Abstract In this article, we investigate why millions of northern white men volunteered to fight in the Civil War. Prior studies have found that Republican partisanship played a significant role in boosting Union enlistment but do not test the competing hypothesis that views about slavery and race motivated them instead. Such views were highly salient among party elites before and during the war, which was sparked by a presidential election between parties divided over the expansion of Black enslavement. However, among the white mass public, we argue that partisanship rather than race-related attitudes explains patterns of war mobilization. Linking Union war participation records with election returns, we show that county-level war participation is better explained by Republican partisanship rather than views about the status of Black Americans (as measured by support for equal suffrage referenda and the Free Soil party). Analyzing a sample of partisan newspaper issues, we further show that Republican elites de-emphasized slavery as they sought to mobilize mass war participation while antiwar Democrats emphasized antiabolition and white supremacy, suggesting each party’s elites saw antislavery messaging as ineffective or even detrimental in mobilizing mass enlistment. This analysis offers additional evidence on the power of partisanship in producing mass violence and sheds more light on political behavior during a critical period in the history of U.S. racial politics.
{"title":"Partisanship and Racial Attitudes in U.S. Civil War Enlistment","authors":"K. Ramanathan, Nathan P. Kalmoe","doi":"10.1017/rep.2022.19","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rep.2022.19","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In this article, we investigate why millions of northern white men volunteered to fight in the Civil War. Prior studies have found that Republican partisanship played a significant role in boosting Union enlistment but do not test the competing hypothesis that views about slavery and race motivated them instead. Such views were highly salient among party elites before and during the war, which was sparked by a presidential election between parties divided over the expansion of Black enslavement. However, among the white mass public, we argue that partisanship rather than race-related attitudes explains patterns of war mobilization. Linking Union war participation records with election returns, we show that county-level war participation is better explained by Republican partisanship rather than views about the status of Black Americans (as measured by support for equal suffrage referenda and the Free Soil party). Analyzing a sample of partisan newspaper issues, we further show that Republican elites de-emphasized slavery as they sought to mobilize mass war participation while antiwar Democrats emphasized antiabolition and white supremacy, suggesting each party’s elites saw antislavery messaging as ineffective or even detrimental in mobilizing mass enlistment. This analysis offers additional evidence on the power of partisanship in producing mass violence and sheds more light on political behavior during a critical period in the history of U.S. racial politics.","PeriodicalId":37190,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Race, Ethnicity and Politics","volume":"45 1","pages":"460 - 483"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81448746","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
1Results do not change when controlling for demographics. See Figure S1 in Supplementary Material. 2Unfortunately, we cannot test this explanation directly. Negative D-scores could of course be the result of strong mental associations between the Republican Party and blacks (rather than whites) while not having a strong schema about the Democratic Party. Substantively, that would be “negative projection,” or imposing the racial outgroup identity onto the out-party. We suspect this explanation is less plausible, especially in the light of findings from Study 3 demonstrating that explicit schemas of the Republican Party as white are uniform in the sample. 3We worried that respondents, especially whites, might underreport the association of the Democratic Party with blacks due to social desirability concerns. If so, the variation of schemas in the population would be underestimated, with more respondents reporting that both parties were white. Underestimating this variance, in turn, would lead to smaller and less significant associations between schemas and other variables of interest. This suggests that our test is a conservative one. 3This change in partisan affect informed by race–party schemas can ultimately lead to sorting. The possibility of white Americans defecting from the Democrats in response to its increasing racial liberalism and the growing share of nonwhites in the party has been shown in the literature before (Hajnal and Rivera 2014; Valentino and Sears 2005; Zingher 2018). Our findings suggest that this process may continue in the foreseeable future.
在控制人口统计因素后，结果不会改变。2遗憾的是，我们无法直接验证这一解释。负d分当然可能是共和党和黑人(而不是白人)之间强烈的心理联系的结果，而对民主党没有强烈的图式。从本质上讲，这将是“消极投射”，或将种族外群体身份强加给外党。我们怀疑这种解释不太可信，特别是根据研究3的发现，在样本中，共和党的显性图式是白色的。我们担心被调查者，尤其是白人，可能会由于对社会可取性的考虑而低估民主党与黑人的联系。如果是这样，那么人群中图式的变化就会被低估，因为更多的受访者报告说双方都是白人。反过来，低估这种差异会导致模式和其他感兴趣的变量之间的关联更小、更不重要。这表明我们的测试是保守的。这种由种族党派模式引起的党派影响的变化最终会导致排序。美国白人从民主党叛逃的可能性是对其日益增长的种族自由主义和该党中非白人比例不断增长的回应，这在之前的文献中已经得到了体现(Hajnal和Rivera 2014;Valentino and Sears 2005;Zingher 2018)。我们的研究结果表明，在可预见的未来，这一过程可能会继续。
{"title":"The Origins and Consequences of Racialized Schemas about U.S. Parties – ERRATUM","authors":"K. Zhirkov, Nicholas A. Valentino","doi":"10.1017/rep.2022.23","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rep.2022.23","url":null,"abstract":"1Results do not change when controlling for demographics. See Figure S1 in Supplementary Material. 2Unfortunately, we cannot test this explanation directly. Negative D-scores could of course be the result of strong mental associations between the Republican Party and blacks (rather than whites) while not having a strong schema about the Democratic Party. Substantively, that would be “negative projection,” or imposing the racial outgroup identity onto the out-party. We suspect this explanation is less plausible, especially in the light of findings from Study 3 demonstrating that explicit schemas of the Republican Party as white are uniform in the sample. 3We worried that respondents, especially whites, might underreport the association of the Democratic Party with blacks due to social desirability concerns. If so, the variation of schemas in the population would be underestimated, with more respondents reporting that both parties were white. Underestimating this variance, in turn, would lead to smaller and less significant associations between schemas and other variables of interest. This suggests that our test is a conservative one. 3This change in partisan affect informed by race–party schemas can ultimately lead to sorting. The possibility of white Americans defecting from the Democrats in response to its increasing racial liberalism and the growing share of nonwhites in the party has been shown in the literature before (Hajnal and Rivera 2014; Valentino and Sears 2005; Zingher 2018). Our findings suggest that this process may continue in the foreseeable future.","PeriodicalId":37190,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Race, Ethnicity and Politics","volume":"13 1","pages":"614 - 615"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82583566","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Macropartisanship is a measure of aggregate trends in party identification in the mass public that allows researchers to track partisanship dynamically. In previous research, macropartisanship was found to vary in concert with major political events and forces like presidential approval and the economy. However, studying macropartisanship as an aggregate trend assumes that group dynamics within the measure are equivalent. We present a series of new measures of macropartisanship using Stimson’s (2018) dyad ratio approach disaggregated by race and ethnicity. We detail the creation of measures for White, Latino, and Black macropartisanship from 1983 to 2016 using more than 500 surveys from CBS News and CBS/New York Times. The resulting data collection is publicly available and can be downloaded in monthly, quarterly, or yearly format. Our initial analysis of these data show that thinking about macropartisanship as a single aggregate measure masks important and significant variation in our understanding of party identification. Change in the measures are uncorrelated. Latino macropartisanship is more volatile and responds more to economic conditions, Black macropartisanship is very stable and has become more Democratic in response to increased polarization, while White macropartisanship has become less responsive to economic conditions as has become more Republican as Republicans have moved to the right.
{"title":"Constructing a New Measure of Macropartisanship Disaggregated by Race and Ethnicity","authors":"Joshua J. Dyck, G. Johnson","doi":"10.1017/rep.2021.35","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rep.2021.35","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Macropartisanship is a measure of aggregate trends in party identification in the mass public that allows researchers to track partisanship dynamically. In previous research, macropartisanship was found to vary in concert with major political events and forces like presidential approval and the economy. However, studying macropartisanship as an aggregate trend assumes that group dynamics within the measure are equivalent. We present a series of new measures of macropartisanship using Stimson’s (2018) dyad ratio approach disaggregated by race and ethnicity. We detail the creation of measures for White, Latino, and Black macropartisanship from 1983 to 2016 using more than 500 surveys from CBS News and CBS/New York Times. The resulting data collection is publicly available and can be downloaded in monthly, quarterly, or yearly format. Our initial analysis of these data show that thinking about macropartisanship as a single aggregate measure masks important and significant variation in our understanding of party identification. Change in the measures are uncorrelated. Latino macropartisanship is more volatile and responds more to economic conditions, Black macropartisanship is very stable and has become more Democratic in response to increased polarization, while White macropartisanship has become less responsive to economic conditions as has become more Republican as Republicans have moved to the right.","PeriodicalId":37190,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Race, Ethnicity and Politics","volume":"1 1","pages":"433 - 459"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-08-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"91113904","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Harsh, highly intrusive, personal contact with the criminal justice system has been shown to politically demobilize, but it is unclear whether less intrusive forms of police contact have any political effects. As the modal type of involuntary police–citizen contact is less invasive and more routine (e.g., a traffic stop), it is critical to understand the ramifications of lighter forms of contact. We argue that, unlike harsh police contact, light, personal, police contact can mobilize individuals, under certain circumstances. When a negative encounter with the police—even if it is minor—runs counter to prior expectations, people experiencing the contact are mobilized to take political action. Using 3 years of observational data and an original survey experiment, we demonstrate that individuals who receive tickets or are stopped by the police are more likely to participate in politics. These effects are most pronounced for individuals with positive evaluations of the police, often White respondents.
{"title":"Can Light Contact with the Police Motivate Political Participation? Evidence from Traffic Stops","authors":"Leah Christiani, Kelsey Shoub","doi":"10.1017/rep.2022.18","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rep.2022.18","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Harsh, highly intrusive, personal contact with the criminal justice system has been shown to politically demobilize, but it is unclear whether less intrusive forms of police contact have any political effects. As the modal type of involuntary police–citizen contact is less invasive and more routine (e.g., a traffic stop), it is critical to understand the ramifications of lighter forms of contact. We argue that, unlike harsh police contact, light, personal, police contact can mobilize individuals, under certain circumstances. When a negative encounter with the police—even if it is minor—runs counter to prior expectations, people experiencing the contact are mobilized to take political action. Using 3 years of observational data and an original survey experiment, we demonstrate that individuals who receive tickets or are stopped by the police are more likely to participate in politics. These effects are most pronounced for individuals with positive evaluations of the police, often White respondents.","PeriodicalId":37190,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Race, Ethnicity and Politics","volume":"78 1","pages":"385 - 405"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83606890","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article identifies the justification frame as a common narrative used by public officials to justify the use of lethal force by police. Officials deploy the justification frame to obfuscate the use of force or claim that victims posed a threat to officers in order to justify civilian deaths. I examine initial statements given in the aftermath of officer-involved deaths in 2016, focusing on incidents where an on-duty officer used force against victims who did not pose a threat when they were killed. I find that elements of the justification frame appear frequently in the explanations issued after these incidents. Statements about Black decedents are more likely to deploy the justification frame.
{"title":"Adding Insult to Injury: The Justification Frame in Official Narratives of Officer-Involved Killings","authors":"Traci Burch","doi":"10.1017/rep.2022.16","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rep.2022.16","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This article identifies the justification frame as a common narrative used by public officials to justify the use of lethal force by police. Officials deploy the justification frame to obfuscate the use of force or claim that victims posed a threat to officers in order to justify civilian deaths. I examine initial statements given in the aftermath of officer-involved deaths in 2016, focusing on incidents where an on-duty officer used force against victims who did not pose a threat when they were killed. I find that elements of the justification frame appear frequently in the explanations issued after these incidents. Statements about Black decedents are more likely to deploy the justification frame.","PeriodicalId":37190,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Race, Ethnicity and Politics","volume":"56 1","pages":"359 - 384"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80475718","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Politics in the United States has become increasingly polarized in recent decades. Both political elites and everyday citizens are divided into rival and mutually antagonistic partisan camps, with each camp questioning the political legitimacy and democratic commitments of the other side. Does this polarization pose threats to democracy itself? What can make some democratic institutions resilient in the face of such challenges?Democratic Resilience brings together a distinguished group of specialists to examine how polarization affects the performance of institutional checks and balances as well as the political behavior of voters, civil society actors, and political elites. The volume bridges the conventional divide between institutional and behavioral approaches to the study of American politics and incorporates historical and comparative insights to explain the nature of contemporary challenges to democracy. It also breaks new ground to identify the institutional and societal sources of democratic resilience.
{"title":"Democratic Resilience: Can the United States Withstand Rising Polarization? Edited by Robert C. Lieberman, Suzanne Mettler, & Kenneth M. Roberts. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2022. 406 pp., $34.99 Paper.","authors":"Amanda Sahar d’Urso","doi":"10.1017/rep.2022.17","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rep.2022.17","url":null,"abstract":"Politics in the United States has become increasingly polarized in recent decades. Both political elites and everyday citizens are divided into rival and mutually antagonistic partisan camps, with each camp questioning the political legitimacy and democratic commitments of the other side. Does this polarization pose threats to democracy itself? What can make some democratic institutions resilient in the face of such challenges?Democratic Resilience brings together a distinguished group of specialists to examine how polarization affects the performance of institutional checks and balances as well as the political behavior of voters, civil society actors, and political elites. The volume bridges the conventional divide between institutional and behavioral approaches to the study of American politics and incorporates historical and comparative insights to explain the nature of contemporary challenges to democracy. It also breaks new ground to identify the institutional and societal sources of democratic resilience.","PeriodicalId":37190,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Race, Ethnicity and Politics","volume":"65 1","pages":"609 - 611"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76094739","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Adam Goodman ’ s The Deportation Machine provides a thorough treatment of the enforcement and policy mechanisms that the US government has used to expel noncitizens from the late 19 th century to the present day. Goodman begins by introducing the readerto threemechanismsthatheusesto structure theargumentforthe entire book; formal deportations, voluntary departures, and a more amorphous and informal set of practicesthathavebeenusedbythefederalandlocalauthoritiestoencourage noncitizens to “ self-deport. ” Goodman goes on to show that, throughout US history, the federal government has leaned more heavily on the latter two mechanisms than it has on formal deportation proceedings. In the process, he opens up some important questions about how to best define expulsions as a legal-administrative reality, considering that many noncitizens who are expelled from the US, by the mechanisms described by Goodman, do not show up in any of the federal government ’ s immigration enforcement statistics.Goodman ’ s subject matter makes for a ready comparison with Daniel Kanstroom ’ s Deportation Nation and Mae Ngai ’ s Impossible Subjects. Unlike these books, however, Goodman pays more attention to primary source documents generated by federal agents and enforcement agencies. His detailed treatment of enforcement tactics also recalls Kitty Calavita ’ s Inside the State (focusing on the Bracero Program) and Joseph Nevin ’ s Operation Gatekeeper and Beyond, but with a more ambitious historical scope. It bears emphasizing, however, that the most important distinguishing feature of T he Deportation Machine is Goodman ’ s argu-ment, which focuses the reader ’ s attention on the federal government ’ s longstanding reliance on expulsion practices that operate outside the court system and in the gray zones of the law. His account of these practices provides an important corrective to much of the recent research on criminal deportations and the intersections of criminal and immigration
{"title":"The Deportation Machine: America’s Long History of Expelling Immigrants","authors":"Philip Kretsedemas","doi":"10.1017/rep.2022.12","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rep.2022.12","url":null,"abstract":"Adam Goodman ’ s The Deportation Machine provides a thorough treatment of the enforcement and policy mechanisms that the US government has used to expel noncitizens from the late 19 th century to the present day. Goodman begins by introducing the readerto threemechanismsthatheusesto structure theargumentforthe entire book; formal deportations, voluntary departures, and a more amorphous and informal set of practicesthathavebeenusedbythefederalandlocalauthoritiestoencourage noncitizens to “ self-deport. ” Goodman goes on to show that, throughout US history, the federal government has leaned more heavily on the latter two mechanisms than it has on formal deportation proceedings. In the process, he opens up some important questions about how to best define expulsions as a legal-administrative reality, considering that many noncitizens who are expelled from the US, by the mechanisms described by Goodman, do not show up in any of the federal government ’ s immigration enforcement statistics.Goodman ’ s subject matter makes for a ready comparison with Daniel Kanstroom ’ s Deportation Nation and Mae Ngai ’ s Impossible Subjects. Unlike these books, however, Goodman pays more attention to primary source documents generated by federal agents and enforcement agencies. His detailed treatment of enforcement tactics also recalls Kitty Calavita ’ s Inside the State (focusing on the Bracero Program) and Joseph Nevin ’ s Operation Gatekeeper and Beyond, but with a more ambitious historical scope. It bears emphasizing, however, that the most important distinguishing feature of T he Deportation Machine is Goodman ’ s argu-ment, which focuses the reader ’ s attention on the federal government ’ s longstanding reliance on expulsion practices that operate outside the court system and in the gray zones of the law. His account of these practices provides an important corrective to much of the recent research on criminal deportations and the intersections of criminal and immigration","PeriodicalId":37190,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Race, Ethnicity and Politics","volume":"5 1","pages":"607 - 609"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79056074","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Race, Gender, and the Politics of Incivility: How Identity Moderates Perceptions of Uncivil Discourse—CORRIGENDUM","authors":"S. R. Gubitz","doi":"10.1017/rep.2022.15","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rep.2022.15","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":37190,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Race, Ethnicity and Politics","volume":"36 1","pages":"612 - 613"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81275849","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract A rich literature documents the effects of survey interviewer race on respondents’ answers to questions about political issues and factual knowledge. In this paper, we advance the study of interviewer effects in two ways. First, we examine the impact of race on interviewers’ subjective evaluations of respondents’ political knowledge. Second, we substitute measures of respondent/interviewer racial self-identification with interviewer perceptions of respondent skin tone. We find that white interviewers subjectively rate black respondents’ knowledge lower than do black interviewers, even controlling for objective knowledge measures. Moreover, we identify a negative relationship between relative skin tone and interviewer's assessment of knowledge. Subsequent analyses show a linear relationship between subjective knowledge assessments and the difference between respondent and interviewer skin tone. We conclude with a discussion of the impact of colorism on survey administration and the measurement of political attitudes and democratic capabilities.
{"title":"Biased Interviewer Assessments of Respondent Knowledge Based on Perceptions of Skin Tone","authors":"A. Enders, Judd R. Thornton","doi":"10.1017/rep.2021.40","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rep.2021.40","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract A rich literature documents the effects of survey interviewer race on respondents’ answers to questions about political issues and factual knowledge. In this paper, we advance the study of interviewer effects in two ways. First, we examine the impact of race on interviewers’ subjective evaluations of respondents’ political knowledge. Second, we substitute measures of respondent/interviewer racial self-identification with interviewer perceptions of respondent skin tone. We find that white interviewers subjectively rate black respondents’ knowledge lower than do black interviewers, even controlling for objective knowledge measures. Moreover, we identify a negative relationship between relative skin tone and interviewer's assessment of knowledge. Subsequent analyses show a linear relationship between subjective knowledge assessments and the difference between respondent and interviewer skin tone. We conclude with a discussion of the impact of colorism on survey administration and the measurement of political attitudes and democratic capabilities.","PeriodicalId":37190,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Race, Ethnicity and Politics","volume":"122 1","pages":"572 - 588"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74564106","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract The relationship between immigration and welfare provision is at the heart of welfare politics research. While prior studies have examined how immigration affects welfare generosity, less is known about the consequences of exclusive welfare policies and immigration on social inequality. In this paper, by using TANF as the policy context, we offer a systematic examination of how immigration combined with state immigrant welfare policies affect inequality in welfare usage between citizens and immigrants. Using data across the fifty American states from 2001 to 2016, we find evidence that exclusive state immigrant TANF policies are a key source of decreased immigrant TANF caseload rate and enlarged citizen-immigrant TANF caseload gap. Moreover, states’ immigrant population density moderates the effect of state immigrant welfare eligibility policies on immigrant TANF caseload rate and citizen-immigrant TANF caseload gap. Our robustness checks by using alternative measures of the dependent variable and key independent variable verify these findings.
{"title":"Immigration, Policy Exclusion, and State-Level Inequality in TANF Usage","authors":"P. Xu, Ling Zhu","doi":"10.1017/rep.2021.41","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rep.2021.41","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The relationship between immigration and welfare provision is at the heart of welfare politics research. While prior studies have examined how immigration affects welfare generosity, less is known about the consequences of exclusive welfare policies and immigration on social inequality. In this paper, by using TANF as the policy context, we offer a systematic examination of how immigration combined with state immigrant welfare policies affect inequality in welfare usage between citizens and immigrants. Using data across the fifty American states from 2001 to 2016, we find evidence that exclusive state immigrant TANF policies are a key source of decreased immigrant TANF caseload rate and enlarged citizen-immigrant TANF caseload gap. Moreover, states’ immigrant population density moderates the effect of state immigrant welfare eligibility policies on immigrant TANF caseload rate and citizen-immigrant TANF caseload gap. Our robustness checks by using alternative measures of the dependent variable and key independent variable verify these findings.","PeriodicalId":37190,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Race, Ethnicity and Politics","volume":"26 1","pages":"406 - 432"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84010375","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：