Minority Turnout

Even after the passing of the Fifteenth Amendment, African Americans were “disenfranchised in the South by intimidation and electoral trickery, including whites-only primaries, rigged literacy tests, and poll taxes” (Patterson 2011, p. 180). The Freedom Riders rode through the South, enduring harassment and imprisonment to encourage other African Americans to vote. Voter turnout in African American communities is greatly encouraged. Personally, coming from an African American family, I was strongly encouraged by my parents and grandparents to vote when I was of legal age. My family instilled the importance of voting in me at a very young age. Although voter turnout among African Americans is still fairly low, in the 2008 presidential election African Americans had the second highest voter turnout, behind non-Hispanic Caucasians (African Americans, n.d.). Race can influence voter turnout because with African Americans specifically, although rates are getting better, they are still not high.

The most important factor to evaluate if voter turnout has decreased is calculating and constructing the turnout rate, “when it equals the total number of votes cast divided by the eligible electorate” (McDonald and Popkin 2001, 963). This means that researchers rely upon the Bureau of Census statistics of the voting-age population (VAP) for the denominator. According to the Bureau of the Census, the VAP includes people ineligible to vote. This group of people consists of noncitizens, felons, and the mentally incompetent. The voting-age population also fails to include the citizens who are living overseas whose votes can count. The inclusion of ineligible populations in the VAP creates a negative skew to the data used to calculate voter participation. This, in turn, would make voter participation appear to be declining more than it actually is since, according to McDonald and Popkin, the population of those ineligible to vote, like noncitizens and felons, has been

In 2008, African-American presidential nominee Barack Obama garnered 67% of the Latino vote. In his bid for re-election, President Barack Obama acquired 71% of the Latino vote (Pew Research Center). With these statistics in mind, one can conclude that there has been a consistent growing pattern of continued co-operation between blacks and Latinos at the national level. This is in complete contrast however, to the mindset of some observers who believed that Latinos would not come out in the numbers they did because of racial bias and because of the fact that Obama received much less support amongst Latinos in the democratic primaries when faced against Hilary Clinton (Hero & Preuhs, p.3). Many people mistakenly thought this to be so because

The authors further explain their reasons for calling America a “racial democracy” and how conflicted they are. Jason Stanley and Weaver explain how minorities

61% of the eligible electorate voted in the 1968 presidential election (Nicholas, 1969), while only 58.6% voted in the 2012 presidential election (Kernell et al., 2016, p. 450). Although national voting rates in 2008 and 2012 were lower than historical rates, voting rates among minorities were at an all time high. This suggests that there is an inverse relationship between national voting rates and minority voting rates, at least in the context of the 1968, 2008, and 2012 elections: if one rate rose, the other fell. Further research on why this occurs would be beneficial for future presidential elections. Voting rates among immigrants are still very low compared to native born voting rates, so efforts to encourage political participation among immigrants should be increased. Efforts to increase the national voting rate (including all races and ethnicities) should also be

Voters Identification law may suppress minority voting and it may not suppress minority voting. We have so many different races that enter this country with permission and without. The laws for visiting or becoming a legal resident in this country is complicated especially because of the terrorist attacks. Identification laws are necessary in my opinion. It helps identify people, most importantly it helps to decrease any fraudulent activities in this country. I can say if it has anything to do with racial and ethnic minorities, maybe it’s a coincidence that majority of African Americans and Hispanic have less access to photo IDs, some of us are not legal citizens, or maybe not. The law complicates everything in general for good reasons so they feel. I can understand what the research and studies demonstrates, about the decrease in minority audience and increase Republican Party turnouts. I do believe if you have a higher mindset you can attain all things that seem impossible. I know firsthand how difficult it is for African Americans to register to vote without an ID, the law won’t even to let you register if its expired. So what the law has gotten strict, so what, that should motivate African Americans and other races in this country to push through any obstructions to get an ID so they can be apart in making changes in this society. I know African Americans went through what may have seem like Hell but they overcame it and contribute to adding Amendments, why go through

In accordance with the New York Times article ‘’27 Million Potential Hispanic Votes. But What Will They Really Add Up To?’’ writed by Marcela Valdes, the hispanic vote is determined for a such of circumstances, which explained through different testimonies in different contexts; starting with a background about one of the most important political issues in America today.

Since the majority of Latinos are not legal citizens; therefore, they cannot vote in an election (Ginsbert et al, 2013). For the Latinos that can vote are more likely to vote Democratic. Voters for the Democratic are seen as urban countries, with large minority population, older and native Texans (Ginsbert et al, 2013). Teachers, business men and women, and citizens with higher educations are more likely to vote depending on who is running and their platforms. Hispanics and African-American are seen voting more for the Democratic candidates and whites voting for the Republican candidates (Ginsbert et al, 2013). Women are move likely to vote Democratic than men (Ginsbert et al,

Published by the New York Times under the Opinion section, the audience for this article is any interested reader. At the time it was released, November 18th, 2016, this article arrived during last year’s elections, in which a large, but surprising number of Americans voted for candidate Donald Trump, shocking many forecasters who had predicted otherwise. Therefore, after the election, many people may have been researching the demographics of the election, and this article, which briefly shared Brooks’ opinion on the nature of the election and how viewing others through the lens of a dominant identity influenced how the votes fell where they did, may have caught a keen reader’s eye. Also, this article came at a time where racism and prejudice caused many problems, leading some to view others as one-dimensional, represented only by a skin color or religion. Since prejudice and hate is still a large issue today, tackling this problem helps make this article relevant, nearly a year after its release.

This research examines the disjuncture between Hispanic strength in population and Hispanic participation in politics. I examine the nature of this disjuncture: its severity, its causes, and its consequences. Hispanics currently comprise 11.2% of the U.S. population, but the Hispanic vote in the 1998 elections comprised only 4.7% of all ballots cast. The situation is even bleaker when considering Hispanic representation in Congress. Currently, less than four percent of U.S. House members are Latino. Add to that clear disjuncture the fact that two of the Hispanic Congressmen do not even possess the ability to vote and that there is not a single Hispanic Senator, and we see that

In politics, racial and ethnic backgrounds tend to outline the outcomes of public policies- especially in minority communities. Minorities in the United States yearly increase due to both legal and illegal immigration (Shaw et al. 332). The trend will continue and by the middle of the 21st century, the minority population, cumulatively, will surpass the so-called White majority in the United States. The definitions of pluralism and two-tiered pluralism differ between the person’s race and ethnic backgrounds. As for the minorities, it may both bring some advantages and as well as disadvantages in public participation and the passing of public policies; however, in current times, two-tiered pluralism is becoming more dominant in politics as the racial divide within the United States continues to worsen.

Merriam-Webster online dictionary defines democracy "as a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by the people" (www.merriam-webster.com). But the one big problem is that "We the people" are not exercising their "supreme power" to determine the U.S. government. Less than half of the eligible electorate showed up at the polls for the 1996 U.S. presidential election. While lower turnout has marred previous presidential elections, 1996's voter turnout dipped below 50 percent for the first time in more than 30 years. It appears that the people's increasing cynicism about politicians that they lie to get elected and the perception that people have no respect or confidence in the

The election of President Obama marks the most noteworthy political accomplishment for African Americans in the United States during the post-civil rights revolution, thus bringing about a change in the country’s social and political landscape that was steeped in racial discrimination since the founding of this great nation. Because social and political conditions are subject to constant change, President Obama’s

Historically in America, voting has been a relatively discriminatory practice. It has limited and deprived many individuals of many diverse races, ethnicities, and walks of life from casting their votes to select the individual who they feel is most educated, and skilled to represent their interests. Not only has this been proven to be wrong by discriminating minority groups in voting, it also has proved to be a process, which minimizes the largest growing demographics in the country. Furthermore, with millennials growing to become more politically active, minority groups are becoming more politically involved than ever. Taking this into account an important question that is raised by the author William Eskridge in his book “Legislation and Statutory Interpretation” is “Would minorities be better off with more representatives who had to pay attention to their interests because they are a powerful and organized constituency, rather than with a few representatives of minority districts who specialize in protecting only their interests?” (Eskridge,Frickley,& Garrett, 2006, pp.55).

I completely agree that the voting turnout rate in the United States is absolutely pathetic. Young adults seem to be too preoccupied with their life to bother to cast a vote. The pro argument did a great job providing actual empirical facts and the real issue with a national low turnout rate primarily due to young adults in the United States. However, I am very against the idea fining or punished individuals that don’t cast a vote during the primary. My reason isn’t one bit influenced by Jason Brennan weak con argument that was embodied by hypothetical situations and post hoc ergo. Rather I personally believe that voting and being able to participate in politics is a civil virtue (moral duty to society), not an absolute obligation (legally