2. Redefining America: Findings from the 2006 Latino National Survey Luis R. Fraga Stanford University University of Washington John A. Garcia University of Arizona Rodney E. Hero University of Notre Dame Michael Jones-Correa Cornell University Valerie Martinez-Ebers Texas Christian University Gary M. Segura University of Washington

4. Sources of Funding Annie E. Casey Foundation Annie E. Casey Foundation Carnegie Corporation Carnegie Corporation Ford Foundation Ford Foundation Hewlett Foundation Hewlett Foundation Irvine Foundation Irvine Foundation Joyce Foundation Joyce Foundation Kellogg Foundation Kellogg Foundation National Science Foundation National Science Foundation Russell Sage Foundation Russell Sage Foundation Texas A&M University: MALRC, PERG Texas A&M University: MALRC, PERG

5. Latino National Survey A “national” telephone survey of 8600 Latino residents of the United States, seeking a broad understanding of the qualitative nature of Latino political and social life in America A “national” telephone survey of 8600 Latino residents of the United States, seeking a broad understanding of the qualitative nature of Latino political and social life in America State-stratified samples that reach approximately 90% coverage of the national Latino population State-stratified samples that reach approximately 90% coverage of the national Latino population Approximately 40 minutes (length and number of questions depends on split-samples, etc) Approximately 40 minutes (length and number of questions depends on split-samples, etc) English and Spanish English and Spanish Universe is all Latino adults, not citizens or voters Universe is all Latino adults, not citizens or voters

6. Themes within the Survey Survey includes…many of the questions or topics you have grown to love from existing surveys, whenever possible to ensure comparability;Survey includes…many of the questions or topics you have grown to love from existing surveys, whenever possible to ensure comparability;  Questions submitted by various political scientists specifically targeted at states;  Questions suggested by the advisory board Beyond the standard, we focused on transnationalism, identity, inter-group and intra-group relations, gender, education, policy preferences, discrimination, mobilization and overall political orientationsBeyond the standard, we focused on transnationalism, identity, inter-group and intra-group relations, gender, education, policy preferences, discrimination, mobilization and overall political orientations Some questions specific to foreign born, non-citizens, registered voters, and residents of specific statesSome questions specific to foreign born, non-citizens, registered voters, and residents of specific states

7. Stratified Structure The survey is stratified, that is, creates stand-alone samples in 15 states and the DC Metro area allowing us to speak to specific political contexts  Arizona400  Arkansas400  California 1200  Colorado400  DC-SMSA400  Florida800  Georgia400  Illinois600  Iowa400  Nevada400  New Jersey400  New Mexico400  New York800  North Carolina400  Texas800  Washington400  TOTAL 8600

8. California Sub-samples Bay Area: Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, Sonoma Bay Area: Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, Sonoma Los Angeles Metro: Los Angeles, Orange, Ventura Los Angeles Metro: Los Angeles, Orange, Ventura San Diego: San Diego San Diego: San Diego Central Valley: Fresno, Kern, Kings, Madera, Merced, San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Tulare Central Valley: Fresno, Kern, Kings, Madera, Merced, San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Tulare Inland Empire: Riverside (western), San Bernardino (southwestern) Inland Empire: Riverside (western), San Bernardino (southwestern) Other California: Sacramento, rest of state Other California: Sacramento, rest of state

9. Percent Hispanic of U.S. Population, 1960-2030 Source: Chapter 2. Multiple Origins, Uncertain Destinies. Adapted from Figure 2-2. Percent

10. Hispanic Births and Net Immigration by Decade: 1960-2030 Source: Chapter 2. Multiple Origins, Uncertain Destinies. Adapted from Figure 2-1. Millions

11. Source: Population Projections Division, U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2002

12. Source: Population Projections, Department of Finance, State of California, 2004

13. !

14. Population Growth Chart Comparisons United States California

15. Latino Diversity Census Bureau (American Community Survey, Released August 2006) Mexican 63.9% Puerto Rican 9% Cuban 3.5% Salvadoran 2.9% Dominican 2.7% Guatemalan 1.7% Colombian 1.8% ALL OTHERS 14.3% Native-born (not Island-born): 35.4% Foreign-born 61% Island-born PR 3.6% No high school diploma 43% College graduate 11.1% Latino National Survey (unweighted N) Summer 2006 *Mexican 66.1% (5704) *Puerto Rican 9.5% (822) *Cuban 4.9% (420) *Salvadoran 4.7% (407) *Dominican 3.9% (335) *Guatemalan 1.7% (149) *Colombian 1.6% (139) *All Others 7.6% *Native-born 28.4% (2450) *Foreign-born (adults) 66.2% (5717) *Island-born PR 5.4% (467) *No high school diploma 37% *College graduate 16.2% 44 million Latinos in the US

16. Country of Origin Nation California Bay LA San Central Inland Other Nation California Bay LA San Central Inland Other Area Diego Valley Empire Area Diego Valley Empire Mexico 68.6 84.4 78.7 76.1 95.3 97.4 93.2 95.8 El Salvador 4.3 8.2 9.6 14.5 0.0 0.7 0.9 0.7 Guatemala 2.0 2.2 2.2 3.2 1.2 0.7 1.7 0.7 Other 24.2 5.2 9.5 6.2 3.5 1.2 4.2 2.8

17. Nativity Nation California Bay LA San Central Inland Other Nation California Bay LA San Central Inland Other Area Diego Valley Empire Area Diego Valley EmpireBorn U.S. 28.6 30.9 39.7 26.4 25.9 34.4 43.2 29.6 Born Outside U.S. 66.7 68.5 60.3 73.4 72.9 65.6 54.2 69.0 Naturalized 30.1 35.0 40.2 36.2 30.6 25.3 46.9 30.6

18. Generational Status California Bay LA San Central Inland Other California Bay LA San Central Inland Other Area Diego Valley Empire Area Diego Valley Empire Gen 1 69.2 60.7 73.6 74.1 65.6 57.3 70.4 Gen 1 69.2 60.7 73.6 74.1 65.6 57.3 70.4 Gen 2 12.8 14.8 12.1 11.8 11.9 18.8 10.6 Gen 2 12.8 14.8 12.1 11.8 11.9 18.8 10.6 Gen 3 9.3 15.5 8.0 4.7 11.9 10.3 7.8 Gen 3 9.3 15.5 8.0 4.7 11.9 10.3 7.8 Gen 4+ 8.7 8.9 6.3 9.4 10.6 13.7 11.3 Gen 4+ 8.7 8.9 6.3 9.4 10.6 13.7 11.3

19. Assimilation, Values, and Identity

20. Language Preference Nation California Bay LA San Central Inland Other Nation California Bay LA San Central Inland Other Area Diego Valley Empire Area Diego Valley Empire English 38.1 39.8 52.9 32.0 32.9 37.8 59.3 43.0 Spanish 61.8 60.2 47.1 68.0 67.1 62.3 40.7 57.0 Language chosen to complete the survey

21. Importance of Learning English Nation California Bay LA San Central Inland Other Nation California Bay LA San Central Inland Other Area Diego Valley Empire Area Diego Valley EmpireVery Important 91.9 94.7 91.2 94.6 92.9 94.0 91.5 95.1 Somewhat Important 6.7 5.1 7.4 4.2 4.7 6.0 6.8 4.2 Not Very Important 0.9 1.0 0.7 1.1 2.4 0.0 1.7 0.7 Not At All Important 0.4 0.2 0.7 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Question: How important do you think it is that everyone in the United States Learn English? English?

22. Importance of Retaining Spanish Nation California Bay LA San Central Inland Other Nation California Bay LA San Central Inland Other Area Diego Valley Empire Area Diego Valley EmpireVery Important 84.9 84.1 79.4 85.5 82.4 86.1 83.1 82.4 Somewhat Important 11.9 13.3 17.7 11.7 16.5 12.6 13.6 14.1 Not Very Important 1.9 1.7 0.7 1.1 1.2 1.3 3.4 0.7 Not At All Important 1.1 1.0 2.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.8 Question: How important do you think it is for you and your family to maintain the ability to speak Spanish? to speak Spanish?

23. Language Proficiency across Generations 1 st Gen 2 nd Gen 3 rd Gen 4 th Gen Answered in English 19.273.790.491.3 Answered in Spanish, Speak English 19.119.58.27.7 Total Share with English Proficiency 38.393.298.699.0 Retain Spanish Proficiency 99.291.668.760.5  Strong English dominance and nearly universal English proficiency among the first-generation of US born;  Generally strong Spanish retention, aided by refreshed populations of Spanish-speakers.

24. Importance of Learning English/ Retaining Spanish across Generations 1 st Gen 2 nd Gen 3 rd Gen 4 th Gen How important do you think it is that everyone in the United States learn English? Somewhat5.28.611.811.6 Very94.189.386.184.0 How important do you think it is for you or your family to maintain the ability to speak Spanish? Somewhat9.713.717.922.2 Very88.684.473.066.7

25. Sense of American and Home-Country Identity Across Generations 1 st CA 1 st CA 2 nd CA 2 nd CA 3 rd CA 3 rd CA 4 th CA How strongly do you think of yourself as “American”? Somewhat Strongly 28.7 27.0 25.1 21.4 15.2 24.3 16.3 8.8 Very Strongly 24.5 25.9 56.9 62.0 78.5 48.7 76.4 87.8 76.4 87.8 How strongly do you think of yourself as (Mexican, Cuban, etc)? Somewhat Strongly 19.6 21.2 22.2 19.6 26.1 28.7 34.3 34.3 Very Strongly 67.6 67.7 64.3 60.5 45.1 53.9 40.5 49.2

26. A Multiplicity of Identities Simultaneous strong sense of pan-ethnic identity, national origin identity, and American- ness Simultaneous strong sense of pan-ethnic identity, national origin identity, and American- ness  Puerto Ricans illustrate best that identities are not mutually exclusive  Cuban pan-ethnicity surprisingly high  Mexican sense of American-ness high considering the share foreign born American National Origin Pan- Ethnic Mexican61.784.087.4 Cuban77.882.181.6 Puerto Rican 83.790.789.3 All65.084.087.2 Cells are percent expressing “somewhat” or “very strongly”

27. Levels of Pan Ethnicity and Connectedness Of One’s Subgroup to Other Latinos  One-half of LNS Latinos perceive a lot of commonalities with one’s group and other Latinos  Stronger pan-ethnic identifiers are more inclined to see this connection.  Over three- fourths of the combined stronger pan- ethic identifiers see their own national origin group as having a similar fate with other Latinos

28. Selected Markers of Societal Assimilation 1 st 2 nd 3 rd 4 th Roman Catholics 73.869.766.858.1 Social Capital (Group Participation) 14.125.029.433.4 Military Service, Self or Family 16.148.968.672.3 Education < High School 49.722.917.616.2 Household income <$35k 53.434.929.233.4 Percent Marrying non- Latinos 13.332.242.653.3

29. Attention to US and “Home Country” Politics and Public Affairs Attention to US politics is strong, even among the foreign born, and approaches (and in some cases surpasses) levels for all other groups, among Latinos born in the US. Attention to US politics is strong, even among the foreign born, and approaches (and in some cases surpasses) levels for all other groups, among Latinos born in the US. While about 57% of foreign born respondents agree that they should be able to vote in home country elections, only about 4% have ever done so, and about 58% report paying little or no attention to politics back home. While about 57% of foreign born respondents agree that they should be able to vote in home country elections, only about 4% have ever done so, and about 58% report paying little or no attention to politics back home. 1 st 2 nd 3 rd 4 th Attention to/Interest in US politics Somewhat or Very Interested 60.073.979.281.3 Attention to/Interest in “Home-Country” politics Little or No Attention Paid 57.561.072.872.8

30. Preferences for Cultural Assimilation and Distinctness 1 st CA 1 st CA 2 nd CA 3 rd CA 4 th CA Importance of Changing to Blend into Larger Society Somewhat 26.2 24.3 33.3 21.7 34.7 31.1 37.5 36.0 Very 61.4 63.7 44.6 58.3 40.6 51.5 35.7 36.8 Importance of Maintaining Distinct Culture Somewhat 16.2 15.0 18.3 14.9 20.3 21.8 26.1 29.3 Very 78.6 79.9 75.8 69.1 72.9 72.9 66.7 60.6 Support for blending into the larger culture and for maintaining a distinct culture are positively related (r=.1415): Support for blending into the larger culture and for maintaining a distinct culture are positively related (r=.1415): Not seen as an either/or proposition

31. Civic and Political Participation

32. Patterns of Civic Engagement California Bay LA San Central Inland Other California Bay LA San Central Inland Other Area Diego Valley Empire Area Diego Valley Empire Group Group Participation 20.4 23.5 18.9 18.8 17.9 22.9 25.4 Participation 20.4 23.5 18.9 18.8 17.9 22.9 25.4 Organizational Organizational Problem Problem Solving 28.7 28.7 28.9 25.9 27.8 33.1 27.5 Solving 28.7 28.7 28.9 25.9 27.8 33.1 27.5 Informal Informal Problem Problem Solving 32.9 29.4 33.4 32.9 34.4 28.8 35.9 Solving 32.9 29.4 33.4 32.9 34.4 28.8 35.9

33. Interest in Politics Nation California Bay LA San Central Inland Other Nation California Bay LA San Central Inland Other Area Diego Valley Empire Area Diego Valley EmpireVery Interested 18.9 19.4 15.4 22.2 23.5 16.6 17.8 14.1 Somewhat Interested 46.1 47.9 50.7 45.1 44.7 48.3 51.7 54.9 Not Interested 30.4 27.6 28.7 28.3 29.4 28.5 22.9 25.4 Not Sure/ Don’t Know 4.1 4.4 5.2 3.5 2.3 5.3 6.8 5.6 Question: How interested are you in politics and public affairs? Would you say you are very interested, somewhat interested, or not at all interested?

34. Voter Registration Nation California Bay LA San Central Inland Other Nation California Bay LA San Central Inland Other Area Diego Valley Empire Area Diego Valley Empire Registered 77.4 79.5 75.9 81.6 73.8 77.9 81.0 78.4 Not Registered 21.4 19.5 23.0 18.1 21.4 22.1 17.9 18.9 This question was only asked of citizens.

35. Electoral Participation, 2004 California Bay LA San Central Inland Other California Bay LA San Central Inland Other Area Diego Valley Empire Area Diego Valley Empire Contacted 36.7 48.3 33.9 33.3 39.0 36.9 33.8 Voted 62.3 60.9 67.4 54.8 61.0 53.6 58.1

36. Latinos and Partisanship

37. Patterns of Partisanship Overall U.S. Born CA Born Outside CA U.S. Democrat 42.1 55.9 50.6 33.9 37.0 Republican 21.5 26.0 22.8 18.8 10.5 Independent 8.1 5.6 7.1 10.0 9.0 Don’t Care 12.7 4.8 6.8 17.4 20.1 Don’t Know 15.6 8.6 12.1 20.0 23.2

38. Partisanship Among Citizens U.S. CA Naturalized CA Reg CA Not Reg CA U.S. CA Naturalized CA Reg CA Not Reg CA Democrat 55.9 50.6 43.9 47.3 55.9 56.9 33.6 28.6 Republican 26.0 22.8 24.9 17.1 26.1 18.3 22.3 27.4 Independent 5.6 7.1 8.6 9.3 6.1 8.5 8.2 7.9 Don’t Care 4.8 6.7 9.2 7.8 3.9 4.3 15.4 14.5 Don’t Know 8.6 12.1 13.4 18.3 8.1 11.8 20.6 21.4

39. Patterns of Partisanship, California Nation California Bay LA San Central Inland Other Nation California Bay LA San Central Inland Other Area Diego Valley Empire Area Diego Valley EmpireStrong Democrat 17.6 33.1 23.1 39.3 27.7 27.3 36.1 23.9 Democrat 16.3 25.7 34.1 25.8 21.3 20.5 24.1 26.1 Leans Democrat 10.4 8.5 8.8 8.6 6.4 8.0 2.4 15.2 Independent 38.5 12.4 13.2 11.0 14.9 17.1 10.8 13.0 Leans Republican 6.8 4.4 4.4 3.0 4.3 9.1 6.0 4.4 Republican 5.9 9.8 8.8 6.2 12.8 11.4 13.3 14.1 Strong Republican 4.5 6.6 7.7 6.2 12.8 6.8 7.2 3.3

40. Partisanship and Gender MaleFemale Democrat 41.2 40.7 Republican 23.7 18.7 Independent 9.3 7.6 Don’t Care 11.7 14.6 Don’t Know 14.1 18.4

41. Citizenship and Issue Positions: Problem Facing the Country Citizen CA Non-citizen CA Citizen CA Non-citizen CA Iraq War 30.0 30.3 33.2 28.3 Economy 14.7 15.2 12.4 17.6 Illegal Immigration 8.4 8.3 14.8 13.4 Immigration 8.4 8.3 14.8 13.4Education/ Schools 4.2 5.1 4.7 1.2 Schools 4.2 5.1 4.7 1.2 Other 12.4 11.3 6.6 6.8 “What do you think is THE one most important problem facing the country today?”

42. Partisanship and Issue Positions: Problem Facing the Country Democrat CA Republican CA Independent CA Democrat CA Republican CA Independent CA Iraq War 33.8 33.2 25.1 29.4 25.8 28.4 Economy 15.0 17.1 14.6 15.0 14.5 17.9 Illegal Immigration 6.9 7.5 9.0 8.8 10.6 14.1 Immigration 6.9 7.5 9.0 8.8 10.6 14.1Education/ Schools 5.4 4.3 4.5 2.4 5.0 3.7 Schools 5.4 4.3 4.5 2.4 5.0 3.7 Other 11.7 10.4 17.3 12.6 16.1 4.6 “What do you think is THE one most important problem facing the country today?”

43. Partisanship and Issue Positions: Preferred Party to Address Problem Facing Country Dems CA Reps CA Neither CA Don’t CA Dems CA Reps CA Neither CA Don’t CA Know Know Democrat 39.4 49.3 7.4 6.8 43.1 32.4 10.1 11.2 Republican 14.6 7.4 26.2 33.1 46.3 50.6 13.0 8.7 Independent 12.1 22.7 6.8 8.2 63.8 51.2 17.2 17.8 Don’t Care 6.2 10.1 3.9 5.0 54.2 37.5 35.7 47.2 Don’t Know 6.1 6.0 4.8 6.6 48.5 43.0 40.6 44.2 “Which political party do you think has a better approach to address this problem?”

44. Citizenship and Issue Positions: Problem Facing Latinos Citizen CA Non-citizen CA Citizen CA Non-citizen CAIllegal Immigration 25.0 25.4 35.1 30.7 Immigration 25.0 25.4 35.1 30.7Education/ Schools 13.9 16.7 3.6 4.6 Schools 13.9 16.7 3.6 4.6 Unemp/Jobs 11.7 10.9 12.6 11.2 Iraq War 1.5 2.0 1.6 2.8 Other 13.6 13.5 9.2 8.4 “What do you think is THE one most important problem facing the Latino community today?”

45. Partisanship and Issue Positions: Problem Facing Latinos Democrat CA Republican CA Independent CA Democrat CA Republican CA Independent CAIllegal Immigration 24.7 24.8 23.7 26.0 27.5 32.2 Immigration 24.7 24.8 23.7 26.0 27.5 32.2Education/ Schools 18.2 16.1 15.3 15.8 11.3 10.0 Schools 18.2 16.1 15.3 15.8 11.3 10.0 Unemp/Jobs 12.4 12.3 11.0 6.8 9.7 11.7 Iraq War 1.8 1.7 0.9 3.0 1.9 4.2 Other 13.8 10.5 16.4 23.3 14.4 8.7 “What do you think is THE one most important problem facing the Latino community today?”

46. Partisanship and Issue Positions: Preferred Party to Address Problem Facing Latinos Dems CA Reps CA Neither CA Don’t CA Dems CA Reps CA Neither CA Don’t CA Know Know Democrat 44.8 51.2 6.7 6.6 37.1 32.0 11.4 10.0 Republican 19.3 13.1 21.0 24.8 42.1 49.3 17.6 12.6 Independent 14.4 18.6 7.8 7.0 55.7 56.2 22.0 18.0 Don’t Care 12.1 10.2 6.2 4.2 48.2 41.0 33.5 44.4 Don’t Know 7.7 7.1 6.2 8.8 40.5 34.3 45.6 49.6 “Which political party do you think has a better approach to address this problem?”

47. IMMIGRATION POLICY

49. Preferred Immigration Policy, by Generation 1 st CA 2 nd CA 3 rd CA 4 th CA 1 st CA 2 nd CA 3 rd CA 4 th CAImmediate Legalization 53.6 58.2 23.7 22.1 35.5 37.2 15.5 16.3 Guest Worker: Legalization 25.3 22.8 43.7 53.4 35.1 34.3 47.0 52.1 Guest Worker: Temporary 10.6 9.6 13.9 16.3 12.0 12.1 13.6 12.6 Seal Border 2.1 0.8 7.3 2.3 6.5 7.5 11.5 12.9

50. Latino National Survey Executive Summary Demographic Tables Background Tables Questionnaire and Toplines Available at the website of the Washington Institute for the Study of Ethnicity, Race, and Sexuality (WISER), University of Washington, Seattle: http://depts.washington.edu/uwiser/LNS.shtml