Read the article here.

Summary

The readings this week discussed the polarization of immigration politics and how this interacts with local policy making.  Previous scholars argue the relevance of variables such as wage competition between blacks and whites, overcrowded housing, and high proportions of linguistically isolated households (Ramakrishnan and Wong, 2010).  However, Ramakrishnan and Wong 2010, and Wong 2012 found that the most salient variable in explaining increased restrictionist policies was the share of Republicans in each locality.  That said, while much of the focus of partisan immigration politics has been on the “radicalization” of the right, this article instead discusses the changes in the Democratic party that have exacerbated party polarization.

The article presents the following theories for the rapid change of opinion within the Democratic party:

1) Shifted focus to Civil Rights

In the early 2000s, the NAACP began to relate the immigration issue to Civil Rights rather than as a threat to black workers.  Concurrently, the AFL-CIO membership became increasingly diverse, and they reversed their position on immigration, mirroring the rhetoric presented in Pew’s study.

2) Increased familiarity

The Democratic party itself has diversified, with non-white membership increasing eighteen percentage points since 1995.  One pundit explained, “Americans over the last decade have become more profoundly and deeply pro-immigrant because they know immigrants.”

 

Question

Given that the divergence of opinions occurred around 2006, what are some other potential variables that may have led to the Democratic party altering its viewpoint? How does local politics interact with the increased familiarity aspect, as we read for this week?