Gomez 1

Fernando M Gomez

ENGL 1302 – 101

Dr. Sharity Nelson

11 November 2022

Increasing Voter Turnout Among Minority Populations Through Effective Mobilization

Introduction

In today’s world, political transnationalism has become a much larger part of people’s

everyday lives. This has been largely influenced by the increase in access to technology.

Information about voting schedules and potential candidates are more accessible than ever before

with millions of people having access to voting alternatives and online information desks that

can answer all their questions. However, despite this technological advancement and the growing

population of Hispanic communities, this minority group has the lowest percentage of

participation in politics, especially in voting (Zorrilla-Velazquez et al. 3). This paper aims to

demonstrate why and when certain demographics are more or less likely to participate in

elections in the US. Furthermore, it will argue that to increase voter turnout among minority

populations, certain methods of contact must be used to mobilize Mexican immigrants present in

Hispanic American communities, including the representation of interests and offering voting

alternatives.

Political Transnationalism

There are many factors that play into the reasons why certain ethnic demographics,

namely Hispanic immigrants, are more or less likely to participate in politics, specifically in

voting. One of these main reasons is that earlier generations are less likely to have political

efficacy than later immigrant generations because later immigrant generations have more
Gomez 2

awareness and access to informational resources related to political engagement. Qi, Dan, and

Sylvia Gonzalez analyzed their findings and arrived at this conclusion where they found a trend

that minority groups tended to vote in larger populations when they are a later generation of

immigrants. Their findings showed that there were differences across racial groups, including

African Americans, Asians, and Latinos, but there was a special focus in voter turnout in relation

to immigration status in terms of generation. “As [minority group members] move away from

their immigration generation,” Qi and Gonzalez claim, “they should be more likely to turnout

than their first-generation ancestors as they become culturally and politically assimilated” (227).

This is because, as Qi and Gonzalez delineate, first-generation immigrants have other priorities

besides becoming politically involved, and that is assimilating and integrating into “American

society” in a cultural, social, and economic sense (227). Meanwhile, historical trends of later

generations of immigrants analyzed by Qi and Gonzalez confirmed the predicted trend by

showing increased voter turnout in later generations. Because later immigrant generations are

more familiar with the political system, they are more competent to vote. The idea of

immigration status and generation connects to the idea of political transnationalism. Qi and

Gonzalez assert that newer generations have more access to information and voting opportunities

because they are more “integrated” and “assimilated” with the “American society”.

Another reason Hispanic immigrants are less likely to participate in U.S. politics is the

consequent vulnerability to political schemes encouraged by imposing candidates as it relates to

the lack of information, mentioned previously. Fording, Richard C. and Sanford F. Schram used

Donald Trump’s campaign statement as evidence of this theory. Fording and Schram noticed that

Donald Trump’s campaign statement, “Make America Great Again” attracted unprecedented

levels of support from “low-information voters” (670). “Using emotional appeals to people’s
Gomez 3

racial and ethnic anxieties,” Fording and Schram point out, “Trump was able to attract low-

information […] voters” (672). This is additional validation that immigrant representation in

political activities is small compared to other ethnic groups because their support is misinformed

and misled. Such that specific statements made by presidents who have certain clout are capable

of establishing a seemingly strong authority over people’s minds, coercing people’s votes in their

favor (Fording and Schram 672). In addition to lack of access to basic resources for engagement

in political activities, minority groups like Mexican immigrants are constantly forced to reason

and rely on emotions encouraged by candidates, who they subsequently vote for without seeing

no other choice or candidate to vote for - even so far to not vote at all.

Representation of Interests

One main way in which voting turnout can be increased is through the representation of

minority’s interests. In their article, Jeffrey A. Fine and James M. Avery consider Latino

representation in relation to the Latino population size. They found that geographic

constituencies and electoral constituencies in other minority groups are comparable to the

proportions of Latino populations. “Underrepresentation of Latinos relative to whites in the

House is strongest in districts where Latinos make up a significantly large portion of the district,”

Fine and Avery assert, concluding that Latino populations, which are composed of Hispanic

immigrants, are significantly underrepresented (1184). As there is less electoral strength from the

Latino minority population, there is a worse representation of interests. Considering this,

representation of Latino interests in the U.S. Senate is the must in increasing minority population

voter support and turnout. This relates to how Mexican immigrants have little to no access to

specific and necessary information, which significantly contributes to their voting behaviors and

low voter turnout.

Gomez 4

Furthermore, there is more support for the candidate that will cause the more benefit for

the minority group population regardless of the candidate’s race. In his article, Bernard L. Fraga

discovered that candidates race, rather than increasing the candidates support on behalf of

minority groups depending on race, made no difference as opposed to the size of the population

of a minority group increasing and leading to more support for a candidate representing their

interests. “For both African Americans and Latinos” Fraga claims, “turnout is greater when each

group makes up a larger portion of the electorate, regardless of candidate race. Thus, the

prevailing candidate-centered explanations positing a connection between the ethnicity of office

seekers and turnout miss the principal role of jurisdiction racial/ethnic composition” (98).

Considering that the theory of race and participation engulf the idea that minority voters will

support a candidate that is of the same race, according to Fraga, candidate’s race is not as

impactful as it is believed. Not only that, but district composition, which is also discussed by

Fraga, underscores the importance of other factors that should be considered aside from race

and/or ethnicity of the minority population and the candidate running for office. Not only does

this demonstrate minority voting based on how each individual voter will vote, but also how the

minority groups as a whole contribute to the overall support of specific candidates, leading to the

shift and movement in political schedules in the United States and voter turnout in Hispanic

minority.

Because minority group representation in politics is often contributed to the supply of

minority candidates, there is clarification needed in terms of how a candidate’s race impacts

minority support by related race. Eric Gonzalez Juenke considers this by focusing on the

candidate’s perspective: self-selection. As Juenke discusses in his article, the evidence he found

corroborates the idea that the belief that candidate’s race does not impact voter turnout but is
Gomez 5

actually a representation of interests is actually a misconception of political representation of

certain groups such as Latinos, a growing minority group. According to Juenke, it all starts with

the self-selection of the minority candidate to be involved and participate in politics for the factor

of candidate representation of minority groups to be considered in the first place. Rather than

jumping ahead to individual voter’s options and predictions of having them vote or not for a

minority candidate, as stated by Juenke, it is also important to recognize the candidate’s decision

to run as it is fostered by the opportunity to be elected. “It is clear that Latino district populations

drives Latino candidate emergence” Juenke points out. “Conversely, Latino candidates are rarely

on ballots in low Latino population districts” (597). Similar to how Fraga’s experiment and

results unveiled a difference between minority groups voting based on candidate’s race, which

there was significant difference on behalf of Latinos or Hispanic immigrants, there is a common

ground in that the representation of minority groups in politics is much more than simply

representing them through their inclusion in politics. Such that their interests are what are to be

considered and applied in the political realm to advance appropriate changes and

transformations. Accordingly, the lack of participation and electoral constituency of Hispanic

minority can be changed through better representation of interests rather than only race.

Minority Mobilization

With growing technology resources, it is hard to understand why so many people of

Mexican decent have such a little voice in government. However, using these same technology

resources as they become more accessible to a variety of voters, we can consider the use of

methods of contact through technological mediums as opportunities to mobilize minorities and

encourage political engagement. In their paper, Stevens and Bishin talk about mobilization of

minority voter turnout through effective contact techniques by candidates and parties. Stevens
Gomez 6

and Bishin delve into the topic of voter turnout in ethnic and racial minorities as affected by the

amount of influence the parties may play in either as compared to whites or Americans. Talking

about Minority participation and mobilization, Stevens and Bishins describe voter turnout

differences between whites and minorities including Blacks, Hispanics, Asians and more. They

introduce the alternative for identifying group mobilization besides race including or factoring in

socioeconomic status and party identification. This is closely related to idea of an emphasis on

candidates addressing specific interest of minority groups rather than simply establishing

representation by having a candidate of that race, ethnicity, or minority group.

Language proficiency is also a strong influencer. In their article, De La Garza and Yang

discuss their findings and results of their theory that language proficiency has a strong influence

on political participation. Registration, voting and non-electoral campaign related activities are

discussed in how they are presented to English and Spanish-dominant Latinos as well as

bilingual people. Language proficiency grouping is analyzed. This shows how the dominant

language can and should be used when informing certain groups in the United States about

political topics, such as those analyzed in this article. This includes how and where to register

and non-electoral campaigns that encourage political participation. It is noteworthy that high

levels of political involvement are in populations that are spoken to in their dominant language.

That is, English-dominant Latinos participate more when political topics are talked about in

English, but both also participate in such activities when they are informed in their dominant

language. This translates clearly to the topic of how Mexican immigrants may be misinformed

because political topics are not talked in the dominant language in their areas and therefore are

less informed or have less of an idea of what political engagement and activities, they can

participate in.
Gomez 7

Zorrilla-Velazquez et al. consider the impact of Mexican communities in the United

States in this paper. Using a transnational theory perspective, political activities and involvement

alternatives for Mexican immigrants are explained. It considers the background of Mexican

diaspora along with their historical, social, and political background that has led to their idea of

the external vote and its impact on the United States’ political schedules. Furthermore, it

considers in-person and internet voting as possible solutions for Mexican immigrants and

communities in the United States to learn and use. This contributes to the main idea of the factors

behind the voting turnout behaviors of Mexican communities, whose influence is stronger than

ever before in today’s world. In fact, this article uses data from 2006 to the present – it considers

immigration as a historical phenomenon that is currently partaking meaningful impacts on

politics in the United States. Voting abroad is a growing phenomenon and this article addresses it

with strong arguments and evidence.

Conclusion

As we can see, in a growing transnational setting, there are factors involved in the

reasons for low voter turnout. This includes the low accessibility of information, especially for

earlier immigrant generations, and the subsequent voting vulnerability with which candidates

integrate into their campaigns to lash out on voting minorities who are left with no other choice

but to support a candidate that is not necessarily representing them or not voting at all. With a

rising Hispanic minority population, minority mobilization must be taken into effect through

effective methods of contact including a just representation of interests and the use of

technologies accessible to minorities so as to increase political participation by communicating

party goals responsibly and offering voting alternatives. Representation of interests encourages a
Gomez 8

more democratic setting, especially for the earlier and later generations of Mexican immigrants,

who comprise the largest growing population in the United States, and increased minority

mobilization engages voters from Hispanic minority populations who have a hard time finding or

accessing basic political-engagement resources.

Gomez 9

Works Cited:

De La Garza, Rodolfo O., and Alan Yang. “Language Dominance, Bilingualism, and Latino

Political Participation in the United States.” Political Science Quarterly, vol. 130, no. 4,

2015, pp. 655–699., https://doi.org/10.1002/polq.12399. 

Fine, Jeffrey A., and James M. Avery. “Senate Responsiveness to Minority Constituencies:

Latino Electoral Strength and Representation.” Social Science Quarterly, 2014,

https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12093. 

Fording, Richard C., and Sanford F. Schram. “The Cognitive and Emotional Sources of Trump

Support: The Case of Low-Information Voters.” New Political Science, vol. 39, no. 4,

2017, pp. 670–686., https://doi.org/10.1080/07393148.2017.1378295. 

Fraga, Bernard L. “Candidates or Districts? Reevaluating the Role of Race in Voter

Turnout.” American Journal of Political Science, vol. 60, no. 1, 2015, pp. 97–122.,

https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12172.

Juenke, Eric Gonzalez. “Ignorance Is Bias: The Effect of Latino Losers on Models of Latino

Representation.” American Journal of Political Science, vol. 58, no. 3, 2014, pp. 593–603.,

https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12092. 

Qi, Dan, and Sylvia Gonzalez. “Immigrant Status, Race, and Voter Turnout in the American

Mass Public.” Social Science Quarterly, vol. 103, no. 1, 2021, pp. 225–240.,

https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.13110. 
Gomez 10

Stevens, Daniel, and Benjamin G. Bishin. “Getting out the Vote: Minority Mobilization in a

Presidential Election.” Political Behavior, vol. 33, no. 1, 2010, pp. 113–138.,

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-010-9128-7. 

Zorrilla-Velazquez, Daniel, et al. “Political Transnationalism in Mexico: The Importance of

Mexican Communities in the United States and the External Vote.” The International

Journal of Interdisciplinary Civic and Political Studies, vol. 16, no. 1, 2021, pp. 1–15.,

https://doi.org/10.18848/2327-0071/cgp/v16i01/1-15.