The central themes of this weeks readings focus on the strains that partisan divide and threat narratives place on immigration policy-making. The findings of Casellas and Leal (2013) help to emphasize the significance that party affiliation and district or state partisanship play in influencing “all of House votes and most Senate votes.” Additionally, the two researchers observe the tendency of Republican legislatures to favor both restrictive and enforcement approaches while opposing comprehensive legislation. However, this has not been the case. As shown in the article below, both the Democrats and Republicans shared similar negative attitudes towards both illegal and legal immigrants until the mid-2000’s.

Since the mid 90’s, Democrats have been moving towards a more progressive attitude, as the democratic constituents have moved on from supporting candidates who perpetuate the Latino Threat Narrative that Professor Massey introduced. This suggests that significant change can be made in a relatively short amount of time. However, the difficulties are amplified by intense debates fueled by anti-immigrant sentiment from politicians like President Trump. It seems then for true comprehensive reform begin we need Republicans to resists the urge to vote with their party or intensify the fear-mongering of their further right members. In doing so, the party can rid-itself of its constituencies built on the Latino Threat narrative, and the nation can move closer to immigration reform.

Discussion Question:

1. Senate Republicans have began to express dissent with the “far right” members of their party. Do you think extreme edges of the Republican party are beginning to push party members towards more moderate attitudes in order to attract ostracized voters?

Article Link:

https://www.npr.org/2019/02/19/694804917/democrats-used-to-talk-about-criminal-immigrants-so-what-changed-the-party