e Political and Civic
Engagement of Immigrants
Caroline B. Brettell
e Political and Civic
Engagement of Immigrants
Caroline B. Brettell
© 2020 by the American Academy of Arts & Sciences.
All rights reserved.
ISBN: 0-87724-131-7
is publication is available online at www.amacad.org/project/practice-democratic
-citizenship.
Suggested citation: Caroline B. Brettell, e Political and Civic Engagement of Immigrants
(Cambridge, Mass.: American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 2020).
Cover image: “e Day Without an Immigrant,” demonstration on May 1, 2006, in Los
Angeles, California, © iStock.com/elizparodi.
is paper is part of the American Academy’s Commission on the Practice of Democratic
Citizenship. e statements made and views expressed in this publication are those held by
the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the Ocers and Members of the
American Academy of Arts & Sciences.
Please direct inquiries to:
American Academy of Arts & Sciences
136 Irving Street
Cambridge, MA 02138
Telephone: 617-576-5000
Fax: 617-576-5050
Email: [email protected]rg
Web: www.amacad.org
Contents
1 Introduction
4 Inclusion and Exclusion: Rates of and Barriers to Participation
4 Latino Participation and the Latino Vote
9 Asian American Participation and the Asian American Vote
13 e Importance of Naturalization
17 e Second Generation
21 From Civic to Political Engagement: e Role of Associations
and Organizations
33 Conclusion: Solutions and Best Practices
36 About the Author
Introduction
In 2000, Robert Putnam published his inuential book, Bowling Alone: e
Collapse and Revival of American Community, in which he argued that so-
cial capital, civic engagement, and a sense of community have been on the
decline in America since the 1960s.
1
Putnam noted that participation in
social organizations and associations, which presumably fostered trust, had
diminished, and this had serious implications for the strength of democ-
racy and democratic values. As Melissa Marschall stated, Putnam’s work
addressed the question of “how and why the U.S. metamorphosized from
a model of civic virtue and social connectedness to a nation of non-voters
and non-joiners.”
2
In the ensuing years, many scholars have debated if not powerfully
challenged Putnam’s deployment of social capital as well as some of his
conclusions and policy recommendations.
3
ey have critiqued his ap-
proach for its narrow interpretation of the motivations behind associa-
tional membership and for the absence of full consideration of diversity
within the American population. Yet at the end of the second decade of
the twenty-rst century, concerns about low voter turnout and limited po-
litical engagement remain. Scholars have begun to explore alternative ex-
planatory factors for these trends while maintaining an interest in the role
of organizations and associations as civic spaces. Further, beginning in the
mid to late 1990s and continuing to the present, these broad concerns have
also resulted in research focused in particular on the political and civic
participation of immigrants and their children.
By the 1990s, many undocumented immigrants who had been able to
attain legal status as a result of the Immigration Control and Reform Act
(IRCA) of 1986 were eligible for citizenship and/or to vote. Individuals who
1. Robert Putnam, Bowling Alone: e Collapse and Revival of American Community (New
York: Simon and Schuster, 2000).
2. Melissa J. Marschall, “Robert D. Putnam, Bowling Alone: e Collapse and Revival of
American Community: Empirical Foundations, Causal Mechanisms, and Policy Impli-
cations,” in e Oxford Handbook of Classics in Public Policy Administration, ed. Martin
Lodge, Edward C. Page, and Steven J. Balla (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015), 2.
3. See Steven N. Durlauf, “Bowling Alone: A Review Essay,” Journal of Economic Behavior
and Organization 47 (2002): 259–273; and Dietlind Stolle and Marc Hooghe, “Inaccurate,
Exceptional, One-Sided or Irrelevant? e Debate about the Alleged Decline of Social Cap-
ital and Civic Engagement in Western Societies,” British Journal of Political Science 35 (1)
(2005): 149–167.
the political and civic engagement of immigrants
1
had entered the United States under the 1980 Refugee Act were also quick-
ly eligible for citizenship and the children of both these populations, oen
born in the United States, were growing to adulthood. Additionally, many
individuals who entered the United States on various student and work
visas (for example, H-1B visas) were able to adjust their status and grad-
ually move toward legal permanent residence (securing a “green card”)
and eventually citizenship.
4
In other words, all the demographic stars
were aligned to make the civic and political incorporation of immigrants
and their children an intriguing research question, not only in the United
States
5
but also in Western Europe.
6
4. Caroline B. Brettell, “Adjustment of Status, Remittances, and Return: Some Observations
on 21st Century Migration Processes,” City and Society 19 (2007): 47–59.
5. Gary Gerstle and John Mollenkopf, eds., E Pluribus Unum? Contemporary and Histori-
cal Perspectives on Immigrant Political Incorporation (New York: Russell Sage Foundation,
2001); S. Karthick Ramakrishnan, Democracy in Immigrant America: Changing Demo-
graphics and Political Participation (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2005); Janelle
Wong, Democracy’s Promise: Immigrants and American Civic Institutions (Ann Arbor, MI:
University of Michigan Press, 2006); S. Karthick Ramakrishnan and Irene Bloemraad, “In-
troduction: Civic and Political Inequalities,” in Civic Hopes and Political Realities: Immi-
grants, Community Organizations and Political Engagement, ed. S. Karthick Ramakrishnan
and Irene Bloemraad (New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 2008), 1–44; Jennifer Hoch-
schild, Jacqueline Chattopadhyay, Claudine Gay, and Michael Jones-Correa, eds., Outsiders
No More: Models of Immigrant Political Incorporation (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
2013); and Mary Waters and Marisa Gerstein Pineau, e Integration of Immigrants into
American Society (Washington, D.C.: e National Academies of Sciences, 2015), chap. 4.
6. Meindert Fennema and Jean Tillie, “Political Participation and Political Trust in Amster-
dam: Civic Communities and Ethnic Networks,” Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 25
(1999): 703–726; Dirk Jacobs, Karen Phalet, and Marc Swyngedouw, “Associational Mem-
bership and Political Involvement Among Ethnic Minority Groups in Brussels,” Journal of
Ethnic and Migration Studies 30 (3) (2004): 543–559; Jean Tillie, “Social Capital of Organi-
zations and eir Members: Explaining the Political Integration of Immigrants in Amster-
dam,” Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 30 (2004): 529–541; omas Huddleston, Mi-
grant Political Participation: A Review of Policies and Integration Results in the OSCE Region
(Warsaw: Oce for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, 2017), https://www.osce.
org/odihr/367936?download=true; and Katia Pilati and Laura Morales, “Civic and Politi-
cal Engagement by Immigrant-Background Minorities in Traditional and New Destination
European Cities,” in e Politics of New Immigrant Destinations—Transatlantic Perspectives,
ed. Stefanie Chambers, Diana Evans, Anthony M. Messina, and Abigail Fisher Williamson
(Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2017), 277–299.
caroline b. brettell
2
is research paper oers a review of some of the major ndings and
conclusions of this literature.
7
Given the diversity of the population of im-
migrants and their children, this review is by no means exhaustive. is
paper does, however, attempt to capture the most signicant dimensions
of the debates surrounding the political and civic engagement of immi-
grants. Where appropriate I have introduced some material from two focus
groups that I conducted in the Dallas area, one with individuals of Chinese
origin and one with individuals of Asian Indian background. e partici-
pants in each group, most of whom were over age y and had been in the
United States for some time, were naturalized citizens, although there was
someone in the Indian group who was of the second generation.
e paper is divided into four sections. e rst section introduces
the data on rates of participation in the political sphere within the broad
categories of Latino and Asian populations, as well as particular barriers
to such participation. e second section explores the signicance of the
process of naturalization. e third section addresses the civic and political
participation of the second generation: the children of immigrants who are
American citizens by birth and hence do not confront the naturalization
barrier. e nal section addresses, in particular, the role of voluntary or-
ganizations and faith-based institutions in fostering the civic and political
integration and engagement of immigrant populations.
7. I am grateful to Dr. Josh Dorfman for his assistance in identifying some of the crucial
bibliography for this paper. Josh defended his dissertation in November of 2018 and his
Ph.D. was conferred by Southern Methodist University in December of 2018. I am also
grateful to Nestor Rodrigues, Roberto Suro, and Michael Jones-Correa for oering leads
and providing comments in the form of personal communications. Finally, I want to thank
for their invaluable comments and assistance the expert reviewers at the American Acad-
emy as well as the Academy sta (particularly Darshan Goux), who supported the work of
the Commission on the Practice of Democratic Citizenship.
the political and civic engagement of immigrants
3
Inclusion and Exclusion: Rates
of and Barriers to Participation
Of paramount concern in the literature under review is the question of wheth-
er the rates of political participation and civic engagement (in the form of vol-
unteerism and other activities within both private and public spheres) among
immigrants are lower than those of native-born individuals, and if so, what
are the barriers to participation that immigrants, in particular, confront.
8
In
general terms, these barriers vary according to stage of immigration and set-
tlement (with factors of age and time of entry being important) as well as by
legal and socioeconomic status. As suggested to this author by immigration
scholar Nestor Rodrigues,
9
at one end of the continuum are undocumented
migrants who are employed in low-income jobs and living in daily fear of
deportation. eir primary concern is simply to work and survive; they are
hardly focused on issues of civic and political engagement. It is generally le
to their children, those who are either born in or who have for the most part
grown up in the United States and who have both more familiarity with the
system and a command of the English language, to become more engaged.
At the other pole of the continuum are those who have entered the country
legally, who are highly educated, and who are employed in high-end profes-
sional occupations (as engineers, medical doctors, scientists, etc.). ey may
be involved in professional association activities that lead them to civic/polit-
ical engagement or they are personally motivated to participate in the public
sphere. ey have a good understanding of what is at stake, no matter what
end of the political spectrum (liberal to conservative) they situate themselves.
Latino Participation and the Latino Vote
In research on questions of inclusion/exclusion in the civic and political
spheres, scholars have either focused on Latino populations
10
or on Asian
8. Loretta E. Bass and Lynne M. Casper, “Dierences in Registering and Voting Between
Native-Born and Naturalized Americans,” Population Research and Policy Review 20 (2001):
483–511.
9. Private communication with Nestor Rodrigues.
10. In this paper I use the word Latino rather than Latinx to be consistent with the language
that is used in the actual publications being discussed.
caroline b. brettell
4
populations, although some have made comparisons across or within these
broad categories. According to data from the Pew Research Center, 29 mil-
lion Latinos were eligible to vote in 2016—constituting 12 percent of all eli-
gible voters.
11
However, consistently since 1996 fewer Latinos vote than are
eligible to vote—in the 2016 presidential election slightly less than 50 per-
cent voted. In 2018, a higher turnout midterm election for all populations
by comparison with midterms of the recent past, voter participation for
Latinos rose to 40.4 percent in comparison with 57.5 percent for Whites
and 51.4 percent for Blacks. For Latinos this represented an increase of 6.8
million, almost double the number of Latino voters in the 2014 midterms.
Further, Latino voters made up 11 percent of all voters across the country, a
proportion that corresponded quite closely to their share of the U.S. eligible
voter population (U.S. citizens who are eighteen years of age and older).
12
e cumulated research on Latinos over the past few decades conrms
that this population is both less likely to naturalize by comparison with
immigrants of Asian and European backgrounds and also less likely to
vote than native-born citizens.
13
As Michael Jones-Correa has observed, in
studies of the political participation of Latinos, emphasis has been placed
on a series of individual characteristics—such as age, education, income,
marital status, and linguistic competence.
14
Not unexpectedly, research-
11. Jens M. Krogstad, “Key Facts about the Latino Vote in 2016,” Pew Research Center, http://
www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/10/14/key-facts-about-the-Latino-vote-in-2016/.
12. It is important to note that these are broad rates that do not take variations, such as edu-
cation and income, into account. A ne-tuned analysis might yield more similarities across
populations at similar incomes or educational levels. See Jens Krogstad, Luis Noe-Bustamante,
and Antonio Flores, “Historic Highs in 2018 Voter Turnout Extended Across Racial and Ethnic
Groups,” Pew Research Center, 2019, https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/05/01/
historic-highs-in-2018-voter-turnout-extended-across-racial-and-ethnic-groups/.
13. See, for example, Rodolfo de la Garza, Louis DeSipio, F. Chris Garcia, John Garcia, and
Angelo Falcon, Latino Voices: Mexican, Puerto Rican and Cuban Perspectives on American
Politics (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1992); Michael Jones-Correa, Between Two Nations:
e Political Predicament of Latinos in New York City (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press,
1998); Michael Jones-Correa, “Institutional and Contextual Factors in Immigrant Natural-
ization and Voting,” Citizenship Studies 5 (1) (2001): 41–56; Christine Marie Sierra, Teresa
Carrillo, Louis DeSipio, and Michael Jones-Correa, “Latino Immigration and Citizenship,”
PS: Political Science and Politics 33 (3) (2000): 535–540; S. Karthick Ramakrishnan and
omas Epenshade, “Immigrant Incorporation and Political Participation in the United
States,” International Migration Review 35 (3) (2001): 870–909; Matt A. Barreto and José A.
Muñoz, “Reexamining the ‘Politics of In-Between’: Political Participation Among Mexican
Immigrants in the United States,” Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences 25 (4) (2003):
427–447; F. Chris Garcia and Gabriel Sanchez, Hispanics and the U.S. Political System: Mov-
ing into the Mainstream (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2008); and Lisa García
Bedolla, Latino Politics, 2nd ed. (Malden, MA: Polity Press, 2014).
14. Jones-Correa, “Institutional and Contextual Factors in Immigrant Naturalization and
Vo t in g .”
the political and civic engagement of immigrants
5
ers generally nd that higher levels of education and income and greater
English-language abilities are strongly correlated with naturalization, as
is length of stay in the country.
15
However, Jones-Correa equally identi-
es some contextual factors that create barriers to naturalization and par-
ticipation—such as the cost and requirements for naturalization and the
complex rules for registration and voting that could aect immigrants in
disproportionate ways in comparison with native-born populations. Addi-
tionally, discrimination and anti-immigrant legislation can suppress par-
ticipation (individuals are fearful of drawing attention to their families,
some of whom might be undocumented) or they can occasionally galva-
nize and mobilize it,
16
while opportunities for dual nationality (primarily
provided by sending countries) can encourage naturalization and by ex-
tension participation.
In a personal communication, Roberto Suro also emphasized the role
of geography—that Latinos, both immigrants and their descendants, may
feel that they only have an impact (i.e., their vote counts) in states where
they are a critical mass (California, Texas, New York, Florida), but as the
Pew Research Center points out, these are oen non-battleground states
and hence the impact on presidential elections may be less important.
17
Alternatively, certain state environments are more politically charged than
others and therefore may mobilize communities to become engaged.
18
In
a study drawing on data from a three-state survey (California, Texas,
15. See also Ramakrishnan and Epenshade, “Immigrant Incorporation and Political Par-
ticipation in the United States.”
16. Deborah J. Schildkraut, “e Rise and Fall of Political Engagement among Latinos:
e Role of Identity and Perceptions of Discrimination,” Political Behavior 27 (3) (2005):
285–312; Adrian D. Pantoja, Cecilia Menjívar, and Lisa Magaña, “e Spring Marches of
2006: Latinos, Immigration and Political Mobilization in the 21st Century,” American Be-
havioral Scientist 52 (4) (2008): 499–506; and Jonathan Benjamin-Alvarado, Louis DeSipio,
and Celeste Montoya, “Latino Mobilization in New Immigrant Destinations: e Anti—HR
4437 Protest in Nebraska’s Cities,” Urban Aairs Review 44 (5) (2009): 718–735.
17. Krogstad, “Key Facts about the Latino Vote in 2016.” Additionally, some researchers
have emphasized city-level dierences as an important contextual factor, with some cities
being more decentralized and hence oering greater opportunities within their political
structures for immigrant participation. See Roger Waldinger, Still the Promised City? Afri-
can-Americans and New Immigrants in Postindustrial New York (Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press, 1996). is “city as context” approach—see Caroline B. Brettell, “Bringing
the City Back In: Cities as Context for Immigrant Incorporation,” in American Arrivals:
Anthropology Engages the New Immigration, ed. Nancy Foner (Santa Fe: School of American
Research, 2003), 163–195—merits further investigation. What, for example, is the impact
of being a sanctuary city (positive or negative) or a city that has implemented an “Oce of
Welcoming Communities” on civic and political engagement?
18. Matt A. Barreto, “Latino Immigrants at the Polls: Foreign-Born Voter Turnout in the
2002 Election,” Political Research Quarterly 58 (1) (2005): 79–86.
caroline b. brettell
6
Florida) conducted by the Tomas Rivera Policy Institute in 1997 (follow-
ing the 1996 national election), Adrian Pantoja and coauthors compared
the turnout of naturalized and native-born Latino citizens.
19
eir results
demonstrated the impact of wedge issues targeting Latino immigrants on
political participation. Further, the analysis shows that newly naturalized
Latinos turned out to vote at higher rates than other Latino citizens of Cal-
ifornia, as well as Latinos in Florida or Texas—they are, as the title of the
article suggests, “citizens by choice and voters by necessity.”
More recent Pew Research Center data conrm these assessments of
more than two decades ago,
20
demonstrating that in 2016, among Hispan-
ics as well as Asians, the voter turnout of naturalized citizens was higher
than that of the U.S. born, although overall—i.e., across all populations—
the U.S. born were more likely to vote.
21
See Table 1.
22
is dierence between the naturalized and the native born held
during the 2018 midterms, reecting some important trends that might
be useful to political parties who want to engage these populations further
(see Table 2).
According to an article published in e Los Angeles Times,
23
many of
the undocumented children of immigrants (known as Dreamers) worked
hard in 2018 to turn out the vote in the Latino communities around Los
Angeles.
24
e article quotes a study conducted by Latino Decisions, a po-
litical research rm, indicating that Latino voter turnout was the key factor
19. Adrian D. Pantoja, Ricardo Ramirez, and Gary M. Segura, “Citizens by Choice, Voters
by Necessity: Patterns in Political Mobilization by Naturalized Latinos,” Political Research
Quarterly 54 (4) (2001): 729–750.
20. Pew Research Center, “Voter Turnout of Naturalized Citizens,” 2017, http://www
.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/05/12/black-voter-turnout-fell-in-2016-even-as-a-record
-number-of-americans-cast-ballots/_17-05-10_voter-turnout_naturalized/.
21. e dierence in the overall population appears to be consistent with results of two
decades ago. Drawing on 1996 data, Loretta Bass and Lynne Casper report that, net of oth-
er factors, naturalized citizens are less likely to vote than the U.S.-born. Bass and Casper,
“Dierences in Registering and Voting Between Native-Born and Naturalized Americans.”
22. is form of comparison has been made recently by Ruoxi Li and Bradley Jones, albeit
between those who moved to the United States at a young age versus those who moved at
an older age. See Ruoxi Li and Bradley M. Jones, “Why Do Immigrants Participate in Pol-
itics Less than Native-Born Citizens? A Formative Years Explanation,” e Journal of Race,
Ethnicity and Politics 4 (3) (2019): 1–30.
23. Jazmine Ulloa, “In the Home of the Dream Act, Young Immigrants Came out in Force on
a Personal Quest to Flip Control of the House,” e Los Angeles Times, January 1, 2019, https://
www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-midterm-elections-dreamers-20190101-story.html.
24. For a similar account in the Houston area, see Elizabeth Trovall, “Unable to Vote,
Dreamers Take Immigration Issues to the People Who Can,” Houston Chronicle, September
13, 2018.
the political and civic engagement of immigrants
7
in ipping six GOP-held congressional seats in California. However, re-
search by Lisa García Bedolla and Melissa Michelson shows that while “Get
Out the Vote” initiatives result in higher turnout among U.S.-born Latinos,
it has no measurable eect on Latino naturalized citizens.
25
Curiously, they
found the opposite to be true among Asian Americans.
Among other contextual factors impacting voter participation are state
regulations that impose registration cutos before the election or that drop
voters from the rolls for not voting, both of which foster less impetus to
naturalize and vote. Interestingly, S. Karthick Ramakrishnan and om-
as Epenshade found that having ballots in Spanish does not necessarily
ensure higher voting among rst-generation Latinos, and that proximity
to co-ethnics has weak eects on voting participation (with the exception
of three or more generations of Asian Americans).
26
ey also found that
prior political experience with repressive regimes (in a country of origin)
has no consistent eect on voting participation, although others have ar-
gued to the contrary, noting that country of origin can have an impact on
25. Lisa García Bedolla and Melissa R. Michelson, “Mobilization by Dierent Means: Nativ-
ity and GOTV in the United States,” International Migration Review 48 (3) (2014): 710–727.
26. Ramakrishnan and Epenshade, “Immigrant Incorporation and Political Participation
in the United States.”
Table 1. Voter Turnout of Naturalized and Native-Born Citizens, 2016
Total Population Hispanics Asians
U.S. Born: 62.1% U.S. Born: 45.5% U.S. Born: 44.9%
Naturalized: 54.3% Naturalized: 53.4% Naturalized: 51.9%
Source: Pew Research Center, Voter Turnout of Naturalized Citizens, 2017, http://www
.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/05/12/black-voter-turnout-fell-in-2016-even-as-a
-record-number-of-americans-cast-ballots/_17-05-10_voter-turnout_naturalized/.
Table 2. Voter Turnout of Naturalized and Native-Born Citizens, 2018
Total Population Hispanics Asians
U.S. Born: 54.2% U.S. Born: 39.0% U.S. Born: 36.7%
Naturalized: 45.7% Naturalized: 44.2.4% Naturalized: 42.7%
Source: Jens Krogstad, Luis Noe-Bustamante, and Antonio Flores, “Historic Highs in 2018
Voter Turnout Extended Across Racial and Ethnic Groups,” Pew Research Center, 2019,
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/05/01/historic-highs-in-2018-voter-turnout
-extended-across-racial-and-ethnic-groups/.
caroline b. brettell
8
citizenship acquisition and voter turnout.
27
For some immigrant popula-
tions (those who came as refugees or who are political asylees), exercising
a political voice or even stating that they are politically involved still raises
fears because of previous homeland experiences.
28
While most scholars have been examining barriers to participation,
there is a small body of scholarship that looks at what might foster engage-
ment—hence the interest alluded to above with ballots in multiple languag-
es. Other variables have also been explored. For example, Gilbert Mireles has
found that immigrant farmworkers in Washington State who own their own
homes display higher rates of both social and political participation than
do those who rent.
29
Homeownership, he argues, “serves to anchor recent
immigrants to their host communities and facilitates the integration of these
individuals into those communities.”
30
Additionally, knowledge of mobiliz-
ing factors provides a better understanding of how to enhance greater po-
litical participation. Adrian Pantoja and colleagues, focusing on the lessons
learned from the 2006 marches, highlight the role of technology, social net-
works, Spanish language media, families, churches, unions, and advocacy
groups.
31
ey suggest that protest or “non-traditional” politics should be
considered as “key dimensions of how politically marginalized groups can
participate in the political arena, and such politics are a central resource for
these groups.” e open question is whether such activities turn into votes—
the outcomes of some races in 2018 suggest that they can, but that mobi-
lizing the vote around particular issues, using all the mechanisms that are
available, including Spanish language media, is equally important.
Asian American Participation and the
Asian American Vote
In recent years, studies of Asian immigration and of Asian American vot-
er participation have expanded signicantly, indicating that scholars have
recognized that this is one of the fastest growing segments of the electorate
27. See Catherine S. Bueker, “Political Incorporation among Immigrants from Ten Areas
of Origin: e Persistence of Source Country Eects,” International Migration Review 39
(1) (2005): 103–140.
28. I am grateful to the anonymous reviewer of this paper for drawing this point to my
attention.
29. Gilbert F. Mireles, “e Eects of Homeownership on Civic Participation among Im-
migrant Farmworkers in Washington State,” Rural Sociology 82 (1) (2017): 129–148.
30. Ibid., 145.
31. Pantoja, Menjívar, and Magaña, “e Spring Marches of 2006: Latinos, Immigration
and Political Mobilization in the 21st Century,” 504.
the political and civic engagement of immigrants
9
and a segment that is very highly educated with high incomes.
32
Pei-te
Lien and Janelle Wong are two of the most prolic scholars writing about
the political participation of Asian Americans.
33
eir research demon-
strates that the rate of naturalization for Asian immigrants is higher than
for most other groups (Cubans are an exception) and that Asian vot-
er turnout has been higher in comparison to that of Latinos, similar to
that of non-Hispanic Whites in midterm elections, and lower than that of
non-Hispanic Whites in presidential election years.
34
In general, the voter
turnout among Asian Americans in 2016 was 49 percent compared with 64
percent for non-Hispanic Whites and 66 percent for African Americans.
However, as the 2018 Asian American Voter Survey indicates,
35
on
average the number of Asian American registered voters has increased
by 850,000 every four years since 2000, and the voter turnout rate in the
2018 midterm election increased to approximately 40 percent of all eligi-
ble Asian American voters—almost a 13 percent increase from the 2014
midterms.
36
One news report has described this as a “coming of age” for
this population
37
—a population that comprises 6 percent of the total U.S.
population (15 percent in California) according to the U.S. Census, and a
population that estimates indicate will comprise a little over 5 percent of
32. Jane Junn, Taeku Lee, S. Karthick Ramakrishnan, and Janelle Wong, Asian Americans
and the 2008 Election, National Asian American Survey, October 6, 2008.
33. See Pei-te Lien, “Ethnicity and Political Participation: A Comparison between Asian and
Mexican Americans,” Political Behavior 16 (2) (1994): 237–264; Pei-te Lien, Christian Collet,
Janelle Wong, and S. Karthick Ramakrishnan, “Asian Pacic-American Public Opinion and
Political Participation,” PS: Political Science and Politics 34 (3) (2001): 625–630; Pei-te Lien,
M. Margaret Conway, and Janelle Wong, e Politics of Asian Americans: Diversity and Com-
munity (New York: Routledge, 2004); Wong, Democracy’s Promise: Immigrants and Ameri-
can Civic Institutions; Janelle Wong, S. Karthick Ramakrishnan, Taeku Lee, and Jane Junn,
Asian American Political Participation: Emerging Constituents and eir Political Identities
(New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 2011); and Tritia Toyota, Envisioning America: New
Chinese Americans and the Politics of Belonging (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2010).
34. Lien, Collet, Wong, and Ramakrishnan, “Asian Pacic-American Public Opinion and
Political Participation,” 625.
35. Civic Leadership USA, “2018 Asian American Voter Survey,” 2018, http://aapidata.com/
wp-content/uploads/2018/10/2018-AA-Voter-Survey-report-Oct9.pdf.
36. Krogstad, Noe-Bustamante, and Flores, “Historic Highs in 2018 Voter Turnout Extend-
ed Across Racial and Ethnic Groups.”
37. Mythili Sampathkumar, “Midterms 2018: How Asian American voters are ‘coming of
age’ this election cycle, especially in ‘red’ states,” e Independent, November 5, 2018, https://
www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/midterms-2018/us-midterm
-elections-asian-american-voters-polls-democrats-republican-vote-states-a8619171.html.
caroline b. brettell
10
the 2020 electorate.
38
Like Latinos, Asian Americans were mobilized by
the highly charged anti-immigrant tone of 2018. Adam Nagourney and
Robert Gebelo reported on the impact of immigrants in ipping four
Republican congressional seats in Orange County, California.
39
A young
Vietnamese woman is quoted as saying, “ere are so many of us here and
that is what is contributing to these changes.” e Vietnamese population
was galvanized by the Trump administration’s attempt to deport Vietnam
War refugees. Not only are these districts more diverse, they also have be-
come better educated and have higher household incomes. Voter turnout
increased and many second-generation Asians, unlike their parents, tend-
ed to vote Democratic in relation to critical issues of immigration, educa-
tion, and health care.
ere are, of course, important variations within the “Asian” category,
with Vietnamese and Koreans demonstrating lower rates of registration
and voting than, for example, Japanese Americans, who have the highest
rate. Further, Vietnamese and Chinese individuals tend to identify more
with the Republican Party than do other Asian groups. Jun Xu, drawing
on Current Population Survey (CPS) data between 1994 and 2000, explores
some of the “intra-Asian” dierences, nding, for example, that socioeco-
nomic explanations do not help in understanding dierences in partici-
pation of Whites and Asians.
40
Xu also found that the positive eect of
education on voting is more limited for Asian Americans than for Whites.
He focuses on registration issues as a powerful hurdle and explanation for
dierent patterns of participation between Asian Americans and Whites.
“In general, immigrants are much less likely to register and thereby to vote
than native-born individuals do.”
41
Others, seeing a great deal of potential
in this population, link low voter turnout not only to language barriers
(which makes navigating the election process challenging) but also to the
fact that politicians make little eort at outreach to Asian groups.
42
is
38. David Byler, “Politicians Oen Overlook Asian American Voters. ey Shouldn’t Es-
pecially in 2020,” e Washington Post, July 10, 2019, https://www.washingtonpost.com/
opinions/2019/07/10/politicians-often-overlook-asian-american-voters-they-shouldnt
-especially/.
39. Adam Nagourney and Robert Gebelo, “Cultural Shis Sweep Away a California Bas-
tion of Conservatism,” e New York Times, December 31, 2018, A1, A15.
40. Jun Xu, “Why Do Minorities Participate Less? e Eects of Immigration, Education
and Electoral Process on Asian American Voter Registration and Turnout,” Social Science
Research 34 (2005): 682–702.
41. Ibid., 697.
42. Caitlin Kim, “Why Asian Americans Don’t Vote,” New America Weekly, September 7,
2017, https://www.newamerica.org/weekly/edition-175/why-asian-americans-dont-vote/.
the political and civic engagement of immigrants
11
was one of the important suggestions made by some of the participants in
the two Asian-origin population focus groups that were conducted in con-
nection with the preparation of this research paper: that candidates should
come to speak to them on their own turf, under the auspices of the ethnic
community organizations in which they feel comfortable.
Pei-te Lien and colleagues also note some dierences in how Asian pop-
ulations engage with the political process, being more likely to contact the
media and other ocials or to focus on solving community problems than
to donate to campaigns—again with variations within the broad “Asian”
category.
43
While the variables that explain rates of participation for oth-
er groups (for example, socioeconomic factors, language skills, length of
stay in the United States, etc.) are also important to consider in relation to
Asians, those who study Asian Americans also point to contextual factors
such as ethnic group concentration; thus, there is greater voter turnout in
states with higher numbers of elected ocials from ethnic groups (Hawaii,
California).
44
Jane Junn and colleagues note that for the Asian American
electorate, the ethnic language media is an important source of informa-
tion, although as mentioned above, they are contacted less by political par-
ties than by other groups.
45
ese researchers also found that participa-
tion in home country politics does not deter involvement in politics in the
United States, and that those who were involved in homeland politics are
slightly more likely to vote than those who are not.
e impact of these transnational connections is also taken up by the
authors who contributed to Christian Collet and Pei-te Lien’s edited vol-
ume on Asian American politics.
46
e volume oers a very useful over-
view of the changing patterns of political participation by this population
since the 1980s. While I have more to say below about the signicance of
transnational social elds to the civic and political engagement of immi-
grants, it is important to emphasize here that, as the twenty-rst century
unfolds, we are witnessing increased political engagement for both Asian
and Latino populations in the United States (of naturalized citizens as well
as their American-born children who are progressively becoming eligible
to vote).
43. Lien, Conway, and Wong, e Politics of Asian Americans: Diversity and Community.
44. Lien, Collet, Wong, and Ramakrishnan, “Asian Pacic-American Public Opinion and
Political Participation,” 628.
45. Junn, Lee, Ramakrishnan, and Wong, Asian Americans and the 2008 Election.
46. Christian Collet and Pei-te Lien, eds., e Transnational Politics of Asian Americans
(Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2009).
caroline b. brettell
12
e Importance of
Naturalization
Clearly, at the heart of many of these discussions of the civic and political
engagement of immigrants is the issue of naturalization, not only in terms
of access to the political sphere but also in encouraging or emboldening
people to use the voice that citizenship aords them. e cost and length
of time that characterize the naturalization process can act as a barrier for
low-income applicants,
47
while the fear of passing the language and civic
knowledge exam is perceived as an obstacle for those with low education
or limited language prociency. Figuring out how to register to vote is also
a problem. While some scholars argue that one can be involved in poli-
tics without being a citizen,
48
or that involving non-citizen immigrants in
public debates about local issues (a citizenship of practice rather than just
judicial status) is an important foundation for political incorporation in
the future,
49
others argue forcefully that naturalization/citizenship is vital
to full participation—i.e., that this should be the primary end goal. Irene
Bloemraad and Alicia Sheares conclude that empirical evidence, albeit
limited, “suggests that naturalized immigrants are more politically active
than noncitizen immigrants, and that foreign-born citizens participate
47. Jens Hainmueller, Duncan Lawrence, Justin Gest, Michael Hotard, Rey Koslowski, and
David D. Laitin, “A Randomized Controlled Design Reveals Barriers to Citizenship for
Low-Income Immigrants,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 115 (5) (2018):
939–944.
48. Barreto and Muñoz, “Reexamining the ‘Politics of In-Between’: Political Participation
Among Mexican Immigrants in the United States.” Clearly the best example we have is the
Dreamer population, who have become politically active and put themselves at risk because
they are undocumented. Many of these young people only discovered their status as they
graduated from high school. See Roberto G. Gonzales and Leo R. Chavez, “Awakening to a
Nightmare: Abjectivity and Illegality in the Lives of Undocumented 1.5-Generation Latino
Immigrants in the United States,” Current Anthropology 53 (3) (2012): 255–281.
49. Lisa García Bedolla, “Noncitizen Voting and Immigrant Political Engagement in the
United States,” in Transforming Politics, Transforming America: e Political and Civic Incor-
poration of Immigrants in the United States, ed. Taeku Lee, S. Karthick Ramakrishnan, and
Ricardo Ramirez (Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2006), 51–70.
the political and civic engagement of immigrants
13
somewhat less or about the same as native-born citizens, with variation by
country of origin and country of residence.”
50
It is worth noting that the work of political sociologist Irene Bloem-
raad on this topic is both insightful and innovative. In her book Becoming
a Citizen, she compares the acquisition of citizenship and well as rates of
political participation in the United States and Canada, focusing on popu-
lations of Vietnamese and Portuguese origins.
51
She argues that Canada’s
ocial policy of multiculturalism and integration facilitates greater immi-
grant political incorporation. She also examines the role of community or-
ganizations in facilitating the political and civic visibility and inuence of
immigrants, an issue I return to below. Bloemraad oers a comprehensive
model of structured mobilization, arguing that political incorporation is a
social process of mobilization by family, friends, local leaders, and commu-
nity organizations. is process is embedded in “an institutional context
shaped by government policies of diversity and newcomer settlement.”
52
is suggests that reforms aimed at achieving greater participation should
work from both the bottom up and the top down and that truly compre-
hensive immigration reform should include community-level projects of
integration and incorporation into civic and political life.
53
Above all, the importance of naturalization and citizenship to civic and
political inclusion has led U.S. scholars to rearm (in what is today a con-
tested issue) the signicance of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution
to supporting birthright citizenship. But as Mary Waters and Marisa Pi-
neau observe, from a comparative perspective,
naturalization rates in the United States lag behind other coun-
tries that receive substantial numbers of immigrants. e overall
level of citizenship among working age immigrants (15–64 years
old) who have been living in the United States for at least 10 years
is 50 percent. Aer adjustments to account for the undocument-
ed population in the United States, a group that is barred by law
50. Irene Bloemraad and Alicia Sheares, “Understanding Membership in a World of Global
Migration: (How) Does Citizenship Matter?” International Migration Review 51 (4) (2017): 848.
51. Irene Bloemraad, Becoming a Citizen: Incorporating Immigrants and Refugees in the
United States and Canada (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2006); and Irene
Bloemraad, “Becoming a Citizen in the United States and Canada: Structured Mobilization
and Immigrant Political Incorporation,” Social Forces 85 (2) (2006): 667–695.
52. Bloemraad, “Becoming a Citizen in the United States and Canada: Structured Mobili-
zation and Immigrant Political Incorporation,” 667.
53. See also Els de Graauw and Irene Bloemraad, “Working Together: Building Successful
Policy and Program Partnerships for Immigrant Integration,” Journal of Migration and Hu-
man Security 5 (1) (2017): 105–123.
caroline b. brettell
14
from citizenship, the naturalization rate among U.S. immigrants
rises slightly but is still well below many European countries and
far lower than other traditional receiving countries such as Aus-
tralia and Canada. is is surprising since the vast majority of
immigrants, when surveyed, report a strong desire to become a
U.S. citizen.
54
e authors argue that the greatest barrier to higher naturalization
rates is less an absence of interest or the challenges of bureaucracy than
“the process by which individuals translate their motivation to naturalize
into action.” In general, scholars are troubled by the dearth of clear expla-
nations for low naturalization rates although they acknowledge, as Roberto
Suro did,
55
that those who have travelled farther to come to the United
States have higher rates than those who come from neighboring countries
(such as Mexico and Canada) and who may remain involved in the civic
and political life of their home countries as an alternative.
Donald Kerwin and Robert Warren provide a recent entry into this
debate.
56
ey demonstrate a powerful connection between naturalization
and the integration and success of immigrants. ey outline numerous ef-
forts on the part of the Trump administration to make access to naturaliza-
tion more dicult, and they suggest that eliminating birthright citizenship
would “create a permanent class of U.S.-born denizens in the future.”
57
In
other words, increasing barriers to political and civic belonging is harmful
to the country in the long run. us, they recommend that the adminis-
tration “devise policies that help rather than harm immigrant families, and
that reect the American values of fairness, generosity, and inclusion.”
58
Newcomers are integrated into American civil and political society
through naturalization. Indeed, an important point made by participants
in the two Asian population focus groups was that they perhaps knew
more about the U.S. Constitution and the structures and institutions of
the government than the native-born population precisely because they
54. Waters and Pineau, e Integration of Immigrants into American Society, 10–11.
55. Personal communication with Roberto Suro.
56. Donald Kerwin and Robert Warren, “Putting American First: A Statistical Case for
Encouraging Rather than Impeding and Devaluing U.S. Citizenship,” Journal of Migration
and Human Security 7 (4) (2019): 1–15.
57. Ibid., 1. As recently as November 2019, the Trump administration proposed raising
the fees for citizenship by more than 80 percent. is is just one action taken by the Trump
administration to make the naturalization process more dicult.
58. Kerwin and Warren, “Putting American First: A Statistical Case for Encouraging Rath-
er than Impeding and Devaluing U.S. Citizenship,” 10.
the political and civic engagement of immigrants
15
had studied to become citizens. ese individuals articulated clearly their
responsibilities as citizens, including the obligation to vote, to obey the law,
and to “give back.” eir comments alone help to explain the higher partic-
ipation rates for naturalized citizens by comparison with the native born.
e focus group participants also stressed the importance of more civic
education in school, education that would give young people the same
training they had as they studied to pass the citizenship test.
caroline b. brettell
16
e Second Generation
If naturalization is one of the most challenging barriers to political partic-
ipation for the immigrant generation, what about the children of immi-
grants—the so-called second generation who are born U.S. citizens?
59
By
the late 1990s, migration scholars began to turn their attention to this pop-
ulation, and particularly to the dimensions of their integration.
60
However,
only a small portion of this work has focused on issues of second-generation
civic and political engagement, oen linking these processes with issues of
identity
61
and exploring variations according to race, class, and/or ethnic
background.
62
A good deal of this research is based on data that are now a
decade or more old and certainly should be updated to reect the changing
composition of the millennial generation who are now of voting age.
59. e term 1.5 generation refers to the children of immigrants who were born elsewhere
but entered the United States at a young age; most “Dreamers” belong to this category.
60. See Alejandro Portes and Rubén G. Rumbaut, Legacies: e Story of the Immigrant Sec-
ond Generation (Berkeley: University of California Press; New York: Russell Sage Foun-
dation, 2001); Rubén G. Rumbaut and Alejandro Portes, eds., Ethnicities: Children of
Immigrants in America (Berkeley: University of California Press; New York: Russell Sage
Foundation, 2001); Peggy Levitt and Mary C. Waters, e Changing Face of Home: e
Transnational Lives of the Second Generation (New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 2002);
Philip Kasinitz, John H. Mollenkopf, and Mary C. Waters, eds., Becoming New Yorkers: Eth-
nographies of the New Second Generation (New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 2004); Philip
Kasinitz, John H. Mollenkopf, Mary C. Waters, and Jennifer Holdaway, Inheriting the City:
e Children of Immigrants Come of Age (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; New
York: Russell Sage Foundation, 2008); Jennifer Lee and Min Zhou, Asian American Youth
(New York and London: Routledge, 2004); C. Suárez-Orozco, M. G. Hernández, and S. Ca-
sanova, “‘It’s Sort of My Calling’: e Civic Engagement and Social Responsibility of Latino
Immigrant-Origin Young Adults,” Research in Human Development 12 (1–2) (2015): 84–99;
Hinda Seif, “e Civic Education and Engagement of Latina/o Youth: Challenging Bound-
aries and Creating Safe Spaces,” Paper Series on Latino Immigrant Civic Participation, no.
5, Woodrow Wilson Center, 2009; Richard Alba and Mary C. Waters, eds., e Next Gener-
ation: Immigrant Youth in a Comparative Perspective (New York: New York University Press,
2011); and Faith G. Nibbs and Caroline B. Brettell, eds., Identity and the Second Generation:
How Children of Immigrants Find their Space (Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press, 2016).
61. Alex Stepick and Carol Dutton Stepick, “Becoming American, Constructing Ethnici-
ty: Immigrant Youth and Civic Engagement,” Applied Developmental Science 6 (4) (2002):
246–257; and Lene Arnett Jensen, “Immigrants’ Cultural Identities as Sources of Civic En-
gagement,” Applied Developmental Science 12 (2) (2008): 74–83.
62. John Mollenkopf, Jennifer Holdaway, Philip Kasinitz, and Mary Waters, “Politics
Among Young Adults in New York: e Immigrant Second Generation,” in Transforming
Politics, Transforming America: e Political and Civic Incorporation of Immigrants in the
United States, ed. Lee, Ramakrishnan, and Ramirez, 175–193.
the political and civic engagement of immigrants
17
Some of the research focus on the civic engagement of the second gen-
eration explores the impact of participation in particular school-based or
community-based youth organizations, reecting broader and more gen-
eralized concerns about the impact of K-12 civic education programs. For
example, drawing on an ethnographic study of a program for Vietnamese
youth in Philadelphia, Rand Quinn and Chi Nguyen show how a particu-
lar organization (referred to as “Homeward Bound”) closes the civic em-
powerment gap by preparing these young people to navigate the political
dynamics of their local communities and to work cooperatively and pro-
ductively across dierent communities.
63
Similarly, John Mollenkopf and
colleagues found that for the second generation being “involved in insti-
tutions that tie the individual to the larger society around them promotes
political engagement.”
64
In a study of Asian American youth, Laura Wray-Lake and colleagues
nd that Asian American students who are stereotypically portrayed as
too involved in academics to be civically and/or politically engaged are in
fact highly engaged civically in a way that is oen linked to what they are
studying.
65
Parissa Ballard and colleagues reveal that there are more sim-
ilarities than dierences in what motivates Asian and Latino youth across
immigrant backgrounds to become involved in political and non-political
volunteerism.
66
ey suggest that this may be because the developmental
similarities in civic motivation are more powerful than the demographic
dierences. Context, including the educational context, seems to matter.
A similar question about variations in volunteerism (civic engage-
ment) by race and ethnicity has also been explored by Hiromi Ishizawa
using the 2002 Educational Longitudinal Study.
67
His results show that
rst- and second-generation Hispanic youth are less likely to volun-
teer than third or more generation Whites and that the dierences are
63. Rand Quinn and Chi Nguyen, “Immigrant Youth Organizing as Civic Preparation,”
American Educational Research Journal 54 (5) (2017): 972–1005.
64. Mollenkopf, Holdaway, Kasinitz, and Waters, “Politics Among Young Adults in New
York: e Immigrant Second Generation,” 190.
65. Laura Wray-Lake, Julia Tang, and Christine Victorino, “Are ey Political? Examining
Asian American College Students’ Civic Engagement,” Asian American Journal of Psychol-
ogy 8 (1) (2017): 31–42. See also Laura Wray-Lake, Wendy M. Rote, Taveesha Gupta, Erin
Godfrey, and Selcuk Sirin, “Examining Correlates of Civic Engagement among Immigrant
Adolescents in the United States,” Research in Human Development 12 (12) (2015): 10–27.
66. Parissa J. Ballard, Heather Malin, Tenelle J. Porter, Anne Colby, and William Damon,
“Motivations for Civic Participation Among Diverse Youth: More Similarities than Dier-
ences,” Research in Human Development 12 (1–2) (2015): 63–83.
67. Hiromi Ishizawa, “Civic Participation through Volunteerism among Youth across Im-
migrant Generations,” Sociological Perspectives 58 (2) (2015): 264–285.
caroline b. brettell
18
accounted for by lower family socioeconomic status, the degree of parents’
civic participation, involvement in extracurricular activities, and enroll-
ment in postsecondary institutions. Interestingly, higher volunteerism is
associated with having non-English-language speaking parents. And nal-
ly, there is an immigrant advantage for rst-generation Hispanic youth and
a second-generation advantage among Asian youth, suggesting that dier-
ent dynamics are at play for each of these populations.
What is apparent examining this body of research is that there is sig-
nicant variation in the second-generation population and that more work
must be done to sort out important sociological and cultural dierences
behind rates of civic engagement. Few have examined how civic engage-
ment may translate into or correlate with political engagement. What is un-
deniable, however, is the signicance of this population as a “barometer for
the future of democracy.”
68
Constance Flanagan and Peter Levine point out
that a spring 2006 national survey (conducted when major protests were
being organized against anti-immigrant legislation in many cities across
the United States) showed that 23 percent of immigrant youth and 18 per-
cent of the children of immigrant parents indicated that they had been
involved in a protest in the previous year as compared with the children
of native-born parents, who reported a protest rate of just 10 percent.
69
Mark Lopez and Karlo Marcelo, utilizing a 2006 Civic and Political Health
National Survey, demonstrate that on most measures young immigrants
report lower levels of civic engagement in comparison with natives.
70
But
many of the dierences are eliminated aer controlling for demographic
factors. By contrast, the children of immigrant parents report levels of civic
engagement that either match or exceed those of natives.
68. Constance Flanagan and Peter Levine, “Civic Engagement and the Transition to Adult-
hood,” e Future of Children 20 (1) (2010): 159. A recent study on the “millennial gener-
ation”—see William Frey, e Millennial Generation: A Demographic Bridge to America’s
Diverse Future (Washington, D.C.: e Brookings Institution, 2018)—reinforces this point
about the “barometer of future democracy” by noting that this is the most diverse gener-
ation in U.S. history. Clearly immigration has contributed to this diversity. Among this
group may be those of the 1.5 generation who have managed to become legal: either as
dependents of parents who entered legally and have naturalized, or they have been able to
gain legal status in other ways. For an analysis of immigrant youth and civic engagement,
see Seif, “e Civic Education and Engagement of Latina/o Youth.”
69. Flanagan and Levine, “Civic Engagement and the Transition to Adulthood,” 164; see
also Pantoja, Menjívar, and Magaña, “e Spring Marches of 2006: Latinos, Immigration
and Political Mobilization in the 21st Century.”
70. Mark Hugo Lopez and Karlo Barrios Marcelo, “e Civic Engagement of Immigrant
Youth: New Evidence from the 2006 Civic and Political Health of the Nation Survey,” Ap-
plied Development Science 12 (2) (2008): 66–73.
the political and civic engagement of immigrants
19
Mobilization around a cause is as important to the children of immi-
grants as it is to the native born—as seen by the engagement of young peo-
ple around gun control aer the shootings at the Marjory Stoneman Doug-
las High School in Parkland, Florida. Based on research among immigrant
youth in Miami, Florida, Alex Stepick and colleagues have observed that
the children of immigrant backgrounds focus their civic engagement ac-
tivities on helping other immigrants, something for which they can draw
on their bilingual skills.
71
Further, and like native minorities, these youth
also become actively involved in politics in response to discrimination. Ca-
rola Suárez-Orozco and colleagues identify awareness of unfair treatment,
along with social responsibility and the desire to create social change as
three drivers for the engagement of Latino immigrant-origin young adults
in the civic sphere. As a young Dominican woman who came to the United
States at age thirteen indicated to these researchers, she is motivated by
“ings that I care for. ey’re . . . something personal to me in one way
or another where I feel some sort of attachment. It is not an obligation but
more like I want to do [these things] . . . [ey make] me feel better. . . . It’s
sort of my calling.”
72
As Flanagan and Levine have observed,
Immigrant youth engage in a wide array of civic activities, work-
ing in faith-based groups and using their bilingual skills to assist
fellow immigrants as translators and tutors. Comparisons of na-
tionally representative studies of foreign-born, second-generation,
and native-born seventh through twelh graders reveal that new
immigrants are just as likely as any of their contemporaries to
embrace core American political values and to engage in volun-
teerism. Further, once socioeconomic dierences are taken into
account, immigrant youth are as likely, or almost as likely, as their
native-born peers to be engaged in most conventional forms of
civic participation.
73
71. Alex Stepick, Carol Dutton Stepick, and Yvan Labissiere, “South Florida’s Immigrant
Youth and Civic Engagement: Major Engagement, Minor Dierences,” Applied Develop-
ment Science 12 (2) (2008): 57–65.
72. Suárez-Orozco, Hernández, and Casanova, “‘It’s Sort of My Calling’: e Civic Engage-
ment and Social Responsibility of Latino Immigrant-Origin Young Adults,” 90.
73. Flanagan and Levine, “Civic Engagement and the Transition to Adulthood,” 164.
caroline b. brettell
20
From Civic to Political
Engagement: e Role
of Associations and
Organizations
e organizational or associational context may be as important for the
immigrant generation as it is for their children. In research that has drawn
both a good deal of attention as well as critical debate, Sidney Verba, Kay
Schlozman, and Henry Brady argued more than twenty years ago that par-
ticipation in community organizations as well as civic volunteerism can
serve as an important foundation for a form of “good citizenship” that
can then be extended into broader political participation and incorpora-
tion.
74
e basis of this argument is in Robert Putnam’s work, revolving
around ideas that involvement in associations fosters habits of solidarity,
public-spiritedness, empathy for and trust of others, and the ability to co-
operate with others.
75
is emphasis on the signicance of civic engagement is also discussed
by Cli Zukin and colleagues, who identify “a subtle but important remix-
ing of the ways in which U.S. citizens participate in public life. is new
mix,” they argue, “has privileged civic engagement over more tradition-
al forms of political engagement such as voting, and focuses on civil and
corporate organizations rather than government institutions as the central
arenas for public action.” e future of democratic citizenship in the Unit-
ed States, they assert, is “likely to be more civic than political.”
76
74. Sidney Verba, Kay Lehman Schlozman, and Henry E. Brady, Voice and Equality: Civic
Voluntarism in American Politics (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995); see
also Hui Li and Jiasheng Zhang, “How Do Civic Associations Foster Political Participation?
e Role of Scope and Intensity of Organizational Involvement,” Non-Prot Political Forum
8 (1) (2017): 3–24.
75. Robert Putnam, Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy (Princeton:
Princeton University Press, 1993); and Putnam, Bowling Alone: e Collapse and Revival of
American Community.
76. Cli Zukin, Scott Keeter, Molly Andolina, Krista Jenkins, and Michael X. Delli Carpini,
A New Engagement? Political Participation, Civic Life, and the Changing American Citizen-
ship (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006).
the political and civic engagement of immigrants
21
ese authors go on to ask if engagement in civic life is politics by
other means and whether engagement in civic activities leads to more tra-
ditional political engagement.
77
Based on a survey they conducted, they
come to the conclusion that for most, civic engagement is neither a path-
way to nor a substitute for political engagement. is is a commentary on
the U.S. population writ large. But what about the immigrant population,
in particular, the new Americans?
One of the earliest projects to raise the question of how civic and po-
litical engagement is connected within immigrant communities emerged
from the Washington Area Partnership for Immigrants in a report titled
Lessons Learned About Civic Participation Among Immigrants.
78
e re-
port argues that restricting the focus of attention on voter registration and
citizenship (in its legal sense) can be limiting because engaging legal per-
manent residents may be equally as important. Further it suggests that re-
stricting the denition of civic participation to political activity diminishes
the importance of involvement in more local issues and activities, which
may be critical dimensions of civic education. e report identied myr-
iad ways in which civic participation among immigrants was happening,
oen within their own organizations rather than within mainstream or-
ganizations and institutions. Within immigrant community organizations
information is shared, social support is delivered, and contributions are
made to the larger society. Further, the social networks that are built within
these organizations can provide the foundation for processes of mobili-
zation around issues of interest. e primary conclusion of this report is
that we should be looking at participation at dierent levels and over time,
depending on the degree of integration of one population or another.
In the ensuing years since this early study, the transition from civic to
political engagement, and particularly the role of associations in this pro-
cess, has increasingly captured the attention of migration scholars.
79
ey
ask whether the engagements with nonpolitical institutions that one nds
77. Ibid., 193.
78. Washington Area Partnership for Immigrants Community Foundation for the Nation-
al Capital Region (and the Association for the Study and Development of Community),
2002 Lessons Learned About Civic Participation Among Immigrants, September 2002, http://
www.racialequitytools.org/resourceles/washingtonarea.pdf.
79. Wong, Democracy’s Promise: Immigrants and American Civic Institutions; Ramakrish-
nan and Bloemraad, eds., Civic Hopes and Political Realities: Immigrants, Community Orga-
nizations and Political Engagement; Garcia and Sanchez, Hispanics and the U.S. Political Sys-
tem: Moving into the Mainstream; S. Karthick Ramakrishnan and Celia Viramontes, “Civic
Spaces: Mexican Hometown Associations and Immigrant Participation,” Journal of Social
Issues 66 (1) (2010): 155–173; and Kathleen M. Coll, Remaking Citizenship: Latina Immi-
grants and New American Politics (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2010).
caroline b. brettell
22
within immigrant communities can have consequences for activism and
politics.
80
Conversely, can we attribute the low levels of political partici-
pation among foreign-born Latinos to their lack of involvement in com-
munity associations, in which civic skills can be developed or are other
items, which are discussed earlier in this paper, much stronger explanatory
factors? As Ramakrishnan has asked, do “group disparities in civic volun-
tarism . . . lead to continued inequalities in political participation over the
long term”?
81
One of the most important volumes on this topic in recent years
emerged from a conference sponsored by the Russell Sage Foundation.
e book, Civic Hopes and Political Realities,
82
evaluates the potential for
immigrant community organizations to have political impact at the local
level. Conceptually, the authors in the book draw on measures of politi-
cal visibility (are public ocials aware of these immigrant organizations)
and political weight (is there any recognition of the political signicance
of these organizations and are their interests considered). Visibility and
weight can be impacted by particular places (what is the size of the host
city and of the immigrant populations, is there an immigrant business
sector, are there local political representatives of immigrant background),
the national origins of the immigrant population that has developed the
organization, and the kind of organization it is—a religious institution, a
cultural group, a nonprot, etc. In places where there is an active business
sector, immigrant organizations have greater visibility; the same is true in
places where local and state-level policies are hostile to immigrants, there-
by galvanizing some immigrant populations to act (protest, resist, etc.) in
the context of the organizations they have formed. Certainly some of the
authors argue that these organizations as civic spaces with political poten-
tial have more impact at the local level than at the national level, but this
may depend on the type of organization and whether it fosters, for exam-
ple, bonding or bridging social capital.
83
80. Hochschild, Gay, and Jones-Correa, eds., Outsiders No More: Models of Immigrant Po-
litical Incorporation, 15.
81. S. Karthick Ramakrishnan, “Race, Immigrant Incorporation, and Civic Voluntarism in
the United States,” in Transforming Politics, Transforming America: e Political and Civic
Incorporation of Immigrants in the United States, ed. Lee, Ramakrishnan, and Ramirez, 243.
82. Ramakrishnan and Bloemraad, eds., Civic Hopes and Political Realities: Immigrants,
Community Organizations and Political Engagement.
83. Caroline B. Brettell, “Voluntary Organizations, Social Capital, and the Social Incorpo-
ration of Asian Indian Immigrants in the Dallas–Fort Worth Metroplex,” Anthropological
Quarterly 78 (2005): 821–851.
the political and civic engagement of immigrants
23
It is impossible to do justice to the contributions that this volume
makes as it explores whether “the civic paths of immigrant participants
lead to greater visibility and inuence in politics or whether such hopes
dissipate in the face of political stratication.”
84
Not only does it oer a
useful analytical framework but it also provides a host of case studies that
emphasize dierent dimensions of the relationship between civic and po-
litical engagement. For example, Kristi Anderson argues in her chapter,
based on an analysis of organizations in six dierent cities in the United
States, that immigrant community organizations are not a good substitute
for the political parties of the past in mobilizing immigrants to partici-
pate in politics.
85
In another chapter, based on research among Indian and
Chinese immigrants in Edison, New Jersey, Sofya Aptekar argues that im-
migrants are largely ignored by a deeply entrenched Democratic political
machine, despite their high human capital.
86
By contrast, and somewhat
surprisingly, Laurencio Sanguino, based on research among Latinos in
Chicago, shows that this population has a stronger political presence than
Indians or Poles, which can be explained by the depth of their presence
in the city and their early institution-building.
87
Els de Graauw oers an
analysis of the role of 501(c) (3) nonprot organizations in the process of
immigrant political incorporation. She argues that these organizations “not
only facilitate the political participation of individual immigrants . . . but
also function as independent actors in local politics advancing the collec-
tive interests of the immigrant community. Immigrants’ political skills and
resources foster immigrants’ political interest, and mobilize immigrants’
civic and political participation.”
88
While the outcome evidence presented in this volume is varied, the ed-
itors emphasize that organizations do matter, that they can ll a space that
political parties have tended to ignore (and presumably should not ignore
moving forward), and that they can play a role in the process of political
84. Ibid., 3.
85. Kristi Andersen, “Parties, Organizations, and Political Incorporation: Immigrants in
Six U.S. Cities,” in Civic Hopes and Political Realities: Immigrants, Community Organizations
and Political Engagement, ed. Ramakrishnan and Bloemraad, 77–106.
86. Sofya Aptekar, “Highly Skilled but Unwelcome in Politics: Asian Indians and Chinese
in a New Jersey Suburb,” in Civic Hopes and Political Realities: Immigrants, Community Or-
ganizations and Political Engagement, ed. Ramakrishnan and Bloemraad, 222–243.
87. Laurencio Sanguino, “Selective Service: Indians, Poles, and Mexicans in Chicago,” in
Civic Hopes and Political Realities: Immigrants, Community Organizations and Political En-
gagement, ed. Ramakrishnan and Bloemraad, 244.
88. Els de Graauw, “Nonprot Organizations: Agents of Immigrant Political Incorporation
in Urban America,” in Civic Hopes and Political Realities: Immigrants, Community Organi-
zations and Political Engagement, ed. Ramakrishnan and Bloemraad, 324.
caroline b. brettell
24
incorporation, although that is sometimes a role that is constrained. As
they assert, “immigrant civic organizations have the potential to be ve-
hicles of political engagement, but that much of that power depends on
their ability to build wide-ranging coalitions with mainstream and ethnic
organizations, to draw on assistance from government and private sourc-
es, to create federated structures to harness the positive returns to home-
land participation, and to take advantage of political events that facilitate
organizing.”
89
In a somewhat dierent approach, Caroline Brettell and Deborah
Reed-Danahay, based on ethnographic research with Asian Indian and
Vietnamese immigrants in the Dallas–Fort Worth metropolitan area,
highlight a community of practice model, arguing that this model focus-
es attention on processes by which, and the contexts within which, im-
migrant newcomers learn civic skills that can then eventually extend into
the political sphere.
90
ey argue that conceptualizing the civic sphere in
terms of communities of practice oers a more dynamic approach to the
development of participatory citizenship than does the social capital ap-
proach to civic engagement.
91
eir approach is, of course, predicated on
a more expansive denition of citizenship. eir book includes an analysis
of a range of communities of practice, ethnic associations, religious assem-
blies, cultural festivals and pan-Asian banquets, as well as the pathways to
more formal participation. As they participate in these activities, immi-
grant newcomers gain greater civic and political visibility and can draw
the attention of political candidates who speak at their community events.
e focus on religious assemblies in particular as arenas for developing
skills of civic participation has attracted the attention of a host of other
89. Ramakrishnan and Bloemraad, Civic Hopes and Political Realities: Immigrants, Com-
munity Organizations and Political Engagement, 35.
90. Caroline B. Brettell and Deborah Reed-Danahay, Civic Engagements: e Citizenship
Practices of Indian and Vietnamese Immigrants (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press,
2012).
91. Ibid., 9.
the political and civic engagement of immigrants
25
researchers.
92
Much of this research nds a positive correlation between
participation in religious assemblies and greater civic engagement (expres-
sions of good citizenship in perhaps a dierent way from the responsibili-
ties of voting, etc.) although the link to broader political engagement is not
always established.
While there is some concern that religious institutions promote ethnic
particularism and hence are not places that foster greater social and politi-
cal incorporation, recent research has argued that these dimensions are not
mutually exclusive. For example, Michael Foley and Dean Hoge demon-
strate that religious congregations not only provide services but also foster
community involvement, and they nurture civic skills that are transferable
to other contexts.
93
is is precisely what Christina Mora nds in her study
of a Mexican immigrant Catholic parish that oers pathways to greater
civic participation.
94
e parish creates spaces (in the form of formalized
prayer groups) where individuals acquire not only new skills and resources
but also build social networks and develop “cultural scripts” about civic
engagement and volunteerism.
95
In addition, the parish oers connections
to other secular organizations that help participants to become more aware
of broader civic debates as well as provide them with opportunities for vol-
unteering and political participation.
In a somewhat dierent approach, Itay Greenspan and colleagues
identify several dierent motivations among rst-generation immigrants
92. Fred Kniss and Paul D. Numrich, Sacred Assemblies and Civic Engagement: How Reli-
gion Matters for America’s Newest Immigrants (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press,
2007); Wendy Cadge and Elaine Howard Ecklund, “Immigration and Religion,” Annual
Review of Sociology 33 (2007): 359–379; Elaine H. Ecklund and Jerry Z. Park, “Religious
Diversity and Community Volunteerism among Asian Americans,” Journal for the Scientic
Study of Religion 46 (2) (2007): 233–244; Michael W. Foley and Dean R. Hoge, Religion
and the New Immigrants: How Faith Communities Shape Our Newest Citizens (New York:
Oxford University Press, 2007); Peggy Levitt, “Religion as a Path to Civic Engagement,”
Ethnic and Racial Studies 31 (4) (2008): 766–791; Janelle Wong, Kathy Rim, and Haven
Perez, “Protestant Churches and Conservative Politics: Latinos and Asians in the United
States,” in Civic Hopes and Political Realities: Immigrants, Community Organizations and
Political Engagement, ed. Ramakrishnan and Bloemraad, 271–299; Alex Stepick, Terry Rey,
and Sarah J. Mahler, Churches and Charity in the Immigrant City: Religion, Immigration and
Civic Engagement in Miami (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 2009); and Brettell
and Reed-Danahay, Civic Engagements: e Citizenship Practices of Indian and Vietnamese
Immigrants.
93. Foley and Hoge, Religion and the New Immigrants: How Faith Communities Shape Our
Newest Citizens.
94. G. Christina Mora, “Religion and the Organizational Context of Immigrant Civic
Engagement: Mexican Catholicism in the USA,” Ethnic and Racial Studies 36 (11) (2013):
1647–1665.
95. Ibid., 1648.
caroline b. brettell
26
within religious congregations for volunteerism and civic engagement: re-
ligious beliefs, social inuence, and the benets of enhanced human and
social capital.
96
ey found that the rst motivation ranked highest and
enhanced human capital the least. ey also found marked dierences be-
tween recent and established immigrants, with the former group empha-
sizing social capital and inuence more than the latter group.
Other studies have identied forms of religio-political activism with-
in immigrant faith-based organizations. In their study of a religious con-
gregation, Immanuel Presbyterian Church, and a community-organizing
network, the Salvadoran American National Association, in Los Angeles,
Stephanie Kotin and colleagues show how religion promotes and sustains
political engagement not only on behalf of but also with immigrants who
are primarily of Latino origin.
97
e authors suggest that more attention
should be paid within these contexts to enhance the naturalization of im-
migrants and the participation rates of new citizens. Marion Coddou ex-
plores the role of faith-based institutions in mobilizing Latinos for the 2006
immigrant rights protests.
98
She sees these organizations as a powerful
structural mechanism impacting the political involvement of immigrants,
particularly those who are disadvantaged economically. Prema Kurien fo-
cuses her attention on how the dierences between immigrants and their
children shape processes of civic engagement in Indian Christian congre-
gations.
99
ese two generations hold quite distinct understandings not
only of Christian worship, but also of evangelism, social outreach, and the
interrelationships among them.
It is important to note that not all the ndings in this broad body of
research on community organizations and religious assemblies are consis-
tent, leaving the answer to the question of whether civic engagement leads
to political engagement an open one. For example, Carol Zabin and Luis
96. Itay Greenspan, Jill Witmer Sinha, and Femida Handy, “e Road to Volunteering is
Paved with Good Intentions: Volunteering in Immigrant Congregations as a Response to
Religious, Social and Instrumental Motivations,” e International Journal of Volunteer Ad-
ministration 28 (2) (2011): 1–17; and Jill Witmer Sinha, Itay Greenspan, and Femida Handy,
“Volunteering and Civic Participation Among Immigrant Members of Ethnic Congrega-
tions: Complementary NOT Competitive,” Journal of Civil Society 7 (1) (2011): 23–40.
97. Stephanie Kotin, Grace R. Dyrness, and Clara Irazábal, “Immigration and Integration:
Religious and Political Activism for/with Immigrants in Los Angeles,” Progress in Develop-
ment Studies 11 (4) (2011): 263–284.
98. Marion Coddou, “An Institutional Approach to Collective Action: Evidence from
Faith-Based Latino Mobilization in the 2006 Immigrant Rights Protests,” Social Problems
63 (2016): 127–150.
99. Prema Kurien, “Religion, Social Incorporation, and Civic Engagement: Second-Gener-
ation Indian American Christians,” Review of Religious Research 55 (2013): 81–104.
the political and civic engagement of immigrants
27
Escala, examining the participation of Mexican immigrants in metropoli-
tan Los Angeles in Hometown Associations (HTAs), argue that despite the
galvanization of members of these organizations in the face of Proposition
187, for the most part HTAs remain primarily circumscribed to Mexican
spheres, oering social support in the United States and fostering philan-
thropic work in Mexico rather than serving as fertile ground for political
activity.
100
ey do note, however, that HTAs have the potential to be im-
portant locations for immigrant political empowerment.
Zabin and Escala’s work draws attention to a much larger corpus of
literature on Hometown Associations and other immigrant communi-
ty organizations that engage in transnational work. Samuel Huntington
saw such organizations as a threat to American civil society because they
perpetuated the identication of immigrants with their homelands rather
than with the United States.
101
us, scholars who have taken up this is-
sue pose the empirical question of whether transnational practices within
organizations hinder or enhance the political integration of immigrants in
the United States.
In an early exploration of this question, Anna Karpathakis, based on
research among Greek immigrants in New York City, argued that home
country issues can become a rallying point for involvement in the political
process and institutions of the United States.
102
A similar conclusion was
drawn by Louis De Sipio and colleagues based on research among Domin-
icans, Mexicans, Salvadorans, and Puerto Ricans:
e expanding opportunities for migrants to be involved in the
electoral politics of their sending countries does appear to have
an independent eect on their perceptions of long-term connec-
tion to the United States and, in more cases than not, speeds it.
Involvement in these activities reduces respondents’ evaluations
of the likelihood of their staying in the United States permanently.
At the same time, this one form of home country engagement is
balanced by perceptions of inuence. Migrants who perceive they
have equal or more inuence in the United States see their futures
100. Carol Zabin and Luis Escala, “From Civic Association to Political Participation: Mex-
ican Hometown Associations and Mexican Immigrant Political Empowerment in Los An-
geles,” Frontera Norte 14 (27) (2002): 7–42.
101. Samuel P. Huntington, e Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of the World Order
(New York: Simon and Schuster, 1996).
102. Anna Karpathakis, “Home Society Politics and Immigrant Political Incorporation:
e Case of Greek Immigrants in New York City,” International Migration Review 33 (1)
(1999): 55–78.
caroline b. brettell
28
here unlike those who perceive that their inuence is primarily in
the sending country.
103
Alejandro Portes and colleagues have explored this question among
Mexican, Dominican, and Colombian migrants and their research reveals
that there is little conict between political incorporation and transnation-
al activism.
104
In fact, they found that most of the organizations within
these immigrant communities have mixed activities, some of them domes-
tic and some of them transnational. A particularly intriguing nding is
that those organizations with both more educated and a better-established
membership were more likely to be pro-integration and to be involved
in both civic and political activities. Furthermore, they found variations
among the three groups, with Dominicans and Mexicans being more in-
volved than Colombians, which they attribute to a process of depolitici-
zation in their home country for the latter group. Here the issue of what
kind of political culture immigrants bring with them is important. And in
a dierent twist, Adrian Pantoja, in research on Dominicans in New York
City, found that while transnational ties may encourage political participa-
tion other than voting, they may either depress or have no impact on natu-
ralization.
105
Pantoja suggests that the greatest impact of transnational ties
may be on those political activities that have “no eligibility requirement”
(citizenship or registration). But this too suggests that building on such
activities and then redirecting them toward completing eligibility—natu-
ralizing, registering to vote, and voting—may have positive outcomes for
greater political participation. Such positive outcomes are identied by Ju-
dith Borucho and colleagues in their research on Latinos in Chicago.
106
It is in the context of Hometown Associations and other community or-
ganizations that individuals become aware of political issues and develop
their own sense of agency as activists in both sending and host societies.
ese authors conclude that, “Viewed from a transnational perspective,
103. Louis De Sipio, “Transnational Politics and Civic Engagement: Do Home Country
Political Ties Limit Latino Immigrant Pursuit of U.S. Civic Engagement and Citizenship?”
in Transforming Politics, Transforming America: e Political and Civic Incorporation of Im-
migrants in the United States, ed. Lee, Ramakrishnan, and Ramirez, 123–124.
104. Alejandro Portes, Cristina Escobar, and Renelinda Arana, “Bridging the Gap: Trans-
national and Ethnic Organizations in the Political Incorporation of Immigrants in the Unit-
ed States,” Ethnic and Racial Studies 31 (6) (2008): 1056–1090.
105. Adrian D. Pantoja, “Transnational Ties and Immigrant Political Incorporation: e
Case of Dominicans in Washington Heights, New York,” International Migration Review 43
(4) (2005): 140.
106. Judith Borucho et al., Latino Immigrants in the Windy City: New Trends in Civic
Engagement, Reports on Latino Immigrant Civic Engagement, no. 6 (Washington, D.C.:
Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, 2010).
the political and civic engagement of immigrants
29
migrants’ continued participation in civic and political processes in their
native land is not at odds with integration in their destination country; in
fact, engagement in one of these arenas may enhance participants’ ecacy
in the other.”
107
e role of transnational associations in fostering civic and political
engagement has been equally of interest to scholars of Asian American
civic and political engagement.
108
Jane Junn and colleagues found that
among Asian Americans, those who were involved in homeland politics
were in fact slightly more likely to vote than those who were not (73–67
percent), and that in general involvement in homeland politics did not
deter or detract from involvement in U.S. politics.
109
Hiroko Furuya and
Christian Collet have explored the emergence of Saigon nationalism in the
United States.
110
ey describe social and fraternal groups, “such as the
Vietnamese Community of Southern California (VCSC), who provided
support services to newly arriving Vietnamese. Frequently, however, they
would organize activities and rituals (such as festivals commemorating Tet,
the lunar new year) that in one way or another turned political—invoking
memories of the lost nation of South Vietnam and fostering anger toward
the CPV.”
111
ese authors observe that few Vietnamese during the early
years of their presence in the United States became citizens or registered
to vote; they viewed focusing on the liberation of Vietnam as their pri-
mary duty so that they could return home to a democratic Vietnam. But
when President Clinton opened Vietnam, the attention of the Vietnamese
community in the United States turned to U.S. political engagement; in
1992, Tony Lam, of Vietnamese origin, won a seat on the City Council of
Westminster, California. As the authors trace the history of these changes,
107. Ibid., 80.
108. Collet and Lien, eds., e Transnational Politics of Asian Americans.
109. Junn, Lee, Ramakrishnan, and Wong, Asian Americans and the 2008 Election.
110. Hiroko Furuya and Christian Collet, “Vietnam and the Emergence of Saigon Nation-
alism in the United States,” in e Transnational Politics of Asian Americans, ed. Collet and
Lien, 56–73; and Brettell and Reed-Danahay, Civic Engagements: e Citizenship Practices
of Indian and Vietnamese Immigrants.
111. Furuya and Collet, “Vietnam and the Emergence of Saigon Nationalism in the United
States,” 63.
caroline b. brettell
30
they suggest that forms of transnational mobilization can become building
blocks for forms of domestic mobilization.
112
At this juncture, it is important to introduce the more theoretical and
critical arguments oered by Elizabeth eiss-Morse and John Hibbing.
113
ey provide three reasons for why they do not think that belonging to a
voluntary association is a foundation for “good citizenship”: rst, because
people join groups that are more homogenous rather than heterogeneous;
second, because civic participation does not necessarily lead to and may
even “turn people o politics”; and third, because democratic values are
not necessarily promoted by all groups. As they state: “Good citizens need
to learn that democracy is messy, inecient, and conict-ridden. Volun-
tary associations do not teach these lessons.”
114
In other words, they ques-
tion the conclusion that civic participation through voluntary associations
enhances political behavior and participation and strengthens democracy,
although they do acknowledge that the relationship between civic and po-
litical engagement holds for some populations or for some individuals who
by nature are more active than others.
Despite this cautionary note, it is my view that forms of civic engage-
ment can indeed lay the foundation for enhanced political engagement, not
only for legal immigrants but also for the undocumented.
115
It is wise to
be mindful of the distinctions that authors like Hui Li and Jiasheng Zhang
draw between dierent modes of political participation (voting, formal,
and informal) as well as “the mechanisms under which civic associations
112. A cautionary and insightful perspective is oered by Lien based on research among
Chinese populations in Southern California. See Pei-te Lien, “Transnational Homeland
Concerns and Participation in U.S. Politics: A Comparison among Immigrants from China,
Taiwan, and Hong Kong,” Journal of Chinese Overseas 2 (1) (2006): 56–78. She draws a dis-
tinction between regime-inuencing (e.g., campaign contributions) and regime-support-
ing (e.g., voter registration) activities and how these are impacted by transnational politics.
If homeland issues reect U.S. ideology and are in the U.S. national interest (e.g., expanding
democracy) then, she argues, it will have a positive impact on participation in U.S. poli-
tics. See also Sangay Mishra, “e Limits of Transnational Mobilization: Indian American
Lobby Groups and the India-U.S. Civil Nuclear Deal,” in e Transnational Politics of Asian
Americans, ed. Collet and Lien, 107–118; and Pei-te Lien and Janelle Wong, “Like Latinos?
Explaining the Transnational Political Behavior of Asian Americans,” in e Transnational
Politics of Asian Americans, ed. Collet and Lien, 137–152.
113. Elizabeth eiss-Morse and John R. Hibbing, “Citizenship and Civic Engagement,”
Annual Review of Political Science 8 (2005): 228.
114. Ibid., 227.
115. Melanie Jones Gast and Dina G. Okamoto, “Moral or Civic Ties? Deservingness and
Engagement Among Undocumented Latinas in Non-Prot Organizations,” Journal of Eth-
nic and Migration Studies 42 (12) (2016): 2013–2030; and Rachel Meyer and Janice Fine,
“Grassroots Citizenship at Multiple Scales: Rethinking Immigrant Civic Participation,” In-
ternational Journal of Political Culture 30 (2017): 323–348.
the political and civic engagement of immigrants
31
inuence political participation.”
116
ey distinguish particularly between
the scope of civic organizational involvement (number of aliations and
the fostering of bridging social ties) and the intensity (depth of involve-
ment in which associations foster trust, cohesion, and bonding social ties),
arguing that the latter has a more substantial impact on formal political
participation. As they note, based on analysis of data drawn from the 2006
U.S. Citizenship, Involvement, Democracy Survey, “participation in pol-
itics rises with participation in voluntary associations, even when these
associations are quite apolitical . . . [and] the more involved one is in the
active associations, the more political activities one will engage in.”
117
A further interesting nding of their research is that while classic so-
cioeconomic status models are better at explaining individualized political
behavior such as voting, mobilization is better at explaining formal and
informal political behaviors.
118
Portes and colleagues come to a similar
conclusion: “Individual immigrants seldom enter American politics on
their own account. Instead they do so collectively in response to mobiliza-
tions organized by activists within their own communities or external ones
seeking to address wrongs or achieve various goals.”
119
Such collective be-
haviors oen happen within the context of civic associations, making them
fundamental to the process of political incorporation. Civic associations,
as communities of practice, oer spaces where civic skills can be learned,
where information can be disseminated, where condence can develop,
and where social networks can expand. All are vital to the engagement in
the broader public sphere of politics.
116. Li and Zhang, “How Do Civic Associations Foster Political Participation? e Role of
Scope and Intensity of Organizational Involvement,” 5.
117. Ibid., 19.
118. Ibid., 20.
119. Portes, Escobar, and Arana, “Bridging the Gap: Transnational and Ethnic Organiza-
tions in the Political Incorporation of Immigrants in the United States,” 1057.
caroline b. brettell
32
Conclusion: Solutions and Best
Practices
In an article written for the Brookings Institution, Steven Schier notes that
in the 1890s, within a few weeks of disembarking from ships at Ellis Island,
immigrants oen received a visit from a Tammany Hall ward heeler or they
were introduced to other politicians at the local precinct hall. “Long before
many of those newcomers fully understood what it was to be American,
they knew quite well what it meant to be a Democrat or a Republican.”
120
He suggests that the immigrants of today, by contrast, are closer to the
fringes of American politics and voter turnout, which a century ago was
more than 80 percent in presidential elections and 70 percent in o-year
congressional elections. “e centripetal forces drawing immigrants into
electoral politics in 1900 have been succeeded,” Schier suggests, “by a set
of strong and persistent centrifugal forces that discourage the full electoral
participation and political assimilation that earlier generations of immi-
grants enjoyed.”
121
He argues that there are three changes that have char-
acterized American politics that have led to the exclusion of immigrants:
the diminishing role of political parties, the emergence of new forms of
campaigning, and, oddly enough, eorts to get more minorities involved
in government (through, for example, the creation of noncompetitive elec-
toral districts, which discourages outreach).
Schier’s solution to this problem is twofold. He calls for incentives that
will induce parties, candidates, and interest groups to seek every possible
voter through mechanisms such as automatic national voter registration.
He also calls for eorts to encourage more voting and to simplify ballots
(including shortening them).
Other ideas about the political and civic engagement of immigrant
newcomers and of new citizens have emerged from the discussion in this
paper as well as from the larger body of materials assembled and reviewed
by the Commission on the Practice of Democratic Citizenship as it worked
120. Steven E. Schier, “From Melting Pot to Centrifuge: Immigrants and American Poli-
tics,” Brookings Institution, 2002, http://www.brookings.edu/articles/from-melting-pot-to
-centrifuge-immigrants-and-american-politics.
121. Ibid.
the political and civic engagement of immigrants
33
toward formulating its nal recommendations. I list several of them here
by way of a conclusion.
• Approach or reach out to immigrant communities through their
own institutions—such as ethnic media, voluntary organizations,
community events, etc. e ethnic media can provide greater access
to election materials and information. And through these organiza-
tions people can be organized or mobilized around issues that not
only provide training in civic skills of how to get things done and
create change, but also how to interact with the structures of gov-
ernment: local, statewide, and national.
• Take advantage of public libraries and bridging civic spaces
122
as
places not only to reach unengaged populations but also to bring
people of diverse backgrounds together and to educate populations
about the process of naturalization, voter registration, how to learn
about candidates, etc. Every element of the voting process needs
to be explained. is might also be included in citizenship class-
es. As Jamie Johnston and Ragnar Audunson have argued, based
on research in Norway, “conversation-based programming in pub-
lic libraries shows great potential for supporting immigrants’ po-
litical integration and bringing their voices into the public sphere
by fostering linguistic competence, expanding social networks,
promoting information exchange, and providing space for ‘messy
conversation.’”
123
• Confront the language barriers and other barriers (including those
related to the process of naturalization) that immigrants, particular-
ly rst-generation immigrants, face. As Waters and Pineau observe,
the barriers to and inequalities in civic and political integration
can be mitigated by partnerships among the voluntary sector, civil
society, community-based organizations, the business sector, and
government.
124
122. Eric Klinenberg refers to these as elements of “social infrastructure.” He argues that
“if states and societies do not recognize social infrastructure and how it works, they will
fail to see a powerful way to promote civic engagement and social interaction, both within
communities and across group lines.” Eric Klinenberg, Palaces for the People: How Social
Infrastructure Can Help Fight Inequality, Polarization and the Decline of Civic Culture (New
York: Crown Publishing Group, 2018), 16.
123. Jamie Johnston and Ragnar Audunson, “Supporting Immigrants’ Political Integration
through Discussion and Debate in Public Libraries,” Journal of Librarianship and Informa-
tion Science (2017): 21, https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0961000617709056.
124. Waters and Pineau, e Integration of Immigrants into American Society, 160.
caroline b. brettell
34
• More cities should establish an Oce of Welcoming Communities
that focuses not just on economic integration, but also on social
and political integration and that serves as a meeting place and um-
brella framework for community-level organization.
125
Addition-
ally, more studies of the Civic Health of Cities should be carried
out and plans of action developed.
126
And more individuals from
these communities, particularly the second-generation, should be
encouraged to run for oce.
127
Above all, there need to be mechanisms to capture what Zoltan Hajnal
and Taeku Lee identied almost a decade ago as the “growing clout” of
racial minorities, including both naturalized citizens and the children of
immigrants.
128
ese authors argue that these minorities do not naturally
gravitate to partisanship and that they must be cultivated in myriad ways.
is cultivation, I would argue, must take place on their own turf, in spaces
where they feel comfortable. Eorts of inclusion and incorporation must
replace those of exclusion and marginalization if we are to reinvigorate our
democracy and create a civil society that is active and engaged.
125. Some examples include: https://www.cityoerseycity.com/community/diversity/
oce_of_welcoming_communities; https://dallascityhall.com/departments/wcia/Pages/
default.aspx; and https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2016/06/30/bright-spots
-welcoming-and-integration.
126. See, for example, Houston Endowment, 2018 Houston Civic Health Index, https://
www.ncoc.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/2018-Houston-CHI-Dra.pdf.
127. For a discussion of new Americans who are running for oce, see Sayu Bhojwani,
People Like Us: e New Wave of Candidates Knocking at Democracy’s Door (New York:
e New Press, 2018). ere are several such initiatives across the country: https://www
.ilrc.org/inspiring-leadership-immigrant-communities; https://www.citylab.com/equity/
2016/11/how-nashville-is-training-a-new-generation-immigrant-leaders/508598/; https://
generocity.org/philly/2017/09/26/welcoming-center-new-pennsylvanians-immigrant
-leadership-institute/; and https://www.nyic.org/membership/member-benets/leadership
-development/.
128. Zoltan Hajnal and Taeku Lee, Why Americans Don’t Join the Party: Race, Immigration
and the Failure (of Political Parties) to Engage the Electorate (Princeton: Princeton Univer-
sity Press, 2011), 2.
the political and civic engagement of immigrants
35
About the Author
Caroline B. Brettell is University Distinguished Professor of Anthropology
and the Founding Director of the Dedman College Interdisciplinary Insti-
tute at Southern Methodist University. She has spent her career studying
the immigrant populations in Europe, Canada, and the United States. Her
particular interests are in the gendered aspects of migration, issues of iden-
tity and citizenship, and the relationship between immigrants and cities. In
addition to over one hundred journal articles and book chapters, she is the
author, co-author, or editor/co-editor of nineteen books. Her most recent
books are Gender and Migration (2016); Identity and the Second Genera-
tion: How Children of Immigrants Find eir Space (co-edited with Faith
Nibbs, 2016); Following Father Chiniquy: Immigration, Religious Schism and
Social Change in Nineteenth-Century Illinois (2015); Anthropological Con-
versations: Talking Culture Across Disciplines (2014); and Migration eory:
Talking Across Disciplines (3rd edition, co-edited with James F. Hollield,
2015). Brettell has served as Chair of the Department of Anthropology at
Southern Methodist University (1994–2004 and 2019–2022), Dean-ad-
Interim of Dedman College (2006–2008), Co-Director of the Health and
Society Program at Southern Methodist University (2016–2018), President
of the Society for the Anthropology of Europe (1996–1998), and President
of the Social Science History Association (2000–2001). She was elected
a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2017 and is
a member of the Academy’s Commission on the Practice of Democratic
Citizenship.
caroline b. brettell
36
American Academy of Arts & Sciences
Board of Directors
Nancy C. Andrews, Chair
David W. Oxtoby, President
Alan M. Dachs, Vice Chair
Diane P. Wood, Vice Chair
Carl H. Pforzheimer III, Treasurer
Geraldine L. Richmond, Secretary
K. Anthony Appiah
Louise H. Bryson
John Mark Hansen
Nannerl O. Keohane
John Lithgow
Cherry A. Murray
Venkatesh Narayanamurti
David M. Rubenstein
Larry J. Shapiro
Shirley M. Tilghman
Natasha Trethewey
Pauline Yu
Selected Publications of the American Academy
David Karpf, e Internet and Engaged Citizenship (2019)
Christina Couch, e Data Driving Democracy: Understanding How the
Internet Is Transforming Politics and Civic Engagement (2020)
To order any of these publications please contact the Academy’s
Publications Oce. 617-576-5085; publications@amacad.org
