democraic presidenial candidae would more

easily win he sae based solely on is changing demographics.61 Bu i he 2016


17/42


Republican presidenial candidae can regain he high level o suppor rom voers

o color ha Presiden Bush received in 2004, he Republican candidae would

ake back Florida by a narrow margin o less han 1 percen.62

No surprisingly, pary preerence among voers o color in Florida has racked

wih he vicorious pary: In 2004, Presiden Bush earned 56 percen o he Laino voe and 44 percen o he Asian American voe; however, in 2012, suppor or

he Republican candidae ell o 39 percen and 26 percen, respecively.63 Florida,

hen, is ruly a swing sae, and he urnou raes and pary preerences o voers o

color could make all he difference.

I is noable, hereore, ha DAPA-affeced Florida voers in 2016 will comprise

80 percen o he 2012 margin o vicory in he sae. By 2020, DAPA-affeced vo-

ers in he sae will make up 114 percen o he 2012 margin o vicory.

In 2016, Florida voers also will decide who wil l replace Sen. Marco Rubio (R), who has saed ha he will no run or re-elecion.64 Florida’s las saewide

elecion was or governor in 2014, where he Republican candidae received

less han 1.1 percenage poins more han he Democraic candidaea voe

difference o slighly more han 64,000 voes.65 Given ha nearly 60,000 voers

in Florida’s 2016 elecion will be personally affeced by DAPA, hey could play a

major role in deciding his Senae race and deermining he balance o power in

he U.S. Senae.

Nevada

Nevada is anoher batleground sae in which DAPA-affeced voers may have a

subsanial effec on upcoming elecions. While Presiden Obama won he sae’s

six elecoral voes in 2012 by 6.7 percenage poins,66 Nevada remains a swing

sae ha Presiden Bush won in 2004 by jus 2.6 percenage poins.67

Nevada is experiencing rapid demographic changes, and voers o color are

comprising a larger porion o he elecorae each year. From 2012 o 2016, voers

o color will jump rom 31.4 percen o he sae’s elecorae o 37 percen.68

TeLaino voe share will reach 18.8 percen, an increase o 2.9 percen over ha ime

period, and he Asian American voe share will grow 1.4 percen, o 8.1 percen o

he elecorae.


18/42


Nevada’s changing demographics will have paricularly significan elecoral

implicaions or uure presidenial campaigns. I racial and ehnic groups have he

same urnou and pary preerence raes as hey did in 2012, he 2016 Democraic

presidenial candidae can easily win Nevada by more han 9 percenage poins,

based on CAP’s previous simulaions. Bu even i he Republican candidae were

o secure he pary’s 2004 level o suppor rom voers o colorregardless o wheher he candidae secures he pary’s 2004 or 2012 level o suppor rom non-

Hispanic whie voershe candidae would sill lose he sae. Essenially, or he

Republican presidenial candidae o be compeiive in Nevada, ha candidae

would need o exceed Presiden Bush’s suppor among voers o color or Gov.

Romney’s suppor among non-Hispanic whie voersor boh.

Candidaes rom boh paries likely could increase suppor rom voers o color by

backing implemenaion o DAPA. In 2016, he more han 27,000 Nevada voers

who live in he same household as a DAPA-eligible amily member will make up

40 percen o he sae’s 2012 margin o vicory. Te number o voers in Nevada who will be personally affeced by DAPA in 2016 is isel greaer han Presiden

Bush’s 2004 margin o vicory in he sae.

Nevada’s 2016 DAPA-affeced voers are no only significan or he presidenial

race bu or a key Senae race as well. Senae Minoriy Leader Harry Reid’s (D)

decision no o seek re-elecion opened up a compeiive Senae sea.69 When Sen.

Reid las ran or re-elecion in 2010, Republican candidae Sharron Angle ran ads

ha were widely criicized as ani-immigran.70 Poliical analyss believe ha hese

ads helped mobilize voers o color in he sae and are parially responsible or he

ac ha Hispanic voers accouned or a record 16 percen o voers.71 In Nevada’s

mos recen Senae race in 2012, Republican Dean Heller won his Senae sea by a

litle more han 11,000 voes.72 In 2016, here will be nearly 2.4 imes ha number

o DAPA-affeced voers in he sae. And voer urnou and pary preerence may

be urher affeced by he ac ha one Democraic candidae, ormer Nevada

Atorney General Caherine Corez Maso, who is vying o replace Sen. Reid is

poised o become he firs Laina o serve in he U.S. Senae i eleced.73

Tese voers will be heading o he polls wih he backdrop o heir sae helping

block DAPA and DACA expansion. Earlier his year, Nevada Atorney General Adam Laxal (R) joined he lawsui led by he sae o exas o block implemena-

ion o hese programs. Te decision was made wihou he suppor o he sae’s

Republican governor, Brian Sandoval, who has largely avoided aking a posiion

wih respec o DAPA isel.74


19/42


Tose who are vying or saewide elecion in Nevada also should ake noe o

he increased influence ha Nevada’s DAPA-affeced voers will have over ime.

In 2020, DAPA-affeced voers will comprise 60 percen o Nevada’s 2012 margin

o vicory, wih nearly 41,000 voers. Given he imporance o DAPA o voers in

Nevada, i is litle surprise ha Presiden Obama chose a Las Vegas high school as

he sie o his 2013 speech o launch he campaign or comprehensive immigra-ion reorm and ha he reurned o ha high school in November 2014 o make

his pich or DAPA and expanded DACA.75

Colorado

Colorado had one o he smalles margins o vicory o any sae in 2012. Presiden

Obama won he sae’s nine elecoral voes by less han 140,000 voesa 5.4 per-

cen margin o vicory.76 Te 2014 race or he U.S. Senae was even closer, wih

Republican Cory Gardner beaing ou incumben Democraic Sen. Mark Udall byless han 40,000 voes.77 In boh elecions, poliical analyss looked o he Laino

voe o explain he oucomes.78

As was he case wih Florida, eiher pary could win Colorado depending upon

wheher he pary preerence o voers o color resembles he 2004 or he 2012

elecion, based on CAP’s previous elecion simulaions.79 In he ormer scenario,

he Republican candidae is projeced o win back he sae by a narrow 1.3 per-

cen margin. In he later scenario, he Democraic candidae’s margin o vicory

could exceed 6.5 percen.80

Tis is why he 21,000 amily members o DAPA-eligible individuals who will be

eligible o voe in 2016 could make such a difference. DAPA-affeced voers made

up 15 percen o he 2012 margin o vicory, and ha amoun will jump in 2020

o 26 percen o he 2012 margin, wih more han 36,000 voers. Ta’s nearly he

enire margin o vicory in he 2014 senaorial race. As wih Florida and Nevada,

Colorado voers also will have he opporuniy o voe in a Senae race ha could

have naional significance. Sen. Michael Benne (D), one o he co-sponsors o he

Senae biparisan immigraion reorm bill81 and a srong proponen o he execu-

ive acions, is up or re-elecion.

In 2014, Colorado Laino voers raed immigraion reorm as he mos imporan

issue acing he Laino communiy ha poliicians should address.82 Neverheless,

nearly hal o hese Laino voers did no know he candidaes’ exac posiions on


20/42


immigraion reorm.83 Sen. Udall’s ailure o srongly embrace he issue o immi-

graion in his re-elecion campaign and Gardner’s abiliy o porray himsel as

supporive o immigraion reorm broadlyhough no o he presiden’s immi-

graion execuive acionsmay explain why Sen. Udall received a significanly

smaller share o suppor rom Laino voers in he sae han Presiden Obama

received in 2012 and Sen. Benne received in 2010.84

Sen. Gardner will be up orre-elecion in 2020, when he number o DAPA-affeced voers in he saemore

han 36,000will make up nearly hree-quarers o his 2014 margin o vicory

o nearly 50,000.85 Because DAPA-affeced voers in 2016 likely will have srong,

personal connecions o DAPA-eligible individuals and may be highly moivaed

o learn he candidaes’ posiions on his policy, hey have he poenial o play an

imporan role in he elecion.

North Carolina

Norh Carolina is a key batleground sae. Te sae’s 15 elecoral voes, which

Gov. Romney won in 2012, were decided by he second-smalles margin o any

saeonly 2 percen, or abou 92,000 voes. Te close naure o he race was

no fluke. Presiden Obama won he sae in 2008 by only 0.3 percen o he voe,

or less han 15,000 voeshen he second-smalles margin o vicory in he

race.86 Bu Norh Carolina is ofen overlooked as a sae in which Laino or Asian

American voersor a candidae’s posiion on he issue o immigraioncould

make he difference. Ta needs o change.

Norh Carolina is undergoing major demographic changes. In 2012, voers o

color made up 26.5 percen o he elecorae, and hey are esimaed o increase o

29 percen in 2016.87 O hose voers, Lainos are expeced o grow o 4.5 percen

o he eligible voing populaion, and Asian Americans are expeced o increase

o 1.8 percen o he overall elecorae.88 Tese numbers underscore rapid growh

among hese communiies: Beween 2000 and 2010, he share o he Laino popu-

laion in he sae increased nearly 79 percen, and he Asian American populaion

increased 57 percen.89

CAP’s previous elecion simulaions demonsraed ha i he 2016 Democraicpresidenial candidae can reain he same urnou and level o suppor rom vo-

ers across all racial and ehnic groups ha Presiden Obama secured in 2012, ha

candidae could win back Norh Carolina based upon hese demographic changes

alone. However, i pary preerences or voers across all racial and ehnic groups


21/42


reurn o 2004 levels, Norh Carolina would swing enirely ou o reach o he

Democraic candidae. Ineresingly, i pary preerence or voers o color revers

o 2004 levels, bu pary preerence or non-Hispanic whie voers mirrors 2012

levels, he race acually would ighen up compared wih he later scenario above.

Tis appears o be he resul o increased Democraic suppor in 2012 among non-

Hispanic whie voers in he sae compared wih 2004.90

Given he prominence o immigraion in he 2016 elecion o dae, he impor-

ance ha Laino and Asian American voers place on a candidae’s posiion wih

respec o immigraion, and he broad suppor wihin hose communiies or

DAPA, he sage is se or eiher pary o capialize on hese demographic changes.

I is hereore sriking ha, according o our projecions, in 2016, here will be

more han 24,000 poenial voers in Norh Carolina who are living wih a relaive

who is DAPA eligible. By 2020, ha number is projeced o grow o more han

42,200. Ta means ha in 2016, poenial voers who may be uniquely sensiive

o a candidae’s posiion on DAPA will make up 26 percen o he 2012 margin o vicory, and by 2020, hey will make up 46 percen o ha margin o vicory.

In 2014 elecion-eve polling, a greaer percenage o Norh Carolina Laino vo-

ers57 percenranked immigraion as he mos imporan issue acing he

Laino communiy han in any oher sae.91 Sixy-wo percen o Norh Carolina’s

Laino voers also expressed ha execuive acion on immigraion would make

hem more enhusiasic abou he Democraic Pary.92 Te srong, personal con-

necion ha hese voers have o DAPA could affec heir urnou in he 2016 race,

and he posiions ha he candidaes adop wih respec o DAPA could play a key

role in deermining wheher heir pary preerence in upcoming elecions mir-

rors 2004 or 2012 levels. As a resul, he daa presened here are highly relevan o

wheher he Democraic candidae or presiden will pick up Norh Carolina or

he Republican candidae will hold he sae.

Norh Carolina’s upcoming senaorial race is equally ineresing. In 2014, a

miderm elecion year when Democraic urnou radiionally lags behind

Republican urnou,93 he Republican candidae or he U.S. Senae, Tom

illis, won by abou 1.6 percenage poins.94 In 2016, incumben Republican

Sen. Richard Burrwho voed agains he Senae’s biparisan comprehensiveimmigraion reorm bill and voed o deund he presiden’s immigraion execu-

ive acions, including DAPAis up or re-elecion.95 Hal o Sen. illis’ 2014

margin o vicory will be comprised o DAPA-affeced voers during he upcom-


22/42


ing elecion.96 And Sen. illis, who also voed o deund DAPA,97 is himsel up

or re-elecion in 2020. By ha poin, DAPA-affeced voers will make up 87

percen o his 2014 margin o vicory.

Te gubernaorial race is equally ineresing, as i involves a Republican incum-

ben, Gov. Pa McCrory, who opposes sae legislaion o provide emporarydriver’s licenses o unauhorized immigrans98 and who is a named pary o he

lawsui prevening DAPA implemenaion. Jus las monh, Gov. McCrory signed

H.B. 318 ino law, an ani-immigran measure ha is being described as Norh

Carolina’s S.B. 1070.99 Te law resrics he accepance o idenificaion docu-

mens or immigrans, mandaes he use o E-Veriy by sae insiuions, and

overrides he abiliy o ciies and counies o enac communiy rus policies.100

Tese ani-immigran acions by sae leaders could affec wheher ens o hou-

sands o DAPA-affeced voers go o he polls and which candidaes hey choose

o suppor.

Arizona

While Gov. Romney secured Arizona’s 11 elecoral voes by 9 percenage poins

in 2012,101 Arizona remains a sae o wach because o is rapidly changing

demographics.102 In 2012, voers o color comprised 27 percen o he elecor-

ae. By 2016, his share will reach 30.9 percen, wih Laino voers making up

22.7 percen and Asian American voers making up 3 percen o he sae’s elec-

orae.103 Given hese changes, i urnou and pary preerence among all racial

and ehnic groups holds consan rom 2012 o 2016, Arizona’s Republican

margin o vicory decreases o 6.8 percen. Furhermore, i pary preerence

among all racial and ehnic groups revers o 2004 levels o suppor, holding

2012 urnou raes, he Republican margin o vicory shrinks o 4.1 percen.104 A

4.1 percen margin would mean ha, i 2012 margins sayed consan or 2016

or all oher saes, Arizona would have he fifh-closes margin o vicory in he

counry, closer han Colorado.105

And his poenial margin is even more sriking when looking a voers who are

direcly affeced by he DAPA policy. According o our findings, in 2016, Arizona will have abou 60,000 DAPA-affeced eligible voers. Tis is 29 percen o he

2012 margin o vicory, giving Arizona he hird-larges share o he 2012 presi-

denial margin ha is made up o DAPA-affeced voers in 2016. In 2020, hese

voers will reach 44 percen o he 2012 margin a more han 92,000 voers.


23/42


Ani-immigran aciviy in Arizona’s pas has already resuled in voer mobiliza-

ion and organizaion.106 In 2010, Arizona enaced S.B. 1070, sae legislaion

ha, among oher hings, required police o check and deain anyone who was

suspeced o being an unauhorized immigran; auhorized he warranless arres

o any person who was believed o have commited a removable offense; and made

i a crimeraher han a civil penalyor a person o ail o carry immigraiondocumens.107 Alhough he U.S. Supreme Cour sruck down much o he law in

2012, i allowed he par o he law ha requires officers in he course o a sop,

deenion, or arres o make effors o veriy a person’s immigraion saus wih he

ederal governmen.108 Similar o he oucome in Caliornia afer Proposiion 187,

his ani-immigran legislaion, srongly suppored by Gov. Wilson, led o a back-

lash among Laino voers. In 2012, no only did voing preerences change con-

siderably or Arizona’s Laino voersrom being more Republican han Lainos

naionwide o being more DemocraicLaino urnou increased as well.109 Tis

ime around, in 2016in addiion o he naional debaeArizona voers will

have seen heir sae paricipaing in he lawsui o block he implemenaion oDAPA and DACA expansion. Tey also will decide he re-elecion o Sen. John

McCain (R), who was a champion o he biparisan reorm legislaion bu who

also voed o deund DAPA.110

Georgia

Like Arizona and Norh Carolina, Georgia is ofen overlooked as a batle-

ground sae in which he issue o immigraion policy could make a difference.

However, he compeiion or Georgia’s 16 elecoral voes will inensiy as a

resul o demographic changes hroughou he sae.111 Te 2012 presidenial

elecion and he 2014 senaorial and gubernaorial races were each decided in

avor o he Republican candidae by approximaely 6.8 percenage poins o 7.8

percenage poins.112

In 2012, voers o color made up 38 percen o Georgia’s elecorae, and his will

increase o 41 percen in 2016. While Georgia’s Arican American voe makes up

he bulk o hese voers, he rapid growh o Laino voers is noable. From 2012

o 2016, he size o he Laino elecorae is projeced o grow nearly 50 percen,reaching 5.6 percen o he sae’s elecorae in 2016. Asian American voers are

also becoming an increasing par o Georgia’s elecorae, growing rom 2.2 percen

o 3 percen beween he presidenial cycles.


24/42


Tis growh is refleced in he DAPA-affeced voer populaion as well. In 2016,

Georgia will have nearly 34,000 voers wih srong amilial ies o DAPA-affeced

individuals, 11 percen o he 2012 margin o vicory. Tese numbers will grow o

more han 52,000 voers in 2020, nearly one-fifh o he 2012 margin o vicory.

As wih all bu one o he oher saes highlighed in his repor, Georgia is aplainiff in he lawsui o block he implemenaion o DAPA. Georgia is also he

sie o a senaorial elecion in which he Republican incumben voed o deund

DAPA and voed agains he biparisan comprehensive immigraion reorm bill

ha passed he Senae wih a supermajoriy o suppor.113 All o his comes agains

he backdrop o several ani-immigran legislaive effors in he sae. Following

Arizona’s lead, Georgia enaced in 2011 H.B. 87,114 a wide-ranging ani-immigran

law. As wih S.B. 1070, ederal cours sruck down he mos nearious provi-

sion o he bill, which made i a sae crime o ranspor or harbor unauhorized

immigrans, bu allowed he so-called show me your papers provision o go ino

effec.115 In 2012, Georgia coninued o consider a variey o ani-immigran mea-sures, including making i more difficul or unauhorized immigrans o sign up

or waer services and prohibiing access o sae colleges.116


25/42


Conclusion

As he counry’s demographic makeup coninues o evolve, he power ha voers

o color have in uure elecions will only increase. Bu because elecions uli-

maely are decided based upon urnou and pary preerence, he acual effec ha

his rising elecorae will have in uure elecions remains o be seen.

Immigraion is broadly undersood as an issue ha could moivae voers o come

o he polls and could shape heir preerence or a paricular candidae or an

enire pary. As he Republican Naional Convenion’s auopsy repor observed,“Hispanic voers ell us our Pary ’s posiion on immigraion has become a limus

es, measuring wheher we are meeing hem wih a welcome ma or a closed

door.”117 Tis limus es is rue or boh paries. Following he Democraic Pary’s

elecoral deeas in 2014, many observers expressed ha key losses were due

o Democraic candidaes’ insufficien atenion o immigraion reorm, espe-

cially in places wih influenial Laino elecoraes.118 Te Democraic Naional

Commitee’s ask orce analysis o hese miderm elecions acknowledged ha he

pary mus “excie key consiuencies” and “mobilize he broades coaliion o vo-

ers possible” o win elecions.119

A candidae’s posiion on immigraion broadly, or execuive acion specifically,

speaks o how ha candidae proposes o rea he amily members o real voers.

As his repor demonsraes, DAPA-affeced voers have he poenial o exer

significan influence on elecions in he years o come.


26/42


Methodology

Estimating the DAPA population—and their families and voters

Tis appendix briefly explains he mehod ha he Cener or he Sudy o

Immigran Inegraion uses o esimae he unauhorized and DAPA-eligible

populaions. I explains how he auhors hen calculaed he poenial voing

power o hose individuals who are in he same household and have a amilial

relaionship wih someone who migh qualiy or DAPA and who migh hereore

be ineresed in and moivaed by candidae sances on he implemenaion o heDeparmen o Human Services direcives on immigraion.

Developing the underlying database

Esimaing he unauhorized immigran populaion is, o course, he firs sep o

esimaing he DAPA-eligible populaion. In his exercise, we adoped an increas-

ingly common sraegy 120 ha involves wo seps. Te firs involves deermining who

among he nonciizen populaion is leas likely o be unauhorized due o a series o

condiions ha are srongly associaed wih documened sausa process called

“logical edis.”121 Te second involves soring he remainder ino auhorized and

unauhorized saus based on a series o probabiliy esimaes applied o reflec he

underlying disribuion o probabiliies. Te specific echnique below was applied o

a pooled 2011–2013 version o he American Communiy Survey, or ACS; he acual

daa used came rom annual ACS surveys ha were provided by Inegraed Public

Use Microdaa Series-USA, wih sel-pooling ino a single sample done by CSII.122

Estimating the unauthorized: Logical edits

We sared he esimaion by assuming ha he aggregae oal o unauhorized

aduls in he Unied Saes in 2012he median year o our samplewas similar

o ha repored in he mos recen esimae rom he Office o Immigraion


27/42


Saisics, or OIS,123 or he Migraion Policy Insiue.124 Given ha he 2011–2013

ACS is he mos recen daa ha are available, and because mos esimaes sugges

ha he aggregae number o unauhorized immigrans has remained essenially

unchanged or he pas several years, his is likely a good snapsho o he 2014

populaion as wellhe period when he DAPA policy was announced.

In he firs logical edi sep, we considered every nonciizen, oreign-born respon-

denwih he excepion o Cubans, who are auomaically graned legal saus

upon arrival o he Unied Saesin our pooled ACS sample and assigned o

each an iniial documenaion saus based on cerain characerisics. For example,

we assumed ha any nonciizen, non-Cuban immigran wih miliary experi-

ence mus be a lawul permanen residen. Oher characerisics ha led us o ag

a responden ino LPR saus included wheher he responden worked or he

public secor; had an occupaion, such as police officer, ha required documena-

ion; received Social Securiy or disabiliy paymens; or was a household head or

spouse in a household ha received “ood samps”125 bu did no have a child inhe house who could have been he legal source o he assisance. We assumed ha

hose who immigraed as aduls and were currenly enrolled in higher educaion

were likely suden visa holders and no among he unauhorized populaion. We

assumed, as do ohers,126 ha any immigran who arrived beore 1982 reached

legal saus hrough he Immigraion Reorm and Conrol Ac o 1986. Finally,

we placed respondens in he LPR caegory i hey received Medicare, Veerans

Affairs care, or assisance rom he Indian Healh Service.127

Estimating the unauthorized: Determining the probability of

being documented

Ta iniial assignmen lef us wih an unauhorized immigran populaion signifi-

canly larger han i should be, according o esimaes by OIS and ohersha is,

ha logical edis were no enough o sor ou he auhorized rom he unauhorized,

so he remainder o he populaion sill needed o be sored by LPR or unauhorized

saus. o assign he res, we firs deermined he probabiliy o being unauhorized

by using a echnique ha is similar o ha used by researchers a he Migraion Policy

Insiue.128

Following he very clear direcions kindly provided by hose auhors, we sared wih Wave 2 o he mos recen available Survey o Income and Program

Paricipaion, or SIPP, rom 2008, in which respondens offered answers wih regard

o wheher hey had LPR saus upon arrival or wheher hey ever achieved i laer;

hose who answered “no” o boh were considered o be unauhorized.


28/42


In our esimaion o he probabiliies, we reduced ha sample o immigrans in

wo ways. o undersand why, i is imporan o realize he purpose a hand: o

ake he esimaes o he impac o various variables on he probabiliy o being

unauhorized and apply hose o daa in he ACS. Bu recall ha he sample

o which we applied he esimaes was a sample creaed afer logical edis ha

excluded all pre-1982 immigrans and all hose likely on suden visas. Tus, wefirs dropped rom he SIPP sample he same poenial individuals, slicing he

sample down o hose who arrived afer 1980because ha is he break in he

SIPP codingand removing all oreign-born residens who arrived in he pas

five years and were currenly enrolled in undergraduae universiy or graduae

schooland so were highly likely o be on suden visas.129

Nex, we uilized a logisic regression sraegy in which he probabiliy o

being unauhorized is deermined by an equaion in which he righ-hand

side variables include gender; age; years since arrival; educaion level; marial

sauswheher never married and i married, wheher married o a U.S.-bornor nauralized ciizenwheher he responden has his or her own children in

he house; English abiliy; and several dummy variables or broad region. Tis

specificaion is based on discussion by Jennier Van Hook, James D. Bachmeier,

and heir collaboraors.130 Finally, we applied he coefficiens rom ha regres-

sionbasically, he probabiliy ha an individual could be unauhorizedo

he observaions in he pooled ACS daa.

Estimating the unauthorized: The role of country controls and undercounts

Wih probabiliies assigned o our ACS pooled daa, he nex sep in he process

was o uilize “counry conrols”a mehod also deployed by Rober Warren o

he Cener or Migraion Sudies131o ge a beter fi.132 Counry conrols essen-

ially mean adjusing he number o unauhorized immigrans in each counry o

origin o fi he oal number o unauhorized immigrans rom a given counry

ha mos observers believe o be he case. We ook advanage o he ac ha he

OIS offers a breakdown o he op 10 naions o origin o he unauhorized.133

According o he OIS, or example, here were 210,000 unauhorized immigrans

rom China in 2012, and we used his oal number o adjus our esimaes. Forhe remaining counries, we used a variey o approaches.134


29/42


More precisely, he oals we uilize are close o he OIS numbers, assuming a degree

o undercoun. Tere is a widely shared assumpion ha he unauhorized are

undercouned by around 10 percen in he decennial censusand by more in oher

samples.135 Rober Warren and John Rober Warren o he Minnesoa Populaion

Cener conend ha he undercoun migh be as high as 20 percen in recen years

because he ACS is perceived as a more volunary survey by respondens han is hecensus.136 We setled on an undercoun esimae o 12.5 percen, which recognizes

ha 10 percen is likely oo low bu also recognizes ha 20 percen is likely oo

high.137 o accoun or he undercoun, we iniially se he arges below he arge

adul numbers naion by naion so ha when we reweighed all o hose observa-

ions wih he undercoun acor, we would arrive a he correc oal number.

Assigning individual observations to legal status

From he pool o remaining individualspeople who were no idenified asLPRs during he logical ediswe hen assigned individuals in he ACS as having

eiher auhorized or unauhorized saus unil we reached he counry conrols. o

ensure ha we did no end up wih an unauhorized immigran populaion alsely

skewed younger and more male han he acual populaion as a resul o using a

sraighorward probabiliy approachsoring who we will assign by heir likeli-

hood o being unauhorizedwe adoped a more complicaed approach ha ook

ino accoun he probabiliy o being unauhorized, bu in a way ha is similar o

muliple impuaion.138

o undersand he sraegy, noe ha each individual who has no ye been

assigned o LPR saus hrough logical edis has a paricular probabiliy o being

unauhorized. We rounded hese o he second decimal and wound up wih jus

more han 60 possible groupsha is, individuals who share he same probabil-

iy o being unauhorized. Essenially, we ried o mimic he underlying probabil-

iy disribuion o he unauhorized rom each counry.

o simpliy hings or explanaory purposes, say we were o divide he pool o

poenially unauhorized people wih assigned probabiliies ino only our groups:

• Group 1: people wih a 60 percen probabiliy o being unauhorized• Group 2: people wih a 50 percen probabiliy o being unauhorized• Group 3: people wih a 20 percen probabiliy o being unauhorized• Group 4: people wih a 10 percen probabiliy o being unauhorized


30/42


How do we hen creae a sample o unauhorized immigrans rom China rom

hese our groups unil we hi he presumed counry conrol oal o 210,000?139 I

we pulled everyone rom Group 1, hen everyone rom Group 2, and so on, unil we

hi he oal, we have he problem o a biased sample, weighed oward, or example,

single men who recenly arrivedwho are likely among hose wih he highes

probabiliy o being unauhorized in our sample. A simple alernaive o ensure hasome people rom he lower-probabiliy caegories would be included is o pull ou

60 percen o people rom Group 1, 50 percen o people rom Group 2, and so on,

unil we hi he counry conrol oal. Bu his also creaes he possibiliy ha oo ew

individuals rom lower-probabiliy groups would make i ino our sample; his is less

biased han a sraighorward probabiliy pull bu sill problemaic.

o remedy his siuaion, we could sar wih hal o his sample, aking 30 percen

o people rom Group 1, 25 percen o people rom Group 2, 10 percen o people

rom Group 3, and 5 percen o people rom Group 4. I afer one roundpulling

people rom Groups 1 hrough 4 in his mannerwe sill have no hi he 210,000arge, hen we would coninue wih muliple rounds, moving rom Group 1 o

Group 4 unil we reach he argeed oal o unauhorized individuals rom China.

In pracice, wha we did was a bi more complicaed: We ollowed his procedure

or 159 naions, 60 possible probabiliy caegories, and 20 separae runs a he

daa. Bu he mos imporan poin is ha he process described above correcs

or he bias o soring by high probabiliy and more or less simulaes a muliple

impuaion procedure; hus, i is no surprise ha our numbers are relaively close

o hose o he Migraion Policy Insiue.

Wih individual aduls agged as unauhorized, we urned o youh, assigning

nonciizen, oreign-born minor children as unauhorized i one o heir wo

parens was unauhorized. Afer adding ha number o he adul coun, we made

some minor adjusmens o weighs by sae o beter fi our daa o sae oals

also available rom he OIS. We ulimaely came up wih a oal o 11,375,000

unauhorized immigrans, a bi below he 11,400,000 esimaed by he Migraion

Policy Insiue in 2014140 and he 11,430,000 esimaed by he OIS or 2012.141

Estimating the DAPA-eligible and their families

We nex moved o calculae he DAPA-eligible numbers. Here, we firs considered

he children, regardless o age, living wih an unauhorized paren. I a leas one o


31/42


he children was a ciizen or an LPR, we hen invesigaed he ime ha he paren

had been in he counry; i ha ime exceeded five years, roughly he requiremen

or DAPA eligibiliy, we assigned he paren as DAPA eligible.

Given he alignmen in erms o he more difficul par o his general proce-

dureesimaing he oal number o unauhorized residens wih a combinaiono logical edis and calculaed probabiliyi is unsurprising ha our U.S. oals

or DAPA-eligible parens are close o hose o he Migraion Policy Insiue:

We boh projec abou 3.7 million DAPA-eligible parens.142 Wih he number o

DAPA-eligible parens in hand, we can now esimae he number o individuals

wih ies o a DAPA-eligible person, hen coun he voers among hem.

We do his in wo ways. In he firs mehod, we couned based on amilies: We

assumed ha a person wih amilial ies o he DAPA-eligible individual would

be mos affeced by ha person’s ae, so we couned all amily members living in

he same household as he DAPA-eligible individualexcluding, o course, heDAPA-eligible individuals and any relaives who are hemselves DAPA eligible. o

undersand how we ideniy he amily members, noe ha a single household can

have muliple amily unis living under he same rooand an individual amily

can have subamilies, such as when an adul child lives wih a paren and has his or

her own spouse and children.

In he Inegraed Public Use Microdaa Series, or IPUMS, version o he ACS,

agging people in he firs amily uni is sraighorward because he relaionships

are very clearly specified: Te daabase idenifies he household head, a spouse,

children, children-in-law, parens, parens-in-law, siblings, siblings-in-law, grand-

children, or any oher relaives; i any o hose individuals are DAPA eligible, all

he oher members o he amily uni are agged as relaives.

Te secondand hird, ec.amily uni is more complex: IPUMS does no

generally ideniy he relaionships o people living in amilies beyond he primary

amily. And because we required a moher or aher o have a ciizen or an LPR

child o be couned as DAPA eligible, wihou hese amily relaionships, we could

no know who in hese amilies had a connecion o a DAPA-eligible individual,

and we also likely somewha undersaed wheher individuals in hose amilies were hemselves DAPA eligible.143 Forunaely, his is a small share o he oal

sample, bu i sill implies ha our numbers are likely somewha conservaive,

underagging some poenial individuals.


32/42


Tere is anoher source o downward bias in our amily relaive numbers. Because

his esimaion procedure relies on individuals who are living in he same house-

hold, relaives o DAPA-eligible immigranssuch as adul married ciizen

children o DAPA-eligible parenswho live elsewhere are no couned. On he

oher hand, when we aged our populaion o relaives o see who migh be eligible

o voe in uure years, we did no make adjusmens or moraliy or emigraion, which we did in earlier work o calculae nauralizaion scenarios.144 On balance,

we believe ha our amily relaive numbers are likely conservaive overall.

In a second mehod ha was used as a benchmark, we assumed ha oher

people living in he same householdwhich could include commited domes-

ic parners and roommaeswould also be sensiive o wha happens o he

DAPA-eligible person regardless o which amily uni hey belong. o accoun

or hese addiional individuals, we esimaed anoher se o numbers ha

included all members living in he same household as he DAPA-eligible indi-

vidual regardless o any amily ies.

While in heory, his should give a larger radius o influence o he DAPA program

ouside amily members, in pracice i does no have a large impac in regard o he

number o voers or his sudy because mos households are a single amily uni,

and many o he second amily unis are mosly nonciizen. For example, when

all he members o a household are included, we find ha here abou 7.8 percen

more DAPA-affeced individuals overall when compared wih couning jus amily

members in he household. When jus ciizens in he household are calculaed

regardless o relaions o he DAPA-eligible individual, here are only abou 2 per-

cen more ciizens in households wih a DAPA-eligible residen han ciizens who

are relaives o DAPA-eligible individuals. We chose o presen he more conserva-

ive amily relaive numbers in he ex above on he grounds ha undersaemen

is preerred o oversaemen o he poenial elecoral consequences.

Afer all he esimaion was done, we ound ha here are abou 6.2 million chil-

dren o DAPA-eligible parens, abou 5.2 million o whom are minor children.145

Tese are significan numbers, bu here are anoher 2.4 million members o he

same amily unis who are eiher spouses o he DAPA-eligible individualand

no hemselves DAPA eligibleor oher relaives. O course, or his exercise, wha really maters is no he aggregae numbers o relaives bu insead he per-

cenage who are ciizens old enough o poenially voe.


33/42


Estimating potential DAPA-affected voters and projecting their

voting power

We hen move o he crux o our sudy: How many ciizen amily members and

household memberspeople who will be waching careully how boh poliical

paries alk abou he DAPA programdo hese DAPA-eligible parens have?

Nearly all4.8 million, or 92 perceno he minor children are U.S. born and

hereore U.S. ciizens. Nearly 550,000, or 60 percen, o he adul children are

U.S. ciizensnaive born or nauralizedand abou 950,000, or 40 percen, o

he spouses and oher relaives are U.S. ciizens.

o calculae wha his number migh mean or voing power in he uure, we ook

all he ciizen relaives and household members who were a leas age 18virually

all he spouses and oher relaives, as well as all he adul children who were cii-

zensand hen also aged he young populaionhe minor ciizen childrenor- ward and added hem in o come up wih a oal number o poenial voers.

o undersand mechanically how we did his, recall ha we are essenially using

he 2011–2013 ACS as a represenaion o he populaion in November 2014,

when he DAPA policy was announced. So anyone in November 2014 who was

a ciizen, had a DAPA relaive, and was a leas 16 years oldso would be a leas

18 wo years laerwas considered o be a poenial voer in he 2016 elecion.

Similarly, anyone who was 12 and a U.S. ciizen was a poenial voer in 2020.

Finally, along wih he naional esimaes and projecions o he DAPA-affeced

voers, we also esimaed hese numbers or all saes. Ten, using daa rom Dave

Leip’s “Alas o Presidenial Elecions,”146 we compared he number o DAPA-

affeced voers wih he margins o vicories in various saes in he 2012 elecion

o projec wha percenage o his margin DAPA-affeced voers would make up in

2016 and 2020.


34/42


About the authors

Manuel Pastor is a proessor o sociology and American sudies & ehniciy a he

Universiy o Souhern Caliornia, or USC, where he also holds he urpanjian

Chair in Civil Sociey and Social Change. He currenly direcs he USC Program

or Environmenal and Regional Equiy and he Cener or he Sudy o

Immigran Inegraion, or CSII. His mos recen books are Unsetled Americans:

Meropolian Conex and Civic Leadership or Immigran Inegraion , edied wih

John Mollenkop and orhcoming rom Cornell Universiy Press; and Equiy,

Growh and Communiy: Wha he Naion Can Learn fom America’s Mero Areas , wih Chris Benner and published by Universiy o Caliornia Press in 2015.

Tom Jawetz is he Vice Presiden o Immigraion Policy a he Cener or

American Progress. He previously served as chie counsel on he Immigraion

and Border Securiy Subcommitee o he House Judiciary Commitee and as he

immigraion deenion saff atorney a he Naional Prison Projec, a par o he

American Civil Liberies Union. He holds a bachelor’s degree rom Darmouh

College and a J.D. rom Yale Law School.

Lizet Ocampo is he Associae Direcor o Immigraion Policy a he Cener. She

previously served in he Whie House and in he U.S. Congress. Ocampo has

experience in naional and sae campaigns. For he 2012 presidenial elecion

cycle, she was naional regional poliical direcor a Obama or America. She

holds a bachelor’s degree rom Sanord Universiy and a maser o ars rom he

Sanord Graduae School o Educaion.


35/42


Acknowledgments

CSII would like o hank Te James Irvine Foundaion and Te Caliornia

Endowmen or providing unding ha has buil he capaciy o carry ou his

research, as well as he Cener or American Progress or is ineres in and suppor

or his projec.

CAP would like o provide a special hank you o Jeff Krehely or his helpul direc-

ion and invaluable inpu, Silva Mahema or her exensive experise and suppor

on he mehodology, and Philip E. Wolgin or his help hroughou he process in

preparing he repor.


36/42


Endnotes

1 U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, “ExecutiveActions on Immigration,” available at http://www.uscis.gov/immigrationaction (last accessed October 2015).

2 American Immigration Council, “Only the Beginning: The Economic Potential of Executive Action on Im-migration,” March 11, 2015, available at http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/just-facts/only-beginning-economic-potential-executive-action-immigration.

3 U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, “Consider-ation of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA),”available at http://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/consideration-deferred-action-childhood-arrivals-daca (last accessed October 2015).

4 U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, “ExecutiveActions on Immigration.”

5 Michael D. Shear and Robert Pear, “Obama’s Immigra-tion Plan Could Shield Five Million,” The New York Times,November 19, 2014, available at http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/20/us/politics/obamacare-unlikely-for-undocumented-immigrants.html.

6 Silva Mathema, “Assessing the Economic Impacts ofGranting Deferred Action Through DACA and DAPA,”Center for American Progress, April 2, 2015, availableat https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigra-tion/news/2015/04/02/110045/assessing-the-econom-ic-impacts-of-granting-deferred-action-through-daca-and-dapa/.

7 Ibid.

8 Silva Mathema, “State-by-State Analysis of the Eco-nomic Impact of DACA, DAPA, and DACA Expansion,”Center for American Progress, June 15, 2015, availableat https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigra-tion/news/2015/06/15/114894/state-by-state-analysis-of-the-economic-impact-of-daca-dapa-and-daca-expansion/.

9 Manuel Pastor, Jared Sanchez, and Vanessa Carter, “TheKids Aren’t Alright - But They Could Be: The Impact of

DAPA on Children” (Los Angeles: USC Center for theStudy of Immigrant Integration, 2015), available athttp://dornsife.usc.edu/csii/dapa-impacts-children.

10 Patrick Oakford, “The Changing Face of America’sElectorate” (Washington: Center for American Progress,2015), available at https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/report/2015/01/06/101605/the-changing-face-of-americas-electorate/.

11 Memorandum from Jeh Charles Johnson to León Ro-driguez, Thomas S. Winkowski, and R . Gil Kerlikowske,“Exercising Prosecutorial Discretion with Respect toIndividuals Who Came to the United States as Childrenand with Respect to Certain Individuals Who Arethe Parents of U.S. Citizens or Permanent Residents,”November 20, 2014, available at http://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/14_1120_memo_de-ferred_action_1.pdf .

12 Memorandum from Jeh Charles Johnson to Thomas S.Winkowski and others, “Policies for the Apprehension,Detention and Removal of Undocumented Immigrants,”November 20, 2014, available at http://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/14_1120_memo_pros-ecutorial_discretion.pdf.

13 Memorandum from Johnson to Rodriguez, Winkowski,and Kerlikowske, “Exercising Prosecutorial Discretionwith Respect to Individuals Who Came to the UnitedStates as Children and with Respect to Certain Individu-als Who Are the Parents of U.S. Citizens or PermanentResidents.”

14 Migration Policy Institute, “As Many as 3.7 Million Unau-thorized Immigrants Could Get Relief from Deportationunder Anticipated New Deferred Action Program,” Pressrelease, November 19, 2014, available at http://www.migrationpolicy.org/news/mpi-many-37-million-un-authorized-immigrants-could-get-relief-deportation-under-anticipated-new. The Migration Policy Institutesubsequently amended this estimate to 3.6 million. SeeMigration Policy Institute, “Profile of the UnauthorizedPopulation: United States,” available at http://www.migrationpolicy.org/data/unauthorized-immigrant-population/state/US (last accessed November 2015).Our estimate remains 3.7 million, as explained in theMethodology section of this report.

15 Ibid.

16 Patrick Taurel, “Why DAPA Applications Were NotAccepted by USCIS Today,” Immigration Impact, May19, 2015, available at http://immigrationimpact.com/2015/05/19/why-dapa-applications-were-not-accepted-by-uscis-today/#?1#?1#WebrootPlugIn#?1#?1#PhreshPhish#?1#?1#agtpwd.

17 State of Texas v. The United States of America, Civil No.B-14-254 (Texas, 2015), available at https://www.docu-mentcloud.org/documents/1668197-hanen-opinion.html.

18 State of Texas v. The United States of America, No. 15-40238 (U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, 2015),available at http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/15/15-40238-CV0.pdf .

19 Michael D. Shear, “Obama Appeals ImmigrationRuling to Supreme Court,” The New York Times,November 10, 2015, available at http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/11/us/politics/supreme-court-immigra-

tion-obama.html?_r=0.

20 Daniel Strauss, “Florida vote count: Obama wins state,”Briefing Room, November 10, 2012, available at http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/267209-president-obama-wins-florida.

21 Dave Leip’s Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections, “UnitedStates Presidential Election Results,” available at http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/ (last accessed October2015).

22 David Boroff and Roque Planas, “Mitt Romney says hefavors ‘self-deportation’ when asked about immigrationduring GOP debate,” New York Daily News, January 24,2012, available at http://www.nydailynews.com/news/election-2012/mitt-romney-favors-self-deportation-asked-immigration-gop-debate-article-1.1010812.

23 2012 national exit polling by Edison Research and asreported by CNN. See CNN, “America’s Choice 2012:Election Center, President: Full Results,” available athttp://www.cnn.com/election/2012/results/race/president/#exit-polls (last accessed October, 2015).

24 For 2004 exit polling, see CNN, “Election Results,” avail-able at http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/US/P/00/epolls.0.html (last accessedOctober 2015).

http://www.uscis.gov/immigrationactionhttp://www.uscis.gov/immigrationactionhttp://www.immigrationpolicy.org/just-facts/only-beginning-economic-potential-executive-action-immigrationhttp://www.immigrationpolicy.org/just-facts/only-beginning-economic-potential-executive-action-immigrationhttp://www.immigrationpolicy.org/just-facts/only-beginning-economic-potential-executive-action-immigrationhttp://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/consideration-deferred-action-childhood-arrivals-dacahttp://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/consideration-deferred-action-childhood-arrivals-dacahttp://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/20/us/politics/obamacare-unlikely-for-undocumented-immigrants.htmlhttp://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/20/us/politics/obamacare-unlikely-for-undocumented-immigrants.htmlhttp://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/20/us/politics/obamacare-unlikely-for-undocumented-immigrants.htmlhttps://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/news/2015/04/02/110045/assessing-the-economic-impacts-of-granting-deferred-action-through-daca-and-dapa/https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/news/2015/04/02/110045/assessing-the-economic-impacts-of-granting-deferred-action-through-daca-and-dapa/https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/news/2015/04/02/110045/assessing-the-economic-impacts-of-granting-deferred-action-through-daca-and-dapa/https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/news/2015/04/02/110045/assessing-the-economic-impacts-of-granting-deferred-action-through-daca-and-dapa/https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/news/2015/06/15/114894/state-by-state-analysis-of-the-economic-impact-of-daca-dapa-and-daca-expansion/https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/news/2015/06/15/114894/state-by-state-analysis-of-the-economic-impact-of-daca-dapa-and-daca-expansion/https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/news/2015/06/15/114894/state-by-state-analysis-of-the-economic-impact-of-daca-dapa-and-daca-expansion/https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/news/2015/06/15/114894/state-by-state-analysis-of-the-economic-impact-of-daca-dapa-and-daca-expansion/http://dornsife.usc.edu/csii/dapa-impacts-childrenhttps://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/report/2015/01/06/101605/the-changing-face-of-americas-electorate/https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/report/2015/01/06/101605/the-changing-face-of-americas-electorate/https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/report/2015/01/06/101605/the-changing-face-of-americas-electorate/http://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/14_1120_memo_deferred_action_1.pdfhttp://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/14_1120_memo_deferred_action_1.pdfhttp://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/14_1120_memo_deferred_action_1.pdfhttp://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/14_1120_memo_prosecutorial_discretion.pdfhttp://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/14_1120_memo_prosecutorial_discretion.pdfhttp://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/14_1120_memo_prosecutorial_discretion.pdfhttp://www.migrationpolicy.org/news/mpi-many-37-million-unauthorized-immigrants-could-get-relief-deportation-under-anticipated-newhttp://www.migrationpolicy.org/news/mpi-many-37-million-unauthorized-immigrants-could-get-relief-deportation-under-anticipated-newhttp://www.migrationpolicy.org/news/mpi-many-37-million-unauthorized-immigrants-could-get-relief-deportation-under-anticipated-newhttp://www.migrationpolicy.org/news/mpi-many-37-million-unauthorized-immigrants-could-get-relief-deportation-under-anticipated-newhttp://www.migrationpolicy.org/data/unauthorized-immigrant-population/state/UShttp://www.migrationpolicy.org/data/unauthorized-immigrant-population/state/UShttp://www.migrationpolicy.org/data/unauthorized-immigrant-population/state/UShttp://immigrationimpact.com/2015/05/19/why-dapa-applications-were-not-accepted-by-uscis-today/#?1#?1#WebrootPlugIn#?1#?1#PhreshPhish#?1#?1#agtpwdhttp://immigrationimpact.com/2015/05/19/why-dapa-applications-were-not-accepted-by-uscis-today/#?1#?1#WebrootPlugIn#?1#?1#PhreshPhish#?1#?1#agtpwdhttp://immigrationimpact.com/2015/05/19/why-dapa-applications-were-not-accepted-by-uscis-today/#?1#?1#WebrootPlugIn#?1#?1#PhreshPhish#?1#?1#agtpwdhttp://immigrationimpact.com/2015/05/19/why-dapa-applications-were-not-accepted-by-uscis-today/#?1#?1#WebrootPlugIn#?1#?1#PhreshPhish#?1#?1#agtpwdhttps://www.documentcloud.org/documents/1668197-hanen-opinion.htmlhttps://www.documentcloud.org/documents/1668197-hanen-opinion.htmlhttps://www.documentcloud.org/documents/1668197-hanen-opinion.htmlhttp://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/15/15-40238-CV0.pdfhttp://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/15/15-40238-CV0.pdfhttp://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/11/us/politics/supreme-court-immigration-obama.html?_r=0http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/11/us/politics/supreme-court-immigration-obama.html?_r=0http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/11/us/politics/supreme-court-immigration-obama.html?_r=0http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/267209-president-obama-wins-floridahttp://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/267209-president-obama-wins-floridahttp://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/267209-president-obama-wins-floridahttp://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/http://www.nydailynews.com/news/election-2012/mitt-romney-favors-self-deportation-asked-immigration-gop-debate-article-1.1010812http://www.nydailynews.com/news/election-2012/mitt-romney-favors-self-deportation-asked-immigration-gop-debate-article-1.1010812http://www.nydailynews.com/news/election-2012/mitt-romney-favors-self-deportation-asked-immigration-gop-debate-article-1.1010812http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/results/race/president/#exit-pollshttp://www.cnn.com/election/2012/results/race/president/#exit-pollshttp://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/US/P/00/epolls.0.htmlhttp://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/US/P/00/epolls.0.htmlhttp://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/US/P/00/epolls.0.htmlhttp://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/US/P/00/epolls.0.htmlhttp://www.cnn.com/election/2012/results/race/president/#exit-pollshttp://www.cnn.com/election/2012/results/race/president/#exit-pollshttp://www.nydailynews.com/news/election-2012/mitt-romney-favors-self-deportation-asked-immigration-gop-debate-article-1.1010812http://www.nydailynews.com/news/election-2012/mitt-romney-favors-self-deportation-asked-immigration-gop-debate-article-1.1010812http://www.nydailynews.com/news/election-2012/mitt-romney-favors-self-deportation-asked-immigration-gop-debate-article-1.1010812http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/267209-president-obama-wins-floridahttp://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/267209-president-obama-wins-floridahttp://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/267209-president-obama-wins-floridahttp://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/11/us/politics/supreme-court-immigration-obama.html?_r=0http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/11/us/politics/supreme-court-immigration-obama.html?_r=0http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/11/us/politics/supreme-court-immigration-obama.html?_r=0http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/15/15-40238-CV0.pdfhttp://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/15/15-40238-CV0.pdfhttps://www.documentcloud.org/documents/1668197-hanen-opinion.htmlhttps://www.documentcloud.org/documents/1668197-hanen-opinion.htmlhttps://www.documentcloud.org/documents/1668197-hanen-opinion.htmlhttp://immigrationimpact.com/2015/05/19/why-dapa-applications-were-not-accepted-by-uscis-today/#?1#?1#WebrootPlugIn#?1#?1#PhreshPhish#?1#?1#agtpwdhttp://immigrationimpact.com/2015/05/19/why-dapa-applications-were-not-accepted-by-uscis-today/#?1#?1#WebrootPlugIn#?1#?1#PhreshPhish#?1#?1#agtpwdhttp://immigrationimpact.com/2015/05/19/why-dapa-applications-were-not-accepted-by-uscis-today/#?1#?1#WebrootPlugIn#?1#?1#PhreshPhish#?1#?1#agtpwdhttp://immigrationimpact.com/2015/05/19/why-dapa-applications-were-not-accepted-by-uscis-today/#?1#?1#WebrootPlugIn#?1#?1#PhreshPhish#?1#?1#agtpwdhttp://www.migrationpolicy.org/data/unauthorized-immigrant-population/state/UShttp://www.migrationpolicy.org/data/unauthorized-immigrant-population/state/UShttp://www.migrationpolicy.org/data/unauthorized-immigrant-population/state/UShttp://www.migrationpolicy.org/news/mpi-many-37-million-unauthorized-immigrants-could-get-relief-deportation-under-anticipated-newhttp://www.migrationpolicy.org/news/mpi-many-37-million-unauthorized-immigrants-could-get-relief-deportation-under-anticipated-newhttp://www.migrationpolicy.org/news/mpi-many-37-million-unauthorized-immigrants-could-get-relief-deportation-under-anticipated-newhttp://www.migrationpolicy.org/news/mpi-many-37-million-unauthorized-immigrants-could-get-relief-deportation-under-anticipated-newhttp://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/14_1120_memo_prosecutorial_discretion.pdfhttp://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/14_1120_memo_prosecutorial_discretion.pdfhttp://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/14_1120_memo_prosecutorial_discretion.pdfhttp://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/14_1120_memo_deferred_action_1.pdfhttp://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/14_1120_memo_deferred_action_1.pdfhttp://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/14_1120_memo_deferred_action_1.pdfhttps://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/report/2015/01/06/101605/the-changing-face-of-americas-electorate/https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/report/2015/01/06/101605/the-changing-face-of-americas-electorate/https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/report/2015/01/06/101605/the-changing-face-of-americas-electorate/http://dornsife.usc.edu/csii/dapa-impacts-childrenhttps://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/news/2015/06/15/114894/state-by-state-analysis-of-the-economic-impact-of-daca-dapa-and-daca-expansion/https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/news/2015/06/15/114894/state-by-state-analysis-of-the-economic-impact-of-daca-dapa-and-daca-expansion/https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/news/2015/06/15/114894/state-by-state-analysis-of-the-economic-impact-of-daca-dapa-and-daca-expansion/https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/news/2015/06/15/114894/state-by-state-analysis-of-the-economic-impact-of-daca-dapa-and-daca-expansion/https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/news/2015/04/02/110045/assessing-the-economic-impacts-of-granting-deferred-action-through-daca-and-dapa/https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/news/2015/04/02/110045/assessing-the-economic-impacts-of-granting-deferred-action-through-daca-and-dapa/https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/news/2015/04/02/110045/assessing-the-economic-impacts-of-granting-deferred-action-through-daca-and-dapa/https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/news/2015/04/02/110045/assessing-the-economic-impacts-of-granting-deferred-action-through-daca-and-dapa/http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/20/us/politics/obamacare-unlikely-for-undocumented-immigrants.htmlhttp://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/20/us/politics/obamacare-unlikely-for-undocumented-immigrants.htmlhttp://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/20/us/politics/obamacare-unlikely-for-undocumented-immigrants.htmlhttp://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/consideration-deferred-action-childhood-arrivals-dacahttp://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/consideration-deferred-action-childhood-arrivals-dacahttp://www.immigrationpolicy.org/just-facts/only-beginning-economic-potential-executive-action-immigrationhttp://www.immigrationpolicy.org/just-facts/only-beginning-economic-potential-executive-action-immigrationhttp://www.immigrationpolicy.org/just-facts/only-beginning-economic-potential-executive-action-immigrationhttp://www.uscis.gov/immigrationactionhttp://www.uscis.gov/immigrationaction


37/42


25 Latino Decisions, “Obama wins 75% of Latino vote,marks historic Latino influence in presidential election,”November 7, 2012, available at http://www.latinodeci-sions.com/blog/2012/11/07/obama-wins-75-of-latino-vote-marks-historic-latino-influence-in-presidential-election/.

26 Kim Geiger, “Asian Americans overwhelmingly backedObama, Democrats,” Los Angeles Times, November 8,2012, available at http://articles.latimes.com/2012/nov/08/news/la-pn-asian-americans-obama-elec-tion-20121108.

27 Jennifer Steinhauer, “Speaker ‘Confident’ of Deal withWhite House on Immigration,” The New York Times,November 8, 2012, available at http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/09/us/politics/boehner-confident-of-deal-with-white-house-on-immigrati

Documents

DAPA Matters