Search

The effect of ethnicity upon political participation presents an interesting paradox to political scientists. No consensus exists on the extent to which the interaction between contextual factors and individual level characteristics allow individuals to overcome barriers to participation, or how this relates to patterns of mobilization. While it is well documented that contacts and mobilization are effective in turning out the vote, few scholars have asked the question of who gets mobilized, and why? In this paper, we use a modified model of the effects of group size and group empowerment for Latinos in the United States to predict which Latinos reported being mobilized prior to the 2000 Presidential election. The modifications include a departure from an emphasis on the presence of Black or Latino mayors as a measurement of empowerment. Instead, we propose using a multiple-level Latino representation model of empowerment. Using a five state survey of registered Latino voters collected after the 2000 elections, we test this alternative model of empowerment to determine if Latino registered voters, living in districts with Latino representatives, are more likely to be contacted and asked to vote. Further modifications include making a distinction between type of contact and the addition of other characteristics that have been found to significantly impact Latino participation. The strategic nature of party contacting leads organizations to contact those individuals who are already the individuals most predisposed to participate. Probit regression analysis finds that Latinos represented by co-ethnics are more likely to be mobilized than Latinos represented by White or Black elected officials, providing additional support for the notion that descriptive representation empowers minority communities. However, the relationship is not linear. Latinos with only one Latino representative are the most likely to receive mobilization while those with two or three representatives are less likely. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since the 2000 Presidential election voter education and mobilization has witnessed a renaissance in targeted contact and segmented messaging. Candidates, political parties, and interest groups have taken advantage of advances in electronic databases to divide and subdivide the electorate into different groups, and have different messages and messengers for each subgroup of voters. For decades, scholars and practitioners have known that personalized campaign appeals are more effective. Labor unions, religious leaders, military veterans, and racial and ethnic community leaders have typically been used by campaigns to make a stronger, more personalized, and perhaps more trusting connection with voters. This paper takes up the question of whether or not personalized or segmented contact during a campaign is more successful at convincing voters than "generic" contact, or no contact at all.Using data from a national survey of Latino registered voters in 2004, we examine the impact of being contacted by a co-ethnic messenger on support for the Republican and Democratic parties. While some previous studies have examined voter turnout or vote choice, this paper examines the deeper implications of co-ethnic contact, including support for public policy and candidate favorability. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]