Reexamining the Effect of Racial Propositions on Latinos’ Partisanship in California

Abstract

Many seasoned politicians and scholars have attributed the loss in support for the Republican Party in California to its push for three racially divisive propositions in the mid- 1990s, especially the anti-immigrant Proposition 187. Their costs are said to involve the partisan realignment of Latinos against the Republicans. Using three separate data sources, we find no evidence of a “tipping point” or abrupt realignment among Latino registered voters who made up the electorate. Latinos’ partisanship within California did not change significantly; it did not change much when compared to nearby states; nor did voter registration change materially. The loss of support for Republicans occurred primarily among unregistered Latino voters whom historically had never been strong supporters. Our findings question the conventional wisdom about the powerful political effects of the propositions, and reaffirm the long standing conclusion in the literature that realignment due to a “critical election” is rare.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Notes

  1. 1.

    “A good immigration bill.” Bush and Mehlman. Wall Street Journal. May 31, 2007. Jeb Bush is the former Republican governor of Florida and Ken Mehlman is the former chairman of the Republican National Committee.

  2. 2.

    See HoSang (2010), Armbrusterm Geron and Bonacich (1995), Pantoja and Segura (2003) and Pantoja and Segura (2003) for more comprehensive discussion of these topics.

  3. 3.

    Figures obtained from Pew Research Center (http://www.pewhispanic.org/2013/09/23/unauthorized-trends/#California) (Accessed May 6, 2014).

  4. 4.

    http://www.scpr.org/blogs/politics/2012/08/27/9577/pete-wilson-still-smarts-187-questions/.

  5. 5.

    The Field Poll cumulative file, 1956–2008 offers a thorough discussion of the Field Poll sampling universe, method, and sample sizes (UCData 2008).

  6. 6.

    In Online Appendix Figure A-1 and Table A-1, we present the results with alternative coding for party identification. Instead of using the root three-point party identification question, we re-run our analyses with the standard Michigan seven-point party identification question. The conclusion is the same, that is, there is no evidence of an abrupt change in Latinos’ partisan identification after Proposition 187. In the Online Appendix, Table A-2, we present another model where we examine the years between 1990 and 2000. In this alternate model, 1990 is used as the baseline. The Gulf War that began in August 1990 marked the apex of President George H.W. Bush’s popularity and that year was a high water mark for the Republican Party in the state. When we use that as the baseline year for comparison, as expected, we find that GOP performed worse in subsequent years. The support for the Republican Party waned immediately after the conclusion of the war in February 1991, well before Proposition 187. In Table A-3 we test another specification by grouping the years into three discrete time periods. The coefficients do vary depending on model specification. However, in general, we find a gradual increase in support for the Democratic Party near the end of the study period, not an abrupt and drastic shift pre- and post-Prop 187. Some readers may interpret the gradual increase in the support for the Democratic Party as a “cumulative” effect of all the proposals and the changing macro political environment in the state.

  7. 7.

    We exclude Wyoming, Idaho, and Montana as these states have relatively few Hispanics. We also exclude Texas because it is far distant from California, and in some ways is as much a Southern state as a Western one, with, of course, a Confederate history. Also the state’s political environment differs significantly from California, since it has become dominated by the Republican Party in recent decades.

  8. 8.

    ICPSR studies 6102, 6520, 6989, 2780, 3527.

References

  1. Alvarez, M., & Butterfield, T. (2000). The resurgence of nativism in California? The case of Proposition 187 and illegal immigration. Social Science Quarterly, 81(1), 167–179.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Angus, C., Converse, P., Miller, W., & Stokes, D. E. (1960). The American voter. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Armbruster, R., Geron, K., & Bonacich, E. (1995). The assault on California’s Latino immigrants: The politics of Proposition 187. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 19, 655–663.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Balin, B. (2008). State immigration legislation and immigrant flows: An analysis. Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies.

  5. Barreto, M., Ramirez, R., & Woods, N. (2005). Are naturalized voters driving the California Latino electorate? Measuring the effect of IRCA citizens on Latino voting. Social Science Quarterly, 86(4), 792–811.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Barreto, M., & Woods, N. (2005). Latino voting behavior in an anti-Latino political context: The case of Los Angeles County. In G. M. Segura & S. Bowler (Eds.), Diversity in democracy: Minority representation in the United States (pp. 148–169). Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press.

  7. Birgeneau, R. (2005). How California’s Proposition 209 created a crisis in African-American higher education. Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, 47, 59–59.

  8. Bowler, S., Nicholson, S., & Segura, G. (2006). Earthquakes and aftershocks: Race, direct democracy, and partisan change. American Journal of Political Science, 50(1), 146–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Burnham, W. D. (1970). Critical elections and the mainsprings of American politics. New York: Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Campbell, A., Wong, C., & Citrin, J. (2006). Racial threat, partisan climate, and direct democracy: Contextual effects in three California initiatives. Political Behavior, 28(2), 129–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Carmines, E., & Stimson, J. (1981). Issue evolution, population replacement, and normal partisan change. American Political Science Review, 75(1), 107–118.

  12. Dyck, J., Johnson, G., & Wasson, J. (2012). A blue tide in the golden state: Ballot propositions, population change, and party identification in California. American Politics Research, 40(3), 450–475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Field Poll. (1995). A summary analysis of voting in the 1994 general election (January 1995). ISSN 0271-1095.

  14. Fiorina, M. (1981). Retrospective voting in American national elections. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Fiorina, M., & Abrams, S. (2008). Is California really a blue state? In F. Douzet, T. Kousser, & K. P. Miller (Eds.), The new political geography of California. Berkeley: Berkeley Public Policy Press, Institute of Governmental Studies, University of California.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Fiorina, M., Abrams, S., & Pope, J. (2005). Culture war?. New York: Pearson Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Frey, W. (1995). Immigration and internal migration “flight”: A California case study. Population and Environment, 16(4), 353–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Green, D., Palmquist, B., & Schickler, E. (2002). Partisan hearts and minds. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Hajnal, Z., & Lee, T. (2011). Why Americans don’t join the party: Race, immigration, and the failure (of political parties) to engage the electorate. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Hernandez, S. (1999). The life after death of Proposition 187. Black Issues in Higher Education, 16(14), 124–129.

    Google Scholar 

  21. HoSang, D. (2010). Racial propositions: Ballot initiatives and the making of postwar California. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Hui, I. (2010). Growing geographic polarization and the perpetuation of the electoral disconnect. Dissertation. University of California, Berkeley.

  23. Key, V. O. (1955). A theory of critical elections. Journal of Politics, 17(01), 3–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Key, V. O. (1959). Secular realignment and the party system. Journal of Politics, 21(02), 198–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Korey, J., & Lascher, E. (2006). Macropartisanship in California. Public Opinion Quarterly, 70, 48–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Lee, Y.-T., Ottati, V., & Hussain, I. (2001). Attitudes toward “Illegal” Immigration into the United States: California Proposition 187. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 23(4), 430–443.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Lewis-Beck, M., Norpoth, H., Jacoby, W., & Weisburg, H. (2008). The American voter revisited. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Martin, P. (1995). Proposition 187 in California. International Migration Review, 29(1), 255–263.

  29. Mayhew, D. (2002). Electoral realignments: A critique of an American genre. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Nardulli, P. (1995). The concept of a critical realignment, electoral behavior, and political change. American Political Science Review, 89(01), 10–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Nicholson, S., & Segura, G. (2005). Agenda change and the politics of Latino Partisan identification. In G. M. Segura & S. Bowler (Eds.), Diversity in democracy: Minority representation in the United States (pp. 51–71). Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Ono, K., & Sloop, J. (2002). Shifting borders: Rhetoric, immigration, and California’s Proposition 187. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Pantoja, A., Ramirez, R., & Segura, G. (2001). Citizens by choice, voters by necessity: Patterns in political mobilization by naturalized Latinos. Political Research Quarterly, 54(4), 729–750.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Pantoja, A., & Segura, G. (2003). Fear and loathing in California: Contextual threat and political sophistication among Latino voters. Political Behavior, 25(3), 265–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Pew Research Center. (2014). The shifting religious identity of Latinos in the United States. Online Report. http://www.pewforum.org/files/2014/05/Latinos-Religion-07-22-full-report.pdf.

  36. Polsby, N. (2004). How congress evolves: Social bases of institutional change. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Robinson, G., Krasno, J., Zingher, J., & Allen, M. (2016). Creating a racially polarized electorate: The political fallout of immigration politics in Arizona and California. Politics, Groups, and Identities, 4(4), 579–597.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Rubenstein, E. (2012). Remembering proposition 187. Social Contract, Winter, 3–7.

  39. Suarez-Orozco, M. (1996). California dreaming: Proposition 187 and the cultural psychology of racial and ethnic exclusion. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 27(2), 151–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Sundquist, J. (1983). Dynamics of the party system. Washington, DC: Brookings Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  41. UCData. (2008). The Field Institute/The California poll cumulative file for the years: 1956-2006. Berkeley: University of California.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Iris Hui.

Additional information

Replication materials for this paper can be found at http://stanford.edu/~irishui/PolBehaviorPR187_Replication.zip

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 95 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hui, I., Sears, D.O. Reexamining the Effect of Racial Propositions on Latinos’ Partisanship in California. Polit Behav 40, 149–174 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-017-9400-1

Download citation

Keywords

  • California
  • Racial propositions
  • Latino
  • Immigration
  • Partisan identification
  • Realignment