Citation
The effect of immigration reform on Hispanic advocacy groups

Material Information

Title:
The effect of immigration reform on Hispanic advocacy groups
Creator:
Lovell, Darrell A. ( author )
Language:
English
Physical Description:
1 electronic file : ;

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Emigration and immigration law -- United States ( lcsh )
Pressure groups -- Texas ( lcsh )
Hispanic Americans -- Political activity -- Texas ( lcsh )
Hispanic Americans -- Politics and government -- Texas ( lcsh )
Emigration and immigration law ( fast )
Hispanic Americans -- Political activity ( fast )
Hispanic Americans -- Politics and government ( fast )
Pressure groups ( fast )
Texas ( fast )
United States ( fast )
Genre:
bibliography ( marcgt )
theses ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )

Notes

Review:
Recent immigration reform has caused a controversy over the implementation of proposed reform in the past two years. Arizona's attempt to pass strict immigration reform triggered an outpouring of advocacy activity among groups nationwide. This movement is not the first time groups have mobilized against immigration reform on both the federal and state levels. Texas is on the verge of a significant state attempt to pass immigration reform, which has sparked initial reactions similar to those seen in Arizona in 2010. This study examines how Hispanic advocacy groups are responding to these policy reforms. In the process I examine how these selected groups explain these policies to the public, how their patterns of activities are altered, and whether the reform is driving an increase in Hispanic community activism. Using a semi-structured interview method I provide evidence that Hispanic advocacy groups see immigration reform in the state of Texas as an opportunity to rally and combine forces, the opportunities to increase membership is not clear. However, these groups believe that the political opportunity provided by immigration reform will give them a platform to increase their influence on policy-makers.
Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references.
System Details:
System requirements: Adobe Reader.
General Note:
School of Public Affairs
Statement of Responsibility:
c by Darrell A. Lovell.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Colorado Denver
Holding Location:
Auraria Library
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
880140107 ( OCLC )
ocn880140107

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text
THE EFFECT OF IMMIGRATION REFORM ON HISPANIC ADVOCACY
GROUPS
By
Darrell A. Lovell
B.S., University of Central Missouri, 2003
A thesis submitted to the
University of Colorado Denver
In partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree of
Masters of Public Administration
2011


This thesis for the Masters of Public Administration
degree by
Darrell A. Lovell
has been approved
Date


Lovell, Darrell A. (MPA, School of Public Affairs)
The Effect of Immigration Reform on Hispanic Advocacy Groups
Thesis directed by Assistant Professor Paul Stretesky, PhD
ABSTRACT
Recent immigration reform has caused a controversy over the
implementation of proposed reform in the past two years. Arizonas attempt to
pass strict immigration reform triggered an outpouring of advocacy activity
among groups nationwide.
This movement is not the first time groups have mobilized against
immigration reform on both the federal and state levels. Texas is on the verge
of a significant state attempt to pass immigration reform, which has sparked
initial reactions similar to those seen in Arizona in 2010.
This study examines how Hispanic advocacy groups are responding to
these policy reforms. In the process I examine how these selected groups
explain these policies to the public, how their patterns of activities are altered,
and whether the reform is driving an increase in Hispanic community activism.
Using a semi-structured interview method I provide evidence that
Hispanic advocacy groups see immigration reform in the state of Texas as an
opportunity to rally and combine forces, the opportunities to increase
membership is not clear. However, these groups believe that the political
opportunity provided by immigration reform will give them a platform to
increase their influence on policy-makers.
This abstract accurately represents the content of the candidate
recommend its publication.
Signei
Paul Stretesky, PhD


DEDICATION
I would like to dedicate this thesis to my loving wife, Amy; son, Ari; and
parents, Dennis and Bertha. Without their support, understanding, and
sacrifices my pursuit of higher education and completion of this thesis would
not have been possible.


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
My thanks to my advisor on this project, Paul Stretesky, PhD, for his
contribution to and support of this thesis. I would also like to thank the
members of my thesis committee, Christopher Weible, PhD, and Marty
Otanez, PhD, for their guidance and insights throughout this process.


TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of figures..............................................vi
CHAPTER
1. Introduction................................................1
1.1 Background..........................................1
1.2 Issue...............................................5
1.3 Problem.............................................8
1.4 Research question..................................10
2. The Role of Advocacy......................................12
Groups in the Policy Process
2.1 Why individuals join...............................13
advocacy organizations
2.2 Advocacy groups responsibilities in...............18
the policy process
2.3 Types of advocacy groups...........................20
2.3.1 Institutional versus membership organizations....20
2.3.2 Public interest versus economic interest groups.22
2.3.3 Large versus small organizations.................24
2.4 Power development..................................26
2.5 Ways groups can participate........................31
2.6 Potential advocacy group tactics...................34
VI


2.7 Relevance of the literature
39
3. History of Hispanic Civil Rights.........................42
3.1 How social movements develop......................43
3.2 Labor rights: The first Hispanic movement........47
3.3 Education reform...................................49
3.4 Political activism.................................50
3.5 Hispanic advocacy groups impact on................52
immigration reform
4. Methods....................................................54
4.1 Importance of qualitative methods...................54
4.2 Sampling frame and organization description........56
4.3 Groups that declined to participate................61
4.4 Interviews.........................................62
5. Results....................................................65
5.1 Have Hispanic civil rights groups...................65
reacted to the pending immigration reform bills?
5.2 If there is a reaction, do these advocacy........74
groups use pending immigration reform
bills to mobilize the Hispanic community
to influence the policy process?
vii


5.3 Current tactics
81
5.4 What are the types of action plans regarding..83
immigration reform?
5.5 Summarizing results...........................89
6. Conclusion...........................................91
6.1 What we learned...............................91
6.2 The role of Arizona SB 1070 ..................94
6.3 Weakness of the study.........................95
6.4 What is the next step?........................97
6.5 Implications of the study and summary.........98
REFERENCES...................................................100
APPENDICES
Appendix A.............................................111
Appendix B.............................................113
Appendix C.............................................115
viii


LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
4.1. Types of organizations studied........................59
4.2. Advocacy organization breakdown.......................60
5.1 Breakdown of responses................................87
VI


1. Introduction
1.1 Background
Calls for immigration regulation and reform have persisted throughout
U.S. history. Hostility toward immigrants began early in America when settlers
rejected a second wave of immigrants. In the United States, racism is often
noted by scholars as a contributing factor in shaping immigration legislation
(Burden, 2007; Eschbach & Waters, 1995; Finch, 1990; Lee, 2002). For
instance, as early as 1882 racially driven immigration legislation was created
to limit Chinese labor (Lee, 2002). The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882
restricted the ability of Chinese immigrants to work in the United States and
barred any court from granting citizenship to a person of Chinese descent.
The Act was unpopular among the public and was eventually deemed racially
insensitive and overturned in 1943 by the Magnuson Act,1 setting in motion a 1
1 The Magnuson Act permitted Chinese immigrants residing in the United States to become
citizens and provided a national quota of 105 Chinese immigrants per year. Large-scale
Chinese immigration did not take place until the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965.
1


path to citizenship for Chinese immigrants. Such a path has often been
regarded as a priority for any comprehensive immigration legislation.
After repealing the Chinese Exclusion Act, the United States again
attempted to restrict the type of immigrants that came to the United States by
passing a series of federal acts that restricted several immigrant groups,
including Hispanics and the Japanese,2 from entering the country legally. In
addition to these groups, criminals too were never welcome, but the United
States began to accept a better class of immigrants. The issue was there
was no way to know who the solid citizens were. Throughout U.S. history
political or social prejudice against certain races or nationalities would partly
determine who was thought to be a criminal. Early on, any Central European
was suspected, and then Eastern Europeans. In the early 1900s suspicion
shifted to Asians, namely the Japanese and Chinese, and in the mid-twentieth
century Hispanics. Currently Hispanics and Middle Easterners are receiving
this attention.
Throughout United States history persons judged to be productive by
supplementing the labor force were allowed to immigrate.3 For instance acts
2 Acts include the Page Act of 1875, the Naturalization Act of 1870, the Chinese Exclusion
Act of 1882, the Immigration Act of 1882, the Geary Act of 1892, the Immigration Act of 1917,
and the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965.
3 Economics has played a key role in immigration reform. Settlers allowed immigration due to
the need for cheap manual labor. The same concept has persisted throughout the United
States history. Even today immigration reform is discussed in the context of how restricting
access to Hispanic immigrants will affect the United States agriculture industry.
2


such as quota acts allowed for states such as California, with its Bracero Act
of 1942, to accept immigrants who would supplement the work force in areas
whose working populations were low, often taking agricultural jobs that
citizens were less likely to perform.4
The decision to enact strict immigration legislation began, for the
Hispanic population, in the 1940s. During the sixty years since, Hispanic
immigrants have watched as a number of legislative acts have been passed
that restrict their ability to seek refuge or their fortune in the United States.
While federal and state governments were looking for ways to restrict
Hispanic immigration, persons from Mexico, the Caribbean, and South
America were continuing to enter the United States and integrate into the
workforce, especially in manual labor and agricultural trades (Crawford,
Meade, Spiller & Stamper, 2004).
Californias Bracero Act of 1942 restricted employers to contracting
with only two million immigrants. Although those immigrants fought to stay in
the country, despite the legislation a large number were deported. Congress
attempted to curb the flow of immigrants in 1986 with the Immigration Reform
and Control Act (IRCA). Using sanctions on employers, the United States
4 One example of a quota act is the Emergency Quota Act of 1921.
3


attempted to stem the flow of illegal immigrants seeking work in the United
States.5
Beginning with President Ronald Reagan, the United States
government has sought to develop programs providing paths to citizenship.
Presidents George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush have
upheld this concept, which aims to provide law-abiding and taxpaying
immigrants the opportunity and education to become United States citizens.
These immigration policies have sparked a number of Hispanic
organizations to incorporate advocacy for just, comprehensive reform into
their groups platforms. That fight has been at the forefront of many national
organizations' agendas for the past forty years (NCLR representative, 2010).
With states queuing to present and pass immigration reform, the fight for
influence in the policy process regarding immigration reform is a pressing
issue for national and local groups (NCLR representative, 2010).
5 It is very important to understand how the term illegal immigrant is used. In many cases,
among both the Hispanic population and the general public, illegal immigrants are the targets
of those wanting immigration reform. The problem arises when legal immigrants are confused
with their unauthorized counterparts, or are made the collateral damage in the pursuit of
stringent reform of illegal immigration. This is an aspect that I am not able to examine fully in
this thesis, but it is a point of interest.
4


1.2 Issue
While immigration reform has been unsuccessful, the implementation
of workers' rights, along with a failing economy and stricter employment and
deportation laws, has caused unauthorized or illegal immigration at the
national level to stabilize (NALEO research project, 2010). Despite the fact
that the number of illegal immigrants in the United States dropped from 12
million in 2007 to 11.2 million in 2010 (Cohn & Passel, 2011), the federal
government has come under pressure from community, state, and local
governments to address the issue, especially in the southwest where Texas,
Nevada, New Mexico, California, and Colorado have experienced an increase
in illegal immigrants (Cohn & Passel, 2011).
With the importance of illegal immigration varying from state to state,
recent calls for national comprehensive immigration reform have gone
unanswered. The lack of a nationwide public mandate may deter the federal
government from concentrating on immigration, but public opinion in the
southwest is different. Given that regions proximity to Mexico and Latin
America, immigration is a hot-button topic in Texas, Nevada, Arizona,
Louisiana, Oklahoma, New Mexico, and California. Groups advocating
against immigration believe that these states are being forced to create
expensive social welfare programs because of illegal immigrants.
5


States in the southwest are now taking matters into their own hands
and creating legislation that attempts to restrict illegal immigration. Arizona
was the first state to take notable action, introducing Senate Bill (SB) 1070,
which imposed restrictions regarding immigrant IDs and granted law
enforcement officials the right to detain and question those suspected of
being illegal immigrants. Nevada and Texas have followed suit, with similar
laws being proposed in both states. However, sweeping change has been
met with disdain, as evidenced by the response to Arizonas attempt to pass
its recent immigration reform.
The call for immigration reform has increased in the past decade. As
the number of immigrants has risen, the public has pressured the government
to provide legislation to regulate entry into the country. In a May 2010 Gallup
poll 68 percent of those asked said that halting illegal immigration was very
important" or extremely important."6 In the same poll 67 percent felt the same
way about developing a plan to deal with illegal immigrants currently residing
in the United States. In June 2010, a Gallup poll placed immigration reform as
one of the top six policy issues facing the nation.7
The trend holds true among Hispanics. Garcia Research and Santiago
ROI conducted the LatinoMetrics research project (Latino Metrics Study,
2010). The study polled 504 Latinos randomly selected from across the
6 See Appendix A.
7 See Appendix B.
6


country about immigration reform and Arizona SB 1070 in May and June of
2010.8 The results align with those of Gallup a poll indicating that immigration
reform is an important policy issue facing the nation, and that 78 percent of
Latinos believe that immigration reform is very important."9 The differences
emerge upon consideration of what immigration reform should address.
In the Gallup polling referenced above, the respondents believed that
reform should address immigrants currently in the United States, along with
the tightening of the nations borders. From this research it is safe to assume
that immigration reform that promotes tougher sanctions on current
immigrants, such as those included in Arizona SB 1070, and that protects the
border, falls in line with the opinions expressed by the Gallup poll research
(Saad, 2010).
Hispanics, on the other hand, favor reform that provides a path to
citizenship. In the same LatinoMetrics poll, 76 percent of Latinos supported
legislation that included a path to citizenship. Conversely, 74 percent of those
polled strongly disagreed with Arizona SB 1070 because they believed it
would be used by law enforcement to promote racial profiling and human
rights infringements. Polling suggests that for Hispanics, immigration reform is
8 Latino is a term used by the research group. This term is synonymous with the term
Hispanic used in this project.
9 Respondents were asked, How important is it to you that the government takes steps this
year to deal with each of the followingextremely important, very important, moderately
important, or not that important?
7


about basic human rights, while for the general or non-Hispanic population it
is an issue of citizenship and access to public services. From both
perspectives immigration reform is gaining traction.
1.3 Problem
The differences in public opinion about immigration reform are evident
when separate populations are polled about the issue. In short, there is
considerable disagreement about what should be done about illegal
immigration. For many Americans the term immigration reform suggests that
the government should move to reduce immigration. Yet among Hispanics
reform is seen as an avenue to legitimacy and citizenship. According to the
representatives from NALEO and NCLR, their Hispanic membership sees
immigration reform in a positive light. The community believes there is a need
to regulate entrance into the country and protect the population from any
criminal element seeking enterprise in the United States.
However, reform cannot be supported by the community if it does not
provide an economically and socially feasible path to permanent citizenship.
Its not like it was in the early centuries when immigrants came to Ellis Island
and were sworn in and allowed to pass. Citizenship costs, in both time and
money, and it's more than the current immigrant population can afford
(Representative of HCAFL-CIO, 2010).
8


Arizona SB 1070 offers an excellent example of what Hispanic groups
feel is unjust legislation. The law, which proponents and critics alike said was
the broadest and strictest immigration measure in generations, would make
the failure to carry immigration documents a crime and give the police broad
power to detain anyone suspected of being in the country illegally (Archibold,
2010). However, opponents of the legislation see the legislation as an affront
against immigrants basic human rights and believe the law is
unconstitutional.
Arizona Governor Jan Brewer signed the bill into law at the
encouragement of a segment of her constituency. The legislation provided a
possible solution to a general immigration problem for politically motivated
elected officials and public figures seeking to gain the support of a
conservative voting bloc. Conversely, the passage of the legislation alienated
the Hispanic community and fostered concerns about racial profiling and the
restriction of basic civil rights (Archibold, 2010; Hagmann, 2010; Rangel,
2010; Sigal, 2010).
The reaction to Arizona SB 1070 was a massive political activist
movement among the Hispanic community. According to those interviewed
for this project, the Hispanic community is not devoid of political ambition, yet
research suggests that the communitys level of activism fluctuates depending
on the issue. On the surface the passing into law of SB 1070 was a lightning
9


rod for Hispanic political activism, as groups across the nation held
demonstrations and joined Hispanic groups in Arizona and achieved an
injunction to suspend the carrying out of the legislation.
1.4 Research Question
While Arizona SB 1070 has been halted by injunction, largely due to
political activism, copycat legislation has been proposed in Nevada,
Maryland, and Texas, among a number of other states (NALEO
representative, 2011).10 This study will focus on activism in Texas regarding
pending legislation similar to SB 1070.
Included in the separate bills are requirements for identification,
grounds for immigration checks when detaining individuals, and voter
requirement laws. All were hot-button issues for Hispanic advocacy groups in
Arizona and may be so in Texas.
Efforts to study the reaction of Hispanic organizations to immigration
reform are starting to increase, but the current literature is limited. This
research addresses three major questions concerning how Hispanic
organizations have reacted to pending immigration legislation in the state of
Texas. First, have Hispanic civil rights groups reacted to the pending
10 "Copycat legislation is a term that was used throughout the interviews for this project. In
this case, the interviewees used this term to describe upcoming or existing legislation that
has many of the same elements as Arizona SB 1070.
10


immigration reform bills in Texas? Second, if they have reacted, do these
advocacy groups use pending immigration reform bills to mobilize the
Hispanic community to influence the policy process? Third, if advocacy
groups are concerned with immigration reform, what types of action plans do
they create? To address these questions I conduct interviews with leaders of
ten national and local Hispanic advocacy groups about pending immigration
legislation in Texas.
11


2. The Role of Advocacy Groups in the Policy Process
Much has been written about the role of advocacy groups in the policy
process (see Birkland, 2011; Burnstein, 1991; Burnstein & Linton, 2002;
deLeon, 1995; Pralle, 2003). This study expands upon the role of advocacy
groups in the policy process by examining Hispanic civil rights organizations
and immigration reform in Texas. The first step in examining how Hispanic
civil rights view and influence immigration policy is to better understand the
role advocacy organizations can play in the policy process.
This chapter is organized to cover the major themes surrounding the
role of advocacy organization in the policy-making process. First, I present
the basic reasons why individuals join advocacy groups, in order to
understand the decision-making process that contributes to how these groups
are formed. Next, I examine advocacy organizations' responsibility in the
policy process, focusing on their role as an intermediary between the public
and the policy-makers. Third, I present six common types of advocacy groups
12


to understand how these groups organize and operate. Fourth, and most
importantly, I outline how the literature suggests that these groups attempt to
influence the policy process. Fifth, I present the ways in which these groups
participate in the policy process and the possible results of those actions. And
sixth, I outline some of the possible tactics these groups can use to effect
change and exert their influence.
This literature provides the basis for the major questions asked in this
thesis, guides the exploration of how groups determine what issues they act
upon, and shows how these groups can take steps to address their
communitys concerns.
2.1 Why individuals join advocacy organizations
Individuals represent one actor in the policy process (Birkland, 2011).
According to Birkland, individuals are the target of both policy-makers and
advocacy groups, and the number of actors in the policy process creates a
logjam or cluster of opinions. If the opinions of individuals were addressed
one at a time, this would confuse or hinder the process further. The remedy
for this is the creation of localized groups to advocate and deliver a
centralized opinion, such as the advocacy organizations involved in this
study.
13


The number of actors in the policy-making process is often seen as a
detriment because a large number of actors influence many different interests
that will need to be addressed in order to form policy. This is where advocacy,
or interest, groups come into the process. Interest groups are important
perhaps centralto the policy process because the power of individuals is
greatly magnified when they form groups (Birkland, 2011). Concentrating
their individual power into one group provides an avenue for individuals to be
heard, which addresses a concern that prevents many people from
participating in the policy process.
At the basic level, the main reason people join interest groups is to
increase the power of their political voice. Thus, interest groups are attractive
because individuals can share their ideas with those who have similar
ideological viewpoints. While the allure of an improved concentrated stake in
the policy process is important, it is not the only reason, or even the primary
reason, that individuals join advocacy groups. Rather, they join such groups
because the groups address issues that affect them personally, building a
personal connection between the person and the group (Marsh, 1971).
While the personal connection is essential to an individual's joining a
group, it is important to examine how the connection is forged. Long ago,
Truman (1951) presented disturbance theory to explain why people engage
with interest groups. This theory suggests that individuals decide to
14


participate in group activity when a disturbance alters the status quo. Once
this happens, individuals are apt to join groups of like-minded people or those
facing similar issues in order to act against the disturbance and restore their
personal equilibria. This is an appealing and easily accepted theory because
it is grounded in a logical formula. Its essential reasoning is quite logical:
there is a cause and effect relationship between external forces
(disturbances) and the formation of new interest group organizations (Berry,
1978, p. 382). The results of this thesis provide evidence that disturbance
theory is what is at work in regard to immigration reform. Most notably, a
number of these groups are seeing a rise in membership and resources
based on individuals interest in immigration reform.
Another theoretical basis for joining advocacy groups is exchange
theory (Salisbury, 1969). Salisbury suggests that individuals join groups
because they receive a benefit for doing so, and this drives individuals to
become more civically engaged. Exchange theory is similar to disturbance
theory in that it suggests a cause-and-effect relationship, but it is not
expressly reliant on a signaling or focusing event.
Both theories suggest that to become involved, individuals must realize
what is important to them. Building on these theories, Doan and Wood (2003)
propose that problem definition can be measured using a threshold model to
determine when individuals will actually take action. This theory
15


conceptualizes how the public identifies issues and starts to push for new
policy. Doan and Woods theory is based on the rational choice perspective
that issues exist on a spacial plane that has a tipping point, namely the
balance between cost and benefit. When the cost outweighs the benefit for an
individual, the threshold is crossed and the individual starts to mobilize. Once
this happens to a group of individuals, momentum is created in the
community and issues are brought to the attention of decision-makers
regarding the balance between the publics need and the lack of current
policy.
Salisbury (1969) and Truman (1951) suggest that individuals take
action in groups only when they are prodded to by outside influences. Another
view on participation in groups is that individuals feel the groups serve a civic
or altruistic purpose (Moe, 1980). While materialistic and reward-based
models provide an obvious reason for advocacy group identification, there is
a segment of the population who joins advocacy groups for a simple reason:
to do their civic duty, which includes influencing public policy. The desired
result of the activity is a collective benefit and not an individual one (Forsythe
& Welch, 1983; Moe, 1980).
These three theories provide three solid, rational bases for individuals'
joining advocacy groups. While they differ in their ideology, all have proven to
be correct in some cases. Therefore, my intention is not to debate which is
16


correct, but to provide three possible explanations as to why individuals join
advocacy groups and take part in the policy process. This literature underlies
one of the main questions posed in this thesis: is immigration reform a strong-
enough event to push Hispanics to get and stay involved with advocacy
groups fighting against immigration reform? In the results section of this
thesis, a main observation is that the current battle over reform has spurred
additional advocacy among the Hispanic community at the local and national
levels.
In answering this question we are potentially provided with another
reason why individuals join groups. For example, it may be that impending
legislation in Texasor in other states such as Arizona, Massachusetts, and
Nevadaserves to support the disturbance perspective, that is, immigration
legislation threatens the status quo of Hispanics in Texas and elsewhere in
the country. If immigration reform does serve as a disturbance to the Hispanic
community in Texas, then we should find evidence for this in interviews with
group leaders. This research may provide support for the idea that individuals
are likely to join groups as a result of the impact a policy issue can have on
their lives or the lives of those close to them. Where that disturbance
originates (Texas or other states) is in question. In short, if Hispanic advocacy
and civil rights groups have responded to legislation in Texas, then
17


disturbance theory may help explain that response by providing an
explanation for it.
Most significantly, the ability of immigration reform to stimulate
Hispanic activism provides evidence of a way for advocacy groups to reach a
rapidly growing population, which many in political science and politics have
been seeking to learn how to do for a number of years (Marquez, 2000).
2.2 Advocacy groups responsibilities in the policy process
There is a place in policy science/democracy dynamic for public input
(deLeon, 1995). An informed public can make a valuable contribution to
effective policy if these members, or their groups, are given the opportunity to
take part in the policy process. Providing the public with information and
opportunity can increase civic engagement, especially in a decentralized
government. Yet ensuring these groups have a coherent and understandable
voice is an issue that needs to be addressed. One potential solution is the
inclusion and identification of advocacy groups.
Policy-makers work with the community, often via community groups or
public advocates, to determine the facts and aspects of issues that establish
the criteria for future policy (deLeon, 1995). Questions that policy-makers
might ask of community representatives deal with who will be affected by a
proposed policy, and to what extent. This collaboration helps to determine
18


what is possible, which often is not the optimal or perfect solution, and is vital
to the success of the policy process.
While public advocates take part in all aspects of policy-making, they
can be especially useful in identifying environmental parameters and time
constraints. They work within the community to educate and mobilize efforts
to identify issues and put them into a policy context. These advocates, most
notably advocacy groups and community leaders, work for specific causes
and usually on behalf of specific population groups. Especially at the local
level, they serve as a bridge between public opinion and policy (Andrews &
Edwards, 2004). In many cases, these groups are more knowledgeable about
the needs of the community than any other participant in the policy innovation
process.
The value of public advocates lies in their ability to speak in a unified
voice to analysts and decision-makers on behalf of their constituency. Putting
the issue into context is vital to the success of the publics having an influence
on policy. If decision-makers receive thousands of letters, this demonstrates
interest in a problem but does not provide a concise view of how the
community would like to see the issue resolved. In mobilizing together, often
under the umbrella of an advocacy organization, the public can address
decision-makers with one clear voice and vision.
19


The fact that these advocates act in congruence with the public interest
gives them increased value, as opposed to a corporation. Lobbyist, or special
interest group, who are not dedicated to addressing public, needs
(Herrington, 2005). Without input from the public, having a realistic idea of the
urgency of needed activity would be difficult. Working with these groups helps
decision-makers and policy analysts define the scope of a given problem
throughout the policy process.
2.3 Types of advocacy groups
There are a number of ways to classify advocacy groups. Groups can
be studied as national or local, public interest or special interest, or
institutional or membership-based. In this section I will examine the
differences between these types of groups and what each can offer to the
policy process.
2.3.1 Institutional versus membership organizations
The first distinction to examine is that between institutional and
membership-based groups. Institutional groups are formed through
association gained by belonging to a specific entity (Birkland, 2011). An
example involved in this thesis is the Harris County AFL-CIO, which is
included in the category of Hispanic advocacy groups because it is interested
20


in advancing the rights of Hispanics who participate in the labor union. This
group is active in protesting immigration reform in Texas, but the majority of
its membership is not Hispanic, and therefore are supporting a cause as
members of the group and not to meet their individual interests.
Membership groups, on the other hand, are created by choice and
often out of a desire to join together with like-minded individuals (Birkland,
2011). These types of groups are often categorized similarly to the civil rights
groups I examine in this study. Groups of Hispanic advocates seek a coalition
within the group model to address issues that pertain to them individually and
others in the group.
Most of the Hispanic advocacy groups examined in this study fall into
the category of membership groups. These groups are made up of different
individuals who are drawn together simply by their affiliation with the
institution. In this case, the groups studied are all membership-based
organizations that were created by community leaders and advocates to
champion a specific cause. Their membership is composed of individuals who
have a connection with that cause, which is prompting them to make a
conscious choice to get involved to work toward an acceptable solution. The
exception is the Harris County AFL-CIO, a group that advocates for Hispanic
rights but which is not focused solely on that segment of the community.
21


2.3.2 Public interest versus economic interest groups
Another difference to examine is that between public and economic
interest groups. Public interest groups are formed to provide political and
policy guidance to effect change and to work toward the greater good
(Birkland, 2011; Cigler & Nownes, 1995; Rothenberg, 1989). Public interest
groups work toward the common cause, suggesting that these groups are
formed in line with Moes (1980) concept that civic duty or altruistic views and
desires are the primary motivations for group participation. The downside to
public interest groups according to Birkland (2011) is that they often cannot
show a tangible gain to sustain membership, which means these groups have
a hard time growing in both power and size.11 Groups involved in this study,
however, have shown such gains regarding immigration reform, which has
allowed them to sustain their memberships.
Economic interest groups fall in line with disturbance theory (Truman,
1951) or exchange theory (Salisbury, 1969). Groups are formed and joined by
people seeking change or wanting to sustain a status quo that provides an
individual benefit. Special-interest groups are in this category. These groups
work toward the benefit of a selected portion of the public, and the benefits
yielded likely accrue to those who have substantial resources (Birkland, 2011; 11
11 A tangible gain is an example of a group's success that the group can present to current or
potential members, or evidence that it is able to convey members opinions in a bottom-up
process that makes the individuals opinions count.
22


Blais & McCallum, 1987; Schmitz, 1988). Often their work involves specific
events or causes that infringe on the particular group interest of those they
represent.
With the literature presented, discerning where the civil rights groups
involved in this study and such groups in general, fall on this continuum is a
difficult task. Although none of the groups involved in this study is focused
solely on immigration reform, their intention is to cause change that can
directly affect their community. While free-riders do exist in this case, in that
fair immigration reform would benefit all races who immigrate, there is
evidence that the community that stands to gain the most from the action of
the organizations involved is the community these groups represent.
The exception, as in the last section, is the Harris County AFL-CIO, a
labor-based organization serving the labor rights of its membership. While
some aspects of these groups would align with those of special-interest
groups, for instance in some of the lobbying tactics used, I believe the groups
surveyed in this project are public-interest groups, as they are working toward
a general policy solution that will provide benefits to the public within and
outside their target community.
23


2.3.3 Large versus small organizations
The final distinction I will examine is that between large and small
groups. Large groups are classified as peak organizations (Birkland, 2011),
which are considered the most influential and connected groups. The effect of
these large organizations is an increased stature in the policy process.
Money, knowledge, and information are related to the size of the group and
the resources that it and its members can bring to policy conflicts (Birkland,
2011, p. 135). These resources are what make groups powerful and increase
their political power. The most important resource is knowledge (Howlett &
Ramesh, 1995), which is often reserved for those with access to decision-
makers and subject matter experts. Typically larger or peak organizations
have such access.
In contrast, small groups, a classification that applies to seven of the
groups surveyed in this thesis, normally have difficulty providing these types
of incentives for membership and have trouble building their stature in the
policy process (Birkland, 2011). Power often lies in increased numbers;
however, there are cases in which resources such as increased money and
knowledge can outweigh membership size. As mentioned above, knowledge
is an important indicator of the influence or power of an organization. But
money places a close second. Therefore, it is possible for there to be a small
group composed of wealthy and influential subject matter experts. These are
24


often special interest groups that have a specific set of goals and a small
number of individuals being served by the work.
However, most often this is not the case. Smaller public interest groups
struggle to gain an audience and to accrue the power necessary to effect
change or have some influence on their own. This is where coalitions come
into the equation. Smaller groups are often drawn to other groups that have
increased stature, in order to improve both groups place in the policy process
(Brams, Jones & Kilgour, 2005). These coalitions offer a way for smaller
groups to become more influential and often lead to the development of peak
organizations or social movements.
We see examples of this in the results section of this study. The larger
groups involved in this study are national groups. Those groups and the
larger state groups are confident that their political resources and current
stature in Texas politics will provide the advantage in gaining an audience
with Texas legislators. The smaller groups in this study understand that their
levels of resources are not high and are looking to those groups with larger
memberships and greater resources to provide information and power
through coalition. The results show that these groups understand the
concepts discussed in the previous section and are working either to take
advantage of the larger groups' resources or to build coalitions to gain access
to those resources. Also of interest is the fact that these groups are working
25


together, as the threat of unfair immigration reform is fostering a willing
partnership between the levels.
These are just three contrasting organization types. Groups fall into a
number of categories simultaneously. A group can be public interest and be
either institutional or membership-based. The common thread is that these
groups are developed and individuals join them to enact some type of overall
public change or benefit (Birkland, 2011). While the resources and motives
differ, advocacy, in its basic form, is developed out of a desire to improve the
public welfare.
2.4 Power development
Organizational power is derived from the organizations ability to apply
pressure through membership or resources to cause change in the early parts
of the policy process. Understanding the power an organization has is vital to
examining how the Hispanic groups involved in immigration reform may
respond to immigration legislation.
Defining power in the policy process can be difficult. One way to
understand it is to recognize that power is derived from the resources an
organization can use to persuade or educate (Birkland, 2011). However, Arts
and Tatenhove (2004) assert that power is generated not only from
resources, but from success or outcomes. In addition to tangible resources
26


such as money, resources in persuasion and argument to sway points of view
and affect public discourse should be considered when determining a groups
power.
Power is the organizational and discursive
capacity of agencies, either in competition with
one another or jointly to achieve outcomes in
social practices, a capacity which is however co-
determined by the structural power of those social
institutions in which these agencies are
embedded. (Arts & Tatenhove, 2004, p. 347)
The best opportunity for advocacy groups to wield their power is in the policy
innovation stage (Birkland, 2011). This is when these groups can use their
resources to attempt to force decision-makers to make or not make certain
policy decisions. In Texas, this is the stage that immigration reform is
currently in. Policy-makers are deciding which bills to review, introduce, and
pass on to the Governor for signing. This is the stage in the policy-making
process in which advocacy groups, as policy actors, can attempt to use their
power to arrange policy in a way that aligns with their organizational views.
With immigration reform yet to be discussed in the state legislature,
immigration reform bills are still being developed. While these reforms are not
yet laws, nor have they been discussed at the time of this thesis, Hispanic
advocacy groups are working to address both the policy innovation stage and
the agenda-setting stage. The results of this thesis suggest that, before the
27


Texas legislature meets to act on the proposed reform, groups are mobilizing
in response to the proposed legislation while simultaneously trying to address
the policy agenda by pushing their views of what fair immigration reform
includes. This is discussed more in the next section.
When discussing issue identification and how it transfers to the policy
process its important to examine the types of power that exist (Bachrach &
Morton, 1962). The elitist power model suggests that those with ample
resources and influence have the most influence and reason for participating
in the policy process. This falls in line with the theory that groups that have
the most resources have the most influence on policy-makers and the
process in general.
However, a pluralist view suggests that power is derived from activity,
which means that membership-driven groups are more influential in the policy
process. Examining this debate in the context of the immigration debate in
Texas, it seems that the answer falls somewhere in the middle. There is
evidence that resources provide groupssometimes called special interest
groupsthe most influence. However, there is strength in numbers, and
policy-makers are known to respond to the power of both types of groups
(Birkland, 2011).
Manzer (1984) suggests that the pluralist and elitist planning models
are useful in partial consumption and are most effective when combined.
28


Unfortunately neither of the two types of models
that dominate current studies of public policy has
an adequate concept of substantive rationality.
Pluralist-exchange models are constructed on the
assumption that the only good reasons, those
given weight or worth consideration by decision-
makers, are self-regarding ones. Elitist-planning
models are constructed on the assumption that the
only good reasons backing policy decisions are
other-regarding. Essentially each type of model
has assumed away the issue of substantive
rationality by adopting a one-sided view of
practical reasoning. (Manzer, 1984, p. 593)
His study provides two model types with which to view policy-making as a
practical response to an issue facing the community. Both model types would
be based mainly on incorporating substantive rationality into the decision-
making process. The first involves a sequence of decision-making that
accepts that actors assign different values and weights to events that
influence their decision. The second involves institutions and problem-solving
classified by their modes of reasoning. These types expand on the pluralist
and elitist views by introducing rational decision-making activity.
One view of how advocacy groups can use their power is Bachrach
and Baratz (1962), who suggest that power is derived from two faces: the
ability to influence decision-making and the ability to influence non-decision-
making. Under this concept, groups can wield power by influencing decision-
makers in the policy process to make and not make certain decisions. This
29


concept is very important because it takes the idea of power from a one-
dimensional view to a two-dimensional view. It shows that power can be
utilized in various ways, meaning that organizations can be effective in
various ways.
The result of this gain in power is that groups have the ability to
address and influence the policy process. This is a central concept to this
thesis: that the groups examined have the ability and political power, either
singly or in coalition form, to push their issues up the agenda and alter what
they feel is unfair immigration reform. The underlying question is whether, in
an attempt to gain power, these groups are better off building coalitions to
increase power, and whether these coalitions, combined with the efforts in
other states, will create a social movement. In the results section of this thesis
it is suggested that groups, as mentioned in the previous section, understand
that power is important, and that immigration is unifying the efforts of those
with and without power to gain an audience with legislators.12
12 The question that comes to mind with these results is whether this is limited to issues that
are considered focusing events or rallying points. Power and resources are considered to be
a coveted commodity among advocacy groups and not something these groups would give
up. This is an aspect of the literature I was not able to explore in this thesis but it bears
examination in future research on Hispanic advocacy activity.
30


2.5 Ways groups can participate
Now that we understand how these groups gain their powers, the next
step is to examine in what part(s) of the policy process they can use these
powers to mobilize the Hispanic community. While there are a number of
avenues through which organizations can participate, for this thesis I will
concentrate on the organizations ability to effect policy change and set the
policy agenda.
First I will discuss agenda setting. Agenda setting is the process by
which problems and alternative solutions gain or lose public and elite
attention (Birkland, 2011, p. 169). Organizations are in a constant struggle to
influence the current place of their important issues on the policy agenda and
promote their viewpoint on those issues. The ultimate goal is to use their
power to move their viewpoints on issues and concerns to the top of the
current policy agenda, which is called enactment (Birkland, 2011). This
happens in the first stages of the policy process, when the parameters of that
policy are being developed and nurtured. This offers these organizations the
opportunity to promote their ideas and provides the biggest window for
creating significant policy change.
The second aspect of agenda setting is to keep the relevance of the
issue or particular platform current or fresh in the minds of the other actors
involved in the policy process. In the next section I will examine some of the
31


tactics that organizations use to accomplish this, but at this point it is
important to understand that groups must stay active to preserve their power
and their issues place on the policy agenda. Maintaining an issues
importance in the public eye provides a tangible result that groups can use to
promote their organization, something that, as mentioned above, is a major
concern for public interest groups.
From the policy-makers point of view, organizations are given a role in
agenda setting for a number of reasons, the most salient of which is as
subject matter experts (Burnstein, 1991; Burnstein & Linton, 2002).
Organizations are seen as vehicles to help policy-makers understand issues.
While the organization is seeking an audience with the policy-maker, the
policy-maker is sometimes looking for the organization to provide guidance.
Burnstein (1991) suggests this happens in cases where organizations have
the power in the policy process to serve in this role. Overall, organizations are
seen in this initial policy stage as advocates and suppliers of information on
the subject, offering insight into the feelings of that groups community.
After the initial stage, organizations play a significant role in causing
policy change. Often this takes place when policy-makers goals cause them
to overlook the role and expertise of advocacy groups and create policy
outside their organizational objectives. This is the case in Texas, along with
other states such as Arizona, regarding immigration reform. Organizations are
32


both reactive and proactive in this stage of the process. Groups are looking to
change the status quo or current legislation while also looking to advance
their organizational views for future agendas and policy-making.
Burnstein and Linton (2002) suggest that organizations have the
greatest impact during the agenda-setting stage. Their study argues that once
issues transfer from the agenda to actual policy, the role of political or
advocacy organizations diminishes. If we accept this, we see that creating
policy change can be a daunting task. The researchers suggest that at this
stage a larger show of force and resources is required to provoke policy-
makers into changing course.
Birkland (2011) suggests that the most effective way to enact policy
change is to take advantage of political opportunities. These occur when new
officials are elected and when policy is up for a general debate. Another
opportunity to effect policy change is to sway public opinion. There is
evidence of a congruency between Congressional and public ideals,
especially on the major issues, so the framework for a working partnership
exists. Bridging the gap between the groups to create effective policy options
is the main issue (Baumgartner & Jones, 2004). It is important to
acknowledge the role that advocacy organizations play as facilitators in this
part of the policy process (Andrews & Edwards, 2004).
33


There are a number of ways for advocacy organizations to participate
in the policy process, but I have chosen to focus on agenda setting and policy
change because they are the stages of the process most relevant to this
thesis. Groups also have the ability to sway opinion in different stages of the
policy process, most notably to induce the termination of the policy (deLeon,
1983), to name one example. Yet I believe that agenda setting and policy
change are the stages of the process these groups are involved in currently,
with regard to their fight against what they believe to be unfair immigration
reform coming up for debate in Texas.
2.6 Potential advocacy group tactics
The final section of this chapter will concentrate on the third research
question, which addresses the types of participation and tactics that may
constitute these groups potential action plans for addressing immigration
reform. Now that we have examined how organizations are formed, how they
develop power, and the stages of the policy process they are most involved
in, it is prudent to examine the tactics these groups can use to make their
mark. By tactics I am referencing the avenues and methods these groups
can employ to actually move issues up and down the agenda and effect
policy change. For this thesis, I chose to concentrate on four specific
maneuvers: lobbying, mobilization, use of the media, and venue shopping.
34


Lobbying is a term and activity that is often associated with special
interest or economic groups, but all groups utilize the tactic. Lobbying is the
organized, continuous act of communicating with the government (Birkland,
2011, p. 139). Birkland makes the case that lobbying has a negative
connotation because the public associates it with shady backroom dealings
or drives to increase campaign finance or pork-barreling (Campos &
Giovannoni, 2007). Linder the above definition lobbying takes place every day
as a tool of groups or coalitions seeking an audience with policy-makers to
plead their case, promote issues, or air grievances. Lobbying is one of the
most useful tactics because lobbyists can provide useful information from a
variety of groups and sources, including the public (Brint, 1990; Potters & van
Winden, 1992). And while not all groups have the clout, power, or resources
to hire or gain access as lobbyists, it is a tool that these groups and coalitions
covet.
While lobbying is a tactic all organizations with sufficient resources can
use, mobilization or mass mobilization is one that is integral to advocacy
group success. However, groups do not simply choose to mobilize their
resources for their cause (McCarthy & Wolfson, 1996). Mobilization takes
place when a catalyst or focusing eventa sudden event that draws
interestoccurs that groups can rally around (Birkland, 1998). When this
occurs, groups, or numbers of groups, take the opportunity to work together
35


to push a unified agenda to policy-makers. A recent and pertinent example is
the recent reaction to Arizona SB 1070, in which groups from across the
nation were called to arms to fight legislation similar to the upcoming bills in
Texas. The focusing event occurred when Governor Brewer signed the bill
into law, providing a rallying cry for groups both national and local or large
and small. The reaction was a mass mobilization that took place nationwide.
The result of successful mobilization can be the creation of a social
movement. While the social movement literature is expansive, for the purpose
of this discussion I am focusing on the development of social movements and
their impact on the policy process. Social movements occur when those with
less power or influence over the policy process unite and mass-mobilize to
carry on a burgeoning fight (Birkland, 2011). A popular and primary example
of a social movement is the movement for civil rights in the 1960s and 1970s.
Movements against unjust and unfair policies were initiated in various pockets
of the nation. As voices of dissent were ignored or silenced, the groups
moved to create a coalition to pool their resource and political strength. Often,
building these social movements involves creating coalitions not only with
groups concerned with the major issue but also with those who could receive
benefits in the fight for their related issues. Therefore, social movements are
the graduated result of mass mobilization. The fight against immigration
36


reform is picking up steam in the United States, and with its profile growing it
is possible that it could grow into a large-scale movement.
Another of the tactics groups can use is to employ media and personal
relationships with elected officials to facilitate an audience with policy-makers.
An example is Greenpeaces use of the media to initiate a campaign against
Shell Oil in the United Kingdom over ocean pollution. Greenpeace employed
a series of media (print, video, and internet) to put pressure on the
government to promote policy change regarding the environment. The
government received so much pressure from the public based on
Greenpeaces media campaign that it was forced to revisit its environmental
policy, and these efforts ultimately led to policy change (Bahkir, 2006). This is
evidence of two things: (1) the immense influence an advocacy group and the
media can have on public opinion, and (2) the level of attention that public
officials will pay to a mobilized public.
For this thesis the final tactic I will examine is venue shopping, which
occurs when policy-makers or actors, including advocacy groups, seek to
change the framework or environment in which decisions are made regarding
policy (Baumgartner & Jones, 1993; Pralle, 2003). Policy venues are
institutional sites where the portrayal of problems and solutions take place
(Baumgartner & Jones, 1993, p. 32). These actors can be frustrated by
37


potential bias and the current landscape of a venue in which decisions are
being made (Goodwin & Schrodel, 2000; Burnett & Davis, 2002).
For advocacy groups, venue shopping offers an avenue for the group
to establish a venue that will serve their organizational needs and their
understanding of policy (Pralle, 2003). Pralle identifies three potential
drawbacks for advocacy groups: (1) groups are likely acting with complete
knowledge of an issue, (2) the existence of internal and organizational
constraints, and (3) the belief that the root cause of an issue will lead to the
policy venue, which could be incorrect.
As with other subjects addressed in this chapter, the literature and
types of tactics are extremely extensive. For the purpose of this thesis I chose
to concentrate on the tactics that relate to the upcoming battle against
pending immigration reform in Texas. To select them I used the recent
happenings in Arizona as a barometer to obtain a better understanding of the
type of actions that similar groups in Texas could take, which I believe is
shown in the results and discussion sections of this thesis.
38


2.7 Relevance of the literature
An examination of the role of advocacy groups and how they can take
part in the policy process is an important part of this thesis. To understand the
upcoming battle and views of the advocacy organizations interviewed we
must understand the accepted theories and concepts under which these
groups are attempting to operate.
Concepts presented in this chapter suggest that for advocacy groups
in Texas to be successful they will have to ensure that their power and
resources are adequate to gain an audience with the influential policy-
makers. With immigration reform still in the concept stages in Texas, the
groups are focusing on pushing their platform up the agenda of public opinion
and government officials.
Given the strong presence of Hispanic advocacy groups in Texas it is
reasonable to assume that these groups are an established and influential
entity. The battle they are fighting is to convince policy-makers that reform
similar to that in Arizona would not be a positive step in the heavily Hispanic
state. The focusing event is a combination of the activity that took place in
Arizona and the inclusion of a growing number of potential immigration reform
bills on the docket for the next state legislature.
The questions asked in this thesis examine whether these groups and
the Hispanic community are being mobilized by immigration reform. If they
39


are in fact being mobilized, which the results of this thesis suggest has
happened, the resulting questions involve how advocacy organizations can
use immigration reform to mobilize otherwise inactive members of the
Hispanic communities that are represented by the organizations involved in
this study, and the types of action plans they are working toward to address
immigration reform in the agenda-setting and policy innovation stage of the
policy process. This literature supports the contention that there are
opportunities for Hispanic advocacy groups to take these steps and provides
basic concepts that assist in understanding and the motivation of those steps.
While the literature supports the research questions, the results of this
thesis provide further confirmation that many of the concepts outlined in this
chapter apply to the Hispanic advocacy community. One significant concept
that is supported is that Hispanics are compelled to act because of a focusing
event, which falls in line with disturbance theory (Truman, 1951) and
exchange theory (Salisbury, 1969). In the results section of the study it is
reported that the groups are not only seeing an increase in membership due
to immigration reform but are using immigration reform to rally support.
Further proof is that these groups are not confident that they will be able to
sustain the level of support once the immigration issue is resolved. The
implication is that without a focusing event participation in these groups and
on this issue would wane.
40


Also, the results of this thesis support the idea that resources and
power are valuable commodities and also raise a question about the
willingness of these groups to share their power and resources with groups of
both greater and lesser means. We see from the results that these groups are
advocating coalitions and working toward action plans that share power and
resources in an effort to make significant change. What this suggests is that
while groups must be ambitious to gain power and improve resources, these
groups are issue-conscious in the sense that they realize that there are some
policies that require a sharing of these valued commodities.
Lastly, this thesis contributes the concept that groups are able to use
issues to gain power, resources, and membership. The literature offers insight
into why individuals become involved and into aspects of the groups
intentions and use of resources. What I believe is added in this thesis is the
idea that these groups are able and willing to use issues to build their profiles,
which is something that is useful to understand when examining the activities
and intentions of these groups.
41


3. History of Hispanic Civil Rights
Examining Hispanic advocacy in the context of immigration reform in
this case benefits from a brief examination of the history of Hispanic civil
rights. Under many names, immigrant groups from Central America and
Mexico have fought a number of fights for basic rights in the United States.13
Immigration reform is a clear part of that history, as evidenced in the first
chapter, as are battles over education, labor rights, and political
representation, along with issues that reach across races, such as the all-
encompassing civil rights movement of the 1960s and 1970s, the anti-war
movement, and major contemporary movements concerning environmental
issues and economic reform.
Looking back over the history of Hispanic civil rights I will focus on
three basic issue areas: education, labor laws, and political representation. I
believe that looking at the early stages and evolution of the Hispanic civil
13 Chicano, Latino and Hispanic are monikers that have been associated with social
movements.
42


rights movement will provide a framework for examining the current state of
immigration reform, which will occupy the last section of this section.
Understanding where these civil rights movements originated and how the
role of Hispanic advocacy groups and the movements that helped generate
them evolved provides a better understanding of the role these groups can
Play-
3.1 How social movements develop
Social movements compose a large section of United States history.
Some high-profile movements in the United States include the movements to
improve womens rights (Minkoff & Paltrow, 2004), labor rights (Derks, 2000;
Cranford & Wilton, 2002; Schiavone, 2008), and the environment (Parker-
Gwin, 2000 & Walter, 2007). Before I discuss the major points of Hispanic
civil rights movement history it is important understand how social movements
develop.
When groups of people mobilize and coalesce
around a set of high visibility issues; a social
movement may result. A social movement involves
far more peoplealthough not all at a high degree
of activitythan the membership of relevant
interest groups. Social movements often involve a
coalition of groups with similar goals; and other
people that support groups without affiliation.
(Birkland, 2011, p. 134)
43


Hispanics have been a part of several important social
movements. The most visible was the civil rights movements of
the 1960s and 1970s. Hispanic groups rallied alongside African-
American and other civil rights activists to force change in the
laws that governed minorities.
Public advocates work within the community to educate and mobilize
efforts to identify issues and put them into policy contexts. These public
advocates, most notably advocacy groups and community leaders,14 work for
specific causes and usually on behalf of specific population groups.
Especially at the local level, these advocates are a bridge between public
opinion and policy (Andrews & Edwards, 2004). In many cases, leaders and
subject matter experts employed by these advocacy groups are more
knowledgeable about the needs of the community than any other participant
in the initiation process and their decisions about how and when to mobilize
are critically important.15
For elected officials, understanding this reality
means the constant search for equilibrium points
on policy to stabilize policy monopolies and to
palliate political constituency, giving enough to
quell disturbances, but not so much as to generate
disruption from the other side. For activists,
14 The term community leaders in this paper excludes elected officials.
15 Employed does not imply on the payroll." By employed" I am referring to either
employees or volunteers who have experience and knowledge of the legislative process and
the issue-related background to provide information to members of the group and the
community.
44


understanding this interaction means making hard
calculations about the costs, as well as the
benefits, of concessions on matters of policy and
political conclusion. Realizing that the prospects
for continued mobilization are limited, in no small
part due to the dynamics of coalition politics,
should help in considering the trade-offs inherent
in cultivating institutionally oriented allies,
recognizing better deals, and negotiating them.
And for analysts, the recognition of the ongoing
interaction between social movements and policy
makers means adopting an analytic focus that
accepts a long time frame for mutual influence,
and an iterative approach to the process of
political institutionalization. (Meyer, 2003, p. 14)
Mobilization often takes place in the context of advocacy groups at the
grassroots level. Groups of local citizens mobilize against an issue with group
activity such as small demonstrations, education and recruitment campaigns,
and applying pressure on decision-makers. To do this organizations act within
a specific collective action frame. Collective action frames are narrative maps
guiding movements toward their goals. Frames include interpretations of the
injustice or immorality of specific social conditions, an attribution of blame for
the, some kind of action agenda for solving them, and a motivation for taking
that action" (Edwards, 1995, p. 41).
These coalitions and movements can develop from a number of
different avenues. Among the considerable social movement theory literature,
political opportunity theory is the most applicable to understanding how
45


advocacy groups become a vital part of the initiation process. Political
opportunity theory (Tarrow, 1983) expands on the frameworks provided and
constructed by organizations to convey a message that was developed by
Esiniger (1973). As defined by Tarrow (1983, p. 28), the concept has three
dimensions: the degree of openness or closure of formal political access, the
degree of stability or instability of political alignments, and the availability and
strategic posture of potential alliance partners" (Kriesi, 1995, p.167).
Combined with political conflict, these elements deal with the structure
of the political system and the power that individual actors and, in our case,
groups wield in the political process. Advocacy groups are now one of the
actors, according to social movement theorists and the public policy literature
above.
Using political opportunity theory we see that organizations have the
ability to frame messages and issues to elicit certain reactions from their
target audiences. Tarrow (1989) examined this ability in his research on why
certain issues are reacted to in different ways across the nation. Looking at
ethnic issues that caused violent outbursts in certain regions and not in
others, Tarrow found that the opportunity for groups to have a viable and
valued voice was a key factor. The research showed that in areas where
organizations had a voice the protest or activity was peaceful, and where it
was not the opposite happened.
46


3.2 Labor rights: The first Hispanic movement
When reviewing the history of Hispanic civil rights, the first struggle
that may come to mind is the fight over employment laws for migrant workers
(Mathitessen, 1972; Shaw, 2008; Young, 1969). Cesar Chavez led a
successful revolution in that spanned the time between the 1950s and 1970s
to overturn numerous labor laws. Chavez operated mainly in California to
generate a mass mobilization against the lack of labor oversight by state and
federal government agencies. The mobilization was epitomized by the
creation of organization such as the United Farm Workers Organizing
Committee (Young, 1972). The labor movement was instrumental in
developing not only Hispanic activism but also the sense that workers have
the ability to organize and impact the laws and regulations that govern them
(Mathitessen, 1969).
Chavez, who originally intended to be a community activist, was drawn
to the fight for economic rights due to his familys background as laborers and
knowledge of the system (Shaw, 2008). His rallying not only his fellow
workers but also other workers to coordinate their efforts and develop unions
and organizations was a standout moment in the history of Hispanic civil
rights and labor law advocacy in the United States. Chavez and the farm
workers movement developed ideas, tactics, and strategies that proved so
47


compelling, so original, and ultimately so successful that they continue to set
the course for Americas progressive campaigns" (Shaw, 2008, p. 1).
The movement to fight and effect change in the labor system was a
vital starting point for Hispanic advocacy. It also has a connection to the
current immigration issue. Chavez felt that illegal immigrants and the
reluctance of recent immigrants to apply for citizenship or visas to work legally
in the United States would hinder the labor movement (Taylor, 1975).
Connecting this concept to the immigration movement, there was early
awareness that the fight for immigration means and avenues would be
important to Hispanic ascendency in the United States. This is one of the
findings of this thesis: that Hispanic advocacy groups and their communities
are not opposed to immigration reform, but to unfair immigration reform. The
consensus of the groups in this study share Chavezs concern that a lack of
determination by Hispanics to naturalize will hurt the overall status of
Hispanics. But as is evidenced by Chavezs workers rights movement and by
the findings of this study, the goal is to create an accessible path to
citizenship (Taylor, 1975).
48


3.3 Education reform
The movement to advocate for workers rights was the first major social
movement among Hispanics in the United States, and the second was the
movement for education rights. Hispanics across the nation organized to
effect change in education opportunities for Hispanics (Guajardo, F. &
Guajardo, M., 2004; McBrien, 2005; Orfield, 1986; Rodriquez, 2003).
However, like the workers movement, the movement started in California and
proceeded in Texas.
Guajardo and Guajardo (2004) make a case that the education reform
movement epitomized the Hispanic civil rights movement. After Brown v. the
Board of Education held that all races were entitled to equal and quality
education, the movement began for Hispanics to work toward taking
advantage of the ruling. While Hispanics often faced unfair practices,
including being punished for speaking Spanish at school and being told to
drop out or not pursue college educations, the motivation to work toward this
reform was not difficult to find. The preferred tactic was to stage walkouts.
These walkouts took place in California and Texas and showed that
these groups could organize and work together to effect change (Rodriquez,
2003). In addition to specific tactics, the movement also spurred the
organization of groups such as United Mexican American Students (UMAS),
49


Mexican American Youth Association (MAYA) in California, and the Mexican
American Youth Organization (MAYO).
This movement illustrates a concept that was also raised by the
workers rights movement, namely the necessity of the involvement of young
Hispanics (Rodriquez, 2003). As we will see in the next section, young
Hispanics have been at the forefront of Hispanic advocacy, due to, among
other factors, their ability to break the cultural bonds that the previous
generations have had with their home countries (Rodriquez, 2003). Without
these bonds, the younger generations see their future in the United States
and are more likely to work on current issues (Patterson, 1975). Immigration
is one such issue.
3.4 Political activism
The umbrella movement that encompasses both of the previous
movements is the role and activity of Hispanic groups in basic political
activism (Lopez, 1992). For the past fifty years Hispanics have been involved
with high-profile issues, the most notable of which were the anti-war
movement and voter rights.
The anti-war movement and protests against the Vietnam War proved
that, as I argued in the previous section, younger generations took up new
fights and used new tactics (Oropez, 2005). In anti-war protests younger
50


Hispanics, or Chicanos, debunked the previous generations ideals of military
history. Instead the group chose to fight against the traditional view and chose
to voice their displeasure and disenchantment with the governments decision
to participate in the Asian conflict. The Chicano Moratorium could be
considered the face of the movement as the group worked to bring to light the
discrimination against Hispanics in the United States and the military.
Another aspect of Hispanic political activism is Hispanics work
advocating for voting rights and participation. Hispanics of all nationalities
have fought to engage their own community as well as outside political actors
due to the groups vast potential (Guerra, 1988; Marquez, 1993). With
Hispanic participation traditionally low (Marquez, 1993) advocacy groups
have rallied in their communities to foster civic engagement and participation.
Two of the groups surveyed in this thesis (NCLR and NALEO) have played a
large role in this effort.
Groups such as NCLR and NALEO have worked to educate Hispanics
about their rights and duties to participate in the political process and by
extension the policy process as well. Political participation depends
significantly on political mobilization, that is, on which persons are targeted for
political recruitment (Hero, Garcia, F., Garcia, J. & Pachon, 2000, p. 530).
This is a gap that Hispanic groups and advocates have tried to fill since the
1950s. Work continues to this day to organize and invigorate the Hispanic
51


community to get involved in the political process, but it is an uphill battle, as
Hispanics are likely to get involved only in issues that pertain to their lives or
community (Patterson, 1975).
3.5 Hispanic advocacy groups impact on immigration reform
Three examples of high-profile issues that have rallied Hispanic
support in the past are given in the previous sections of this chapter. This
thesis provides evidence that immigration reform could be the next social
movement issue facing the Hispanic community, as there are similarities
between immigration reform and issues such as education and labor rights.
The movement against immigration reform involves many groups that
have taken action. This thesis shows that these groups are willing to work
together toward a common cause, which meets Birklands (2011) definition.
These groups are joined by members both within the Hispanic community and
outside it, as demonstrated by the inclusion of the HCAFL-CIOs point of view
in this thesis. This, coupled with the mass mobilization that has emerged out
of an opportunity to rally support, provides evidence that immigration reform
has the makings of the next high-visibility issue to be considered a Hispanic
social movement. The transcendence of the issue overtime and across state
borders provides evidence that this could happen. Also, the ongoing
intentions of state legislatures to propose reform suggests that the opportunity
52


to react to the issue will continue to present itself, a fact that is supported by
some of the results in this thesis.
The intention of this thesis is not to characterize immigration reform as
a social movement. Immigration issues, however, do emerge in the
movement for Hispanic civil rights. As such, many of the organizations that
often deal with these movements can be considered civil rights organizations.
However, I do think the results of this thesis, combined with circumstances at
the state government level and the evolution of the arguments pertaining to
immigration reform, provide sufficient evidence that immigration reform should
be considered the next high-visibility issue in the Hispanic community. This
thesis provides evidence that community and advocacy groups are reacting in
a way that would support the assumption: the groups are using immigration
reform to recruit members, those groups have taken action in Arizona with
regard to SB 1070, and individuals in the Hispanic community have been
willing to get involved in an issue that affects their day-to-day lives.
53


4. Methods
4.1 Importance of qualitative methods
To conduct this research I chose to employ a qualitative research
methodology using semi-structured interviews with executives, key personnel,
and other representatives at various Hispanic advocacy groups. I chose this
method with the belief that it is the best technique for addressing a question
related to current events (Auerbach & Silverstein, 2003; Seidman, 2006).
Group interaction with the community can be quantified, but the reasoning
behind the groups' action plans are better understood through a qualitative
process (Seidman, 2006).
For this study, I believe that an understanding of the reasoning behind
group decisions, especially those made by personnel in the executive or
upper organizational levels, is better achieved through an interpersonal
question-and-answer section. This approach not only allows for explanation
by the respondent, but it also reduces the possibility of a paper- or web-based
54


survey being passed off or answered by a person other than the intended
respondent. Survey data is applicable to answering the questions addressed
in this thesis but is not guaranteed to elicit the needed data. Therefore, by
interviewing key officials in these groups I gathered what I believe is an
accurate view of the each organizations views on immigration reform and
how that reform may shape the groups mobilization of member support.
The semi-structured interview style I chose is characterized as More
or less open-ended questions brought to the interview situation in the form of
an interview guide (Flick, 1998, p. 94). I entered each interview with a set of
questions, but follow-up questions were presented as the conversation
dictated. This yielded a number of unsolicited responses and key data used in
this study, and allowed the respondents and me to create a rapport that was
vital in gaining their trust and setting them at ease, which in turn increased
their willingness to be candid.
The interview process also allowed the examination of running
commentary among the groups. Running commentary refers to phrases,
concepts, and issues commonly used and discussed by the respondents
patterns that lend empirical substance to the results and conclusions of this
thesis, and which were not anticipated in the planning stages.
55


4.2 Sampling Frame and Organization Description
To obtain my sample I relied on two main sources of information. The
first consisted of lists of Hispanic organizations, which I obtained from signed
petitions, other research, published white papers regarding Hispanic
organizations, and publicly available information materials (both printed and
online) regarding Hispanic advocacy. My second source was the member
affiliate lists of national organizations, which provide contact information and
primary sources for gathering more materials, and which directed me to
specific information about the hundreds of Hispanic organizations operating in
Texas.
Several problems surfaced during this process. First, a number of
organizations were small or did not have readily available information.
Second, a number of groups listed had incorrect or faulty contact information,
and in some cases I was unable to verify that they were currently in operation.
Finally, a large number of organizations list immigration as a focus but do not
follow through in practice. Ascertaining the degree to which an organization
was actively involved in immigration-related issues was the most difficult part
of the process of developing a list of possible organizations to contact.
After conducting this research, I compiled a list of 64 groups. From
these, I randomly selected 22 for participation in the study by selecting every
third group from the list of 64. Each of these groups fit the necessary criteria
56


based on the information available. Groups that I chose to contact all have a
presence in the state of Texas and are heavily involved in promoting a
Hispanic platform regarding federal and state immigration reform, and are
thus involved in the policy process.
The criteria are as follows. Each group contacted:
Lists immigration as a priority either on its website or in communication
material.
Provides services and education to the public regarding immigration
reform.
Takes a public stance regarding immigration.
Serves the interests of the Hispanic community.
Has a board of directors.
Meets generally accepted membership practices and accepts all
members regardless of race, religion, education, and sex.
All 22 organizations contacted have a strong affiliation with immigration
reform. Before engaging with these groups I contacted each by email to
ascertain not only their willingness to participate, but also their expertise in
the area of immigration. In addition, I asked questions in pre-interview
conversations, both on the telephone and through email,16 to ensure that their
participation would be applicable to this thesis. I also confirmed that each
organizations online information and literature were accurate, after
corresponding with personnel in these organizations (not always the
individual I ultimately interviewed) and getting verbal confirmation that the
16 No potential interviewee was contacted more than three times before accepting the
invitation. Potential respondents were contacted first by email and then by telephone. All pre-
interviews were conducted on the telephone after an initial email.
57


group does in fact actively participate in attempting to promote or address
immigration reform.
Representatives from the following organizations agreed to participate
in this thesis project.
Asociacion Salvadorena de los EUA
National Alliance of Latino Elected Officials (NALEO)
National Council of La Raza (NCLR)
League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC)
Texas LULAC
Labor Council for Latin American Advancement
America Para Todos
Harris County AFL-CIO
FIEL
HADAS
Most of these organizations use lobbying efforts and are actively
engaged in rallying public support. Each of them holds meetings, with varying
regularity, to convey information and raise awareness. The HCAFL-CIO is a
labor organization that is active in lobbying for local and state immigration
policy, and works with local groups to assist in connecting them with elected
officials. Therefore the group acts as both a coordinating organization and an
individual action organization. Membership in the organizations ranges from
21 to 135,000 members; among the issues the groups address in addition to
immigration reform are civic participation, education, health care, economics,
and naturalization.
58


Table 4.1 lists the groups that participated in this thesis, indicating
where these groups fall within the categories discussed above and providing
a snapshot of their makeup.
Table 4.1: Types of organizations studied
Organization Membership or Institutional Size (Membership) Special or Public Interest
Harris County AFL-CIO Institutional Large (45,000) Special
America Para Todos Membership Small (131) Public
Asociacion Salvadorena de los EUA Membership Small (21) Public
FIEL Membership Small (47) Public
HAD AS Membership Small (80) Public
Labor Council for Latin American Advancement Houston, TX Membership Small (27) Public
League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) Membership Large (135,000) Public
Texas LULAC Membership Large (978) Public
National Alliance of Latino Elected Officials (NALEO) Membership Large (6,000) Public
National Council of La Raza (NCLR) Membership Large (300 member organizations) Public
59


Table 4.2 provides basic information about the groups surveyed in this
thesis, including demographic information and the types of issues these
groups concentrate on, in order to better illustrate why these groups were
chosen for this study.
Table 4.2: Advocacy organization breakdown
Organization No. of Members* Issues Year Started National, Local, or State
Harris County AFL-CIO 45,000 Labor, Immigration, Economics 1938 Local
America Para Todos 131 Legal, Immigration 2003 Local
Asociacion Salvadorena de los EUA 21 Immigration, Health Care 2008 Local
FIEL 47 Civic Participation, Education, Immigration 2005 Local
HADAS 80 Immigration, Labor, Civic Participation 2007 Local
Labor Council for Latin American Advancement Houston, TX 27 Labor, Economics, Immigration, Housing, Women's Issues 1972 Local
League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) 135,000 Civil Rights, Economics, Immigration, Health, Education, Technology, Housing 1945 National
Texas LULAC 978 Immigration, Legal, Economics, Civic Rights 1954 State
National Alliance of Latino Elected Officials (NALEO) 6,000 Voting, Immigration, Nationalization, Census 1976 National
National Council of La Raza (NCLR) 300 (member organizations) Advocacy, Census, Youth Development, Civil Rights, Economy, Education, Health, Immigration 1968 National
* The number of members was provided by the organization personnel in conversation. If no membership number
was given, the figure was retrieved from the organization's website.
60


4.3 Groups that declined to participate
Twelve of the 22 groups declined to participate, for reasons including a
lack of trust in me (one organization),17 the fact that while immigration is a
focus of the organization it is not considered a top priority and the group
lacked a subject matter expert (two organizations), and the groups not having
a significant presence in the state of Texas (one organization).
The remaining eight organizations failed to reply to the three attempts
to contact the organization to request its participation, as mandated by the
Colorado Multiple Institutional Review Board (COMIRB). All eight of these
organizations have websites that show their activity in the community and
each answered my telephone calls. However, I was never connected to an
appropriate person to participate in the study. Without more specific
knowledge of these organizations or the people I was referred to there, I
cannot pinpoint the reasons for the lack of response from these organizations.
17 The organization replied that it would not accept the interview unless I committed to three
months of volunteer work. The requirement is part of its standard operating procedures and
suggests that it wants researchers to have full knowledge of the organization, and possibly a
sympathetic opinion of it.
61


4.4 Interviews
Eight interviews with key personnel took place by telephone and two in
person, and they ranged from 18 to 47 minutes in length. All interviews were
recorded with the subjects permission for transcription and analysis
purposes18. The interview schedule is included in Appendix C. Each interview
featured the following questions:
1. Are you aware of the basic issues of immigration reform?
2. How important do you feel the issue of immigration reform is to the
Hispanic community as a whole?
3. Is immigration reform an issue of importance for your organization?
4. Has your organization spoken out officially on the issue of
immigration reform?
5. Is your organization for or against immigration reform?
6. Do you feel immigration reform is a divisive issue for the Hispanic
community?
7. Do you believe immigration reform will drive more Hispanics to be
politically active?
8. Do you think your organization does/can use the attention from
immigration reform to recruit more members?
9. Do you think your organization does/can use the attention from
immigration reform to generate more interest or raise its public profile?
10. If so, do you believe this is an effective strategy?
11. Do you believe there is controversy surrounding immigration
reform?
12. If so, does the controversy surrounding immigration reform serve
as a positive for organizations to improve membership, recruiting,
and/or funding?
18 The process used to contact subjects, conduct the interviews, and analyze these data was
approved by the human subjects committee at the University of Colorado Denver.
62


13. Are there any other issues in addition to immigration reform that
can provide a boost to Hispanic political advocacy?
14. Are there any other comments you would like to add about your
groups activity or the effects of immigration reform?19
Interview transcripts and recordings were analyzed by me to identify themes
pertaining to the research questions (Glaser & Strauss, 1967).20
No one declined to have their personal or organizational identity
included in the results of this project, but I chose not to include these
identities for privacy purposes. These transcripts and recordings include
verbal confirmation of the interviewees willingness to participate in the study
and his or her permission to be recorded.
To code the interview data I used a system of theoretical concepts to
identify relevant themes and repeating ideas (Auerbach & Silverstein, 2003).
To do this I transcribed the interviews and searched for statements and ideas
that addressed the research questions in this thesis. After highlighting the text
I discovered a series of running patterns or commentary among the
interviews. A number of themes emerged, which are grouped by research
19 A copy of the approved script for this thesis is attached in Appendix C.
20 "Such a theory fits empirical situations, and is understandable to sociologists and laymen
alike. Most important, it worksprovides us with relevant predications, explanations,
interpretations and applications (Glaser & Strauss, 1967, p. 1).
63


question in the results section.21 The results drawn from these theoretical
concepts and themes are reported in the following section.
21 This is my interpretation. According to Auerbach and Silverstein (2003), a drawback of
qualitative interviewing is that data can be interpreted differently. After reviewing the data I
believe these eight themes stood out from the ten interviews, which took roughly 318 minutes
in total to conduct.
64


5. Results
After conducting the interviews for this project I analyzed transcripts for
common themes or running commentary among the ten conversations I had
regarding immigration reform.22 After coding them, I grouped these themes in
sections according to the research question they addressed.
5.1 Have Hispanic civil rights groups reacted to the pending immigration
reform bills?
Immigration is certainly a lightning rod policy among Hispanic
communities. From the literature it is clear that individuals are often provoked
to join groups because of focusing events that drive their personal interest.
The first research question addresses whether immigration reform is this type
of event. From the responses in this thesis I believe that we will see that the
22 During the interview process themes developed among the responses from the ten
subjects. To coordinate these results I examined each interview after it was completed and
coded specific answers or responses in the themes listed as the sub-sections in Chapter
Five.
65


current battle and the previous battle, mainly in Arizona, against unfair
immigration reform will prove to be an event that will promote increased
activity in the Hispanic community.
First it is important to look at how national Hispanic advocacy groups
were active in driving resistance in Arizona and how they have used
immigration reform. The results of the protest in Arizona pushed national
groups to change their focus from that of an umbrella organization to one
working more with state affiliate organizations and reaching out to individual
members of the community. Over the past year, national groups have made
immigration reform a high priority and have experienced interesting trends.
The first of these is that immigration reform is the type of issue that can
galvanize a community of individuals. NCLR has found that immigration
reform has a strong effect on a large majority of both illegal and legal
immigrants. This point contradicts a stereotype that immigration reform is an
issue only for illegal immigrants seeking to evade deportation. Legal
immigrants often take up the fight for relatives or friends who they feel will be
wrongly persecuted by unjust immigration laws.
This is the concern in Texas, where immigration reform is not a novel
issue. For many Hispanics it has been the most important policy/political
issue over the past three decades (Texas LULAC representative, 2011). With
votes pending on a number of immigration-related policies, the reaction from
66


the Hispanic community has been strong and in some cases fearful. While
those reactions may seem contradictory, based on the interviews conducted I
believe that recent events, both the introduction of these bills and the recent
happenings in Arizona, have empowered the Hispanic community to rally and
show force. Yet, according to my conversations, this response may stem from
fear of reprisal from an unfair law.
An interesting point is that because of SB 1070a subject that was
raised voluntarily throughout the conversationsand the new bills, the
Hispanic community and their representatives finally have to take a collective
look at what they would like and how they want to mobilize at the state level.
That has drawn out a sense of community and shown that from a grievance
point of view (deLeon, 1983), groups that demonstrate the ability to organize
and that provide results can effect change in political and social
consciousness within a minority community.
A good place to start to examine how Texans are reacting is to look
back at the reaction to Arizona SB 1070, as all of the interviewees identified
that activity as having some level of influence on the pending action. Each
respondent alluded to past activity" or the policy in Arizona during their
responses to the scripted questions. Their responses prompted me to ask
questions about the legislation, and while the importance or relevance of the
demonstrations in Arizona varied, every respondent mentioned some version
67


of what the FEIL representative told me: What happened out West will have
a major effect on what happens in other immigration battles (FEIL
representative, 2011).
While all ten agreed that it is impossible for the activity in Arizona not
to have an effect on how groups in Texas will plan their response, they were
not sure how effective their tactics would be. The FIADAS representative
pointed out that while the action in Arizona will help, there are different factors
and political cultures in Texas and Arizona. Throughout that interview the
representative said that Texas was a unique case because of the population
and current politicians.
A general theme among those interviewed is that Arizona provided an
issue with which groups could approach the community and garner attention,
something that advocacy groups struggle to obtain. Arizona SB 1070 not only
had the effect of increasing membership in advocacy groups in Texas, but it
showed the power that such groups can wield in the policy process even after
a policy progresses past the initial stages.
The representative from Texas LULAC made the point that the activity
in Arizona set a positive standard for Hispanic groups nationwide: The work
done in Arizona provided a battle plan for groups around the nation. Their
ability to rally groups on both the local and national level showed that groups
can take big-time action (Texas LULAC representative, 2011). He said also
68


that a battle his group fights is proving that groups can be effective in policy
initiation. His comments throughout our conversations suggested that having
Arizona as a positive example of Hispanic activism gives local groups
evidence to show apathetic members of the public that their activity will
matter. This is an issue that advocacy organizations grapple with: Our
biggest problem among our community is getting our members to understand
they can make a difference. Many come from low-income backgrounds and
dont feel they can make that difference. Arizona provides evidence
otherwise (Texas LULAC representative, 2011).
While the reaction to SB 1070 can provide a blueprint, three of the
interviewees were quick to point out that the same plan of attack may not
work in Texas. The representative of America Para Todos was adamant that
while the group can look to Arizona as an example, to insist that the activity
there would be a blueprint" would be going too far.
There are too many things in Texas that are different.
We have a different political and social landscape
here. Plus politicians saw what happened there also
and those who want to push legislation through here
can learn from the mistakes in the writing of the policy
and in the public activity from their counterparts
(America Para Todos representative, 2011).
There are a number of factors at work in framing the opportunity that
immigration reform presents for advocacy organizations in Texas. The
69


HADAS representative alluded to the differences in the political landscapes of
Texas and Arizona. In subsequent responses she said that tactics that
worked in Arizona would not, on the whole, work in Texas. She felt the
relationship between the Hispanic population and policy-makers in Texas was
much more strained and that the connection between their public and the
policy makers had a big gap to cross. While this notion was not expressly
corroborated by other respondents, it raises the interesting point that a
grievance, by itself, is not enough to cause groups to mobilize. Sociological
and political factors also influence mobilization.
An aspect of immigration reform that repeatedly arose in my
conversations with these advocacy group leaders was the misconception that
Hispanics are against immigration. Seven respondents made it clear that
Hispanics are in favor of fair immigration reform that protects the rights of
legal immigrants while restricting access for illegal immigrants. The
representative of Texas LULAC spoke at length against the stereotype that
Hispanics favor legislation that reduces the criminal element of immigration
law, and said that a majority of Hispanics involved with his organization are
against immigrants who circumvent the tax and public service system.
A general concern among those interviewed is that mainstream
America feels that Hispanics are unanimously opposed to immigration reform.
As one local representative notes,
70


People in this country find it hard to differentiate
between immigrants who are here to make an
honest living and those here to do badly. A
majority of immigrants simply want to come to
America and work but, unfortunately, get lumped
together with the negative element (Texas LULAC
representative, 2011).
NALEOs representative spoke to the fact that this misconception
affects how elected officials approach the issue. NALEO represents the
interests of both its member organizations and Latino elected officials
nationwide. In many cases elected officials pressured by their non-Hispanic
constituents to vote for unjust immigration reform legislation based on this
generalization.
The most common point made by the local group representatives is the
desire for immigration reform to include a path to citizenship. Six of the ten
organization leaders interviewed stated that this was a concern of their
organization, and they believed it was a chief concern of the movement to
defeat unfair immigration reform in Texas. They feel that legislation such as
Arizona SB 1070 and the upcoming Texas legislation lacked a way for current
immigrants to become citizens.
Most [Hispanics] just want to live here without the fear that
they will be deported. But to go through that process, the
time and money involved, is just unrealistic. They cant afford
it and would rather simply live the way they are now (HADAS
representative, 2011).
71


This representative went on to say that she felt that if immigration
reform provided an obtainable path to citizenship, a large percentage of her
community would support immigration reform. Getting this support from the
organizations membership and community is integral for an advocacy group
to be successful in influencing policy at any stage. Policy-makers, first and
foremost, are looking to create policy that meets the needs of their public. The
question is, whom is immigration reform being geared to? Are policy-makers
looking to satisfy the Hispanic community or others? This is a question that
will be answered once decisions on the final versions of the policies are
made.
HCAFL-CIO works with Hispanic labor groups and pushes for just
immigration reform at the local level. The groups representative was adamant
that if the government provided a legitimate, feasible path to citizenship, the
workers he has encountered would be eager for the chance. If they did that,
then the government could finally find out who wanted to be here legally and
illegally. Seems like a better starting point if you ask me" (HCAFL-CIO
representative, 2011).
After discussing this subject, each interviewee was asked why it is
important. The responses had a common theme: to show that Hispanics are
capable of identifying policies that benefit the public as a whole. When
pushed, three of the interviewees added that Hispanics, whether
72


undocumented immigrants, documented immigrations, or citizens, feel a
connection to the United States and are in favor of policies they feel better the
nation.
All of those interviewed agreed that organizational cooperation was the
best way to address the issue of immigration reform. Texas LULAC
representative said explicitly that the organization is reaching out to other
groups around the state for one reason: to have a bigger influence in Austin.
We need to be able to talk as one solid block against this reform if we hope
to defeat, which means more talking with each other as much as with elected
officials (Texas LULAC representative, 2011).
Eight respondents who mentioned communication and cooperation
said that increasing their political power in the state of Texas would be easier
if there were a unified voice. According to three of the respondents, there are
a number of groups or coalitions lobbying to effect change in the current bills.
It is clear from the concerns presented that it would behoove these coalitions
to organize into one bloc with one unified message. The literature indicates
that groups that have strong representation have the best ability to effect
change. The goal of coordinating is in line with this theory.
73


5.2 If there is a reaction, do these advocacy groups use pending immigration
reform bills to mobilize the Hispanic community to influence the policy
process?
Now that we have established that immigration reform is a triggering
event, it is important to understand how these groups can use reform to
mobilize the community. Throughout history there have been issues that have
caused increased activism. Determining if the current battle over immigration
reform is such an issue is important in predicting whether groups will be able
to use this issue to recruit new members or encourage activity from their
membership.
When asked about the effect of immigration reform on the level of
Hispanic advocacy, eight of the ten respondents said that the current battle
for fair reform is a rallying point for the Hispanic community and advocacy
groups across the nation.23 However, all three respondents from national
organizations were quick to point out that immigration has been a persistent
issue throughout history. These groups have seen an increase in activism
each time immigration reform has emerged as an issue.
Another point made by representatives of NCLR and NALEO is that
Hispanics are active in political matters in general, and while certain issues
23 The two remaining respondents felt that while the reform battle is important, it is not a
rallying cry. These interviewees felt that other issues as well as past immigration battles
neutralize the novelty factor they feel is required for an issue to act as a rallying point.
74


can provoke a greater response, immigration is not the only concern that
causes Hispanics to become active in policy matters. According to the
literature, questions concerning the finer points of Hispanic activism persist.
Each group acknowledges being able to speak only on behalf of its
community, but their representatives felt strongly that Hispanic activism is not
issue-dependent. I dont feel that immigration reform is any different than
much of the work weve done here.24 We see activism at the local levels with
our organizations that shows that our community is active on a number of
issues (NCLR representative, 2011 )25.
While the impact of immigration reform is up for debate, four of the
local groups that participated in this study specifically acknowledged that the
threat of strict immigration reform has caused their membership numbers to
rise. More individuals in their target communities are participating as
immigration reform has become more high-profile in the past year.
Our members are worried about immigration reform.
They are showing up to meetings more and bringing
people with them. The issue is that we cant always
count on their continued participation. But weve seen
more and more people come out and when I speak to
them immigration is a big worry (HADAS
representative, 2011).
24 The respondent offered to share statistics to support this, but they were never forwarded to
the researcher.
251 chose to interview national representative because they play a role, especially at the
organizing level, in local reform battles. Their opinions provide a necessary big-picture point
of view, but it did seem that they were very guarded about singling out immigration reform as
a special case.
75


The HADAS representatives major concern was that immigration
reform would make it harder for the groups members to earn a living in the
United States. As organization leaders suggest, immigration reform has been
responsible for bringing new members into these groups because many
people associate calls for reform with unjust and unfair laws that will be
applied to all Hispanics. Our members concern is that theyre not immigrants
but theyre worried that theyll be treated like criminals or border jumpers if
they run a stop sign (Texas LULAC representative, 2011).
These worries provide a way for organizations to frame the issue, and
can also offer the opportunity to use such fears as a focusing event to
increase their audience and demonstrate to their members the organizations
plans and scope of influence. The ability of organizations to frame the issue
on the local level is vital to their success. Sure it helps to show that we can
make a difference. Thats why people join our group (America Para Todos
representative, 2011).
Despite the contention from the NCLR and NALEO representatives
that the current round of immigration reform is not the first in history, this does
not lessen the degree to which the issue can be used by organizations to
promote increased activism. The response from local representatives
provides preliminary evidence that grievances such as these have the ability
76


to mobilize and publicize agenda-setting Hispanic organizations. This theme
also offers evidence that immigration reform or contentious policies regarding
the Hispanic community can increase Hispanic activism on the whole, a
question that might be examined in a future project.
The most diverse group of answers came in response to questions
about how immigration reform activity has affected membership and how the
groups can sustain those new relationships. Eight of ten respondents
believed their groups saw a significant rise in membership and fundraising as
a result of the immigration issue in Arizona and pending immigration issues in
Texas. All of the local groups said that of recent new members, a large
majority list immigration reform as an important issue.
While groups are working to provide a voice to their communities in the
fight for immigration reform, they do see the issue as an opportunity. The
high-profile nature of the legislation brings with it a chance to reach a
segment of the community that they may otherwise not. Gaining this kind of
additional access to this community is vital to a grassroots organizations
survival as it can mean increased membership and contributions.
HADAS alluded to this fact in our interview, indicating that willingness
to participate with the group rose as the issue of immigration reform became
more mainstream. Now the group is active in a community with a wider
audience. While working for immigration reform is its main goal, the group
77


hopes to use the attention to promote HADAS and build membership and
power on other policy issues as well.
Its profile as a political advocacy group is also a result of its work on a
high-profile policy; NADAS has gained access to elected officials and
lobbying groups. Building such a profile can help smaller advocacy groups
survive and maintain their place as the connection between elected officials
and the community.
The Texas LULAC organization has seen an increase in their activity
since the Texas immigration legislation has been on the agenda. It was clear
in my conversation with the Texas LULAC representative that the
organization is looking to further educate the Hispanic community. Texas
LULAC functions as a legal representative for its membership, and has taken
up the mantle of providing a bridge between the Hispanics in Texas and their
government.
That membership is growing with the rise of immigration reform.
Immigration reform is a rallying point for Hispanics in the state of Texas
(Texas LULAC representative). The happenings in Arizona spurred the
interest, and in some cases fear, that the state could adopt similar legislation
and I think that makes them want to act.
The national groups have also seen a significant rise in activism.
NCLR saw about an 18% increase in responses to action alerts, which it feels
78


is very significant.26 Both NCLR and NALEO stated that immigration reform
has risen on the political agendas of their member organizations in those
states where reform is being discussed by the state legislature. NALEO
believes that immigration reform had a significant impact on state and federal
elections in Nevada, Arizona, and Maryland.
When asked if this level of activism can be maintained, the general
consensusagreed to by six of the ten respondentswas that they did not
believe so. While the interest in immigration reform would likely result in some
new permanent members, these subjects felt that membership spikes
surrounding any one issue were temporary.
However, eight of the ten believe it is useful for the sake of their
organizations future to get their foot in the door with these community
members. Building a relationship with any segment of the community is vital
to local group survival. While these individuals may not take part in every
policy debate, the general feeling was that having built a relationship would
provide more power for advocacy groups when speaking to elected officials
about policy development.
While there was no consensus on how these groups can retain new
members, group representatives believed that although Hispanic activists
26 The representative did not have exact statistics readily available, and she did not believe a
study had been done on this specific question. Her response was based on the group's
ongoing study of immigration reform and membership. However, NCLR is working on
providing a precise answer to this question.
79


may not continue their involvement after immigration reform concludes,
immigration reform is unlikely to end anytime soon, and therefore there is
really no need to develop a plan to deal with declining membership. From
their perspective, immigration reform has the potential to become a perennial
issue as long as crime and the importing of drugs from south of the U.S.
border are a major concern.
Politicians are unlikely to relinquish an issue that their target public is
passionate about. Also, they do not need a bill to pass in order to propose it;
they just need to show that they are taking steps to address immigration. As
long as this is the case, immigration reform and the battle to ensure that it is
comprehensive and fair will exist.
These advocacy groups are attempting to increase their role in the
policy process in Texas to change or strike down pending immigration
legislation they feel is unjust. Therefore they are lobbying and banding
together, mobilizing their resources and improving their affiliations with
decision-makers to gain traction in the states policy process.
80


5.3 Current tactics
The transcripts of these interviews reveal that these groups use a
number of common tactics and types of action to positively influence
upcoming policy. These organizations are seeking both to have their stance
on immigration reform shape the policy agenda and to bring about a change
in the types of legislation being proposed for the upcoming legislative session.
Public demonstrations at the state and local levels were mentioned by
nine of the ten groups surveyed. These groups are organizing these
demonstrations in their cities and are traveling to Austin to gain an audience
with state policy-makers. They feel that this kind of power is the most effective
tool with which to accomplish their goal of making positive change. As the
representative from HADAS stated, the number of Hispanics in the state of
Texas provides a unique opportunity to use public demonstrations as a policy
tool. The literature on policy-making and advocacy groups shows that
resources are important for advocacy organizations to improve their place in
the policy process. One resource that all of these groups have is a large
membership base.
Another tactic mentioned was coalition building, which is another
example of ways in which the happenings in Arizona has played a role in
configuring the development of action plans in Texas. After seeing the type of
mobilization that was achieved in Arizona and around the nation by groups
81


working together, those surveyed believed that building strong relationships in
the state of Texas between organizations is important to voicing the concerns
of Hispanics regarding immigration reform. Discussion did not include
specifics of how these coalitions are being built, but this tactic is one that
these groups are intent on using. The mass mobilizations and demonstrations
in Austin have served as an opportunity for these groups to build their
networks and continue to show a united front. Another avenue for these
coalitions to grow is through national organizations. The representative of
NCLR mentioned that the groups network of member organizations is
reaching out to others in their community and taking part in the state
demonstrations. These similar organizations are looking for others to join
them in their fight.
Education was unanimously mentioned as a tool for advocacy groups
to gain and increase advocacy activity. According to Texas LULAC
representative, the issue for many Hispanics is their lack of understanding of
the specifics of the proposed immigration reform. As we see in the policy-
making literature this is a gap in policy process that advocacy organizations
can fill. By acting as policy and issue experts, these advocacy groups can
work to provide positive and accurate representations of proposed and
upcoming legislation. This is where national or umbrella organizations can
have the most impact. All three national groups surveyed said that their
82


biggest role in the fight against unfair immigration reform at the state level is
to provide their local members and organizations with accurate information,
which gives individuals who may be reluctant the tools to promote advocacy,
and as a result, aids in increasing membership. This information is helpful as
local groups conduct meetings to educate Hispanics about what is involved in
the legislation and about how to get involved in the fight against unfair
immigration reform.
Finally, and most importantly, gaining an audience with elected officials
and policy-makers is the main goal. Through the tactics mentioned in this
section, these organizations focus on meeting with elected officials to
promote their viewpoint. Building resources though increased membership,
power, and funds will mean getting an attentive audience with those in power.
5.4 What are the types of action plans regarding immigration reform?
After surveying the current tactics these groups are using to address
immigration reform, to consider the third research question I will outline some
of the responses the groups gave regarding their plans for future advocacy.
As stated above, each group interviewed for this thesis has connections to
the state of Texas. All ten respondents felt that a battle is upcoming similar to
that seen in Arizona. Four local groups said that they foresee a similar
reaction from the Hispanic community regarding protest and public activism.
83


Each local group felt that the issue in Texas could be the most important
battle nationwide, given the rising number of immigrants entering the state.
The battle to secure the Texas border against drug importers was
mentioned by five respondents as a point of worry. It is reasonable to assume
that immigration reform may be seen as a way to stem the wave of drugs and
violence moving back and forth across Texas southern border. HADAS felt
that in the absence of criminal legislation, immigration reform at the state level
could be perceived as a protective measure and a way to curb the problems
at the border. This is a valid concern that many Hispanic groups should be
considering.
The result of this is that these local groups are attempting to educate
the community in order to put pressure on their elected officials to realize that
immigration reform is not criminal reform. The continued use of public
demonstrations is vital. In our discussions the four groups that specifically
mentioned the tactic alluded to the impact of a visual presence, implying that
having a visual spectacle that people could see on the internet and on
television aided support during the fight against reform. This is one of the
tactics that local groups are looking to utilize through coalitions and
demonstration coordination. On any issue it helps to see that other people
share your point of view. In any community it aids those who are
84


apprehensive about joining public demonstration feel at ease when they see
people fighting the cause. It instills confidence (NCLR representative, 2011).
It is clear that these organizations feel their power lies in their ability to
show strength against immigration reform and to pressure elected officials.
Local groups in the state of Texas are following Arizonas lead in organizing
with each other. They are developing new partnerships among organizations
and want to bring in any ally, whether political and social, including labor
groups, human rights groups, or politically motivated groups. Regardless of
group size, each of those interviewed had sent a representative to Austin to
lobby for the group and community. Also, all the groups had a person working
on tracking immigration reform, as either a volunteer or an employee.
The groups plan to work with national organizations to increase their
political power, something that is integral to obtaining access to policy
initiation, the stage that Texas is currently in. The local groups may not, and
in most cases do not, have the political clout to maximize their voices.
Its clear that elected officials can blow us off one
by one. We have come together and thats why
Ive been going to rallies with and for my group to
make a united front. But its also why we became
an affiliate member [of a national organization].
We want to be able to make our voice heard
(Texas LULAC representative, 2011).
To accomplish this, national groups can provide guidance to local and
state groups when called upon. The dynamic between the two levels on
85


immigration reform has been interesting. Each national organization leader
expressed that their organization was engaging in local politics only when
asked by either their local chapters/member organizations or elected officials.
The representative from NALEO mentioned specifically that the group
reached out to elected officials and their member organizations but would not
take a more involved role unless asked. The representatives from NCLR and
LULAC made similar statements.
While the national groups made it clear that their presence on the local
level was not high-profile, the local groups emphasized that they can lean on
their parent organizations, whichever they may be, to provide information and
guidance on how to address immigration reform. Thus, for local groups one
strategy is to draw upon national organizations to help influence policy.
The end result is a relationship between two levels, one in which the
goals may be different and the weight of influence can fluctuate, but one that
both sides feel is valuable to advancing the fight against what they feel is
unjust immigration reform. All three national organizations indicated that they
provide information for local groups regarding recruiting strategies and policy.
86


Table 5.1 provides details of the major themes and how these groups
responded when asked about them. The response no answer means that
the respondent did not give a clear answer or failed to answer the question
completely.
Table 5.1: Breakdown of responses
Organization Arizona SB 1070 will have an impact on Texas reform? Battle in Texas will be similar to Arizona? Immigration reform as a rallying point? Immigration resulting in rise in membership? Retaining level of activism associated with immigration reform? Immigration reform opens avenues to possible future advocacy?
Harris County AFL-CIO Yes Yes Yes No No Answer No
America Para Todos Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes
Asociacion Salvadorena de I os EUA Yes Yes No No Yes Yes
FIEL Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
HADAS Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Labor Council for Lalin American Advancement Houston. TX Yes Yes Yes Yes No No
League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
LULAC Texas Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes
National Alliance of Latino Elected Officials (NALEO) Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes
National Council of La Raza (NCLR) Yes Yes No Yes No Yes
87


Table 5.1 (Cont.)
Organization In favor of fair immigration reform Advocating coalition building Coalitions will lead to increased power? Public demonstrations are effective? Educating the Hispanic population is a top priority? Importance of path to citizenship
Harris County AFL-CIO No answer Yes No No answer Yes No
America Para Todos Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Asociacion Satvadorena de los EUA No answer Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
FIEL Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
HADAS Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No
Labor Council for Latin American Advancement Houston, TX No answer Yes No Yes Yes No
League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
LULAC Texas Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
National Alliance of Latino Elected Officials (NALEO) Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No answer
National Council of La Raza (NCLR) Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No answer
88


5.5 Summarizing results
For local groups, having an umbrella organization to guide them,
recommend best practices, and share expertise, is of great value. One
organization leader admitted that without their national group they wouldnt
have all the information they need to provide their community.
I do not contend that the tactics discussed above represent a final list
or course of action for these groups, but they do address research question
three of this thesis, and can be considered a unified plan to address
immigration reform in the state of Texas. A number of other tactics were
mentioned, including staging protests, walkouts by manual laborers, and
boycotts, but none of these activities was confirmed as having taken place.
Examining these responses provides a snapshot of how the ten
organizations perceive and are addressing the upcoming immigration reform
battle. From the interviews conducted in this study it is clear to me that
immigration reform in Texas is an important battle for promoting and
maintaining Hispanic advocacy. It is also clear that the happenings in Arizona
will play a role in how these organizations proceed in the fight for fair
immigration reform. Based on these conversations, I believe that Arizona
provided a new model for these organizations to use when answering the
questions posed to them. With the consequences of that movement still fresh
89


in their minds, this is understandable. From the results of this research we
can derive that immigration reform in Texas is being addressed early in the
policy innovation and agenda-setting process. The current tactics and
potential future tactics outlined in this thesis offer a glimpse of what the future
battle over immigration reform could hold for Hispanic advocacy groups and
their ability to increase individual activism.
90


6. Conclusion
This thesis provides a window on the current battle for fair immigration
reform in the state of Texas. A survey of a small but diverse set of advocacy
groups allows us to view the issue from a few different perspectives. While
this research has some shortcomings I believe that this thesis provides
evidence of the current state of advocacy activity in Texas regarding an issue
that is increasing in importance and that will have significant potential
consequences for Hispanics in Texas.
6.1 What we learned
Of the three research questions in this thesis, the most significant is
the first one, regarding Hispanic groups recognition of immigration reform.
From their responses it is clear that the Hispanic advocacy groups surveyed
are well aware of the potential impact and the potential dangers of the
91


Full Text

PAGE 1

THE EFFECT OF IMMIGRATION REFORM ON HISPANIC ADVOCACY GROUPS By Darrell A. Lovell B.S., University of Central Missouri, 2003 A thesis submitted to the University of Colorado Denver In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Masters of Public Administration 2011

PAGE 2

This thesis for the Masters of Public Administration degree by Darrell A. Lovell has been approved Paul Stretesky, Ph.D. l)lYll\ Date

PAGE 3

Lovell, Darrell A. (MPA, School of Public Affairs) The Effect of Immigration Reform on Hispanic Advocacy Groups Thesis directed by Assistant Professor Paul Stretesky, PhD ABSTRACT Recent immigration reform has caused a controversy over the implementation of proposed reform in the past two years. Arizona's attempt to pass strict immigration reform triggered an outpouring of advocacy activity among groups nationwide. This movement is not the first time groups have mobilized against immigration reform on both the federal and state levels. Texas is on the verge of a significant state attempt to pass immigration reform, which has sparked initial reactions similar to those seen in Arizona in 2010. This study examines how Hispanic advocacy groups are responding to these policy reforms. In the process I examine how these selected groups explain these policies to the public, how their patterns of activities are altered, and whether the reform is driving an increase in Hispanic community activism. Using a semi-structured interview method I provide evidence that Hispanic advocacy groups see immigration reform in the state of Texas as an opportunity to rally and combine forces, the opportunities to increase membership is not clear. However, these groups believe that the political opportunity provided by immigration reform will give them a platform to increase their influence on policy-makers. This abstract accurately represents the content of the candidate's recommend its publication. Signed Paul Stretesky, PhD

PAGE 4

DEDICATION I would like to dedicate this thesis to my loving wife. Amy; son, Ari; and parents, Dennis and Bertha. Without their support, understanding, and sacrifices my pursuit of higher education and completion of this thesis would not have been possible.

PAGE 5

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS My thanks to my advisor on this project, Paul Stretesky, PhD, for his contribution to and support of this thesis. I would also like to thank the members of my thesis committee, Christopher Weible, PhD, and Marty Otanez, PhD, for their guidance and insights throughout this process.

PAGE 6

TABLE OF CONTENTS List of figures ................................................................... vi CHAPTER 1. Introduction ................................................................... 1 1 .1 Background ........................................................ 1 1.2 Issue ................................................................. 5 1.3 Problem ............................................................. 8 1.4 Research question .............................................. 1 0 2. The Role of Advocacy ...................................................... 12 Groups in the Policy Process 2.1 Why individuals join ............................................. 13 advocacy organizations 2.2 Advocacy groups' responsibilities in ....................... 18 the policy process 2.3 Types of advocacy groups .................................... 20 2.3.1 Institutional versus membership organizations ....... 20 2.3.2 Public interest versus economic interest groups .... .22 2.3.3 Large versus small organizations ........................ 24 2.4 Power development ............................................. 26 2.5 Ways groups can participate ................................. 31 2.6 Potential advocacy group tactics ............................. 34 vi

PAGE 7

2. 7 Relevance of the literature ................................... 39 3. History of Hispanic Civil Rights ........................................ 42 3.1 How social movements develop ............................ .43 3.2 Labor rights: The first Hispanic movement ............. .47 3.3 Education reform ............................................... .49 3.4 Political activism ................................................ 50 3.5 Hispanic advocacy groups' impact on ..................... 52 immigration reform 4. Methods ...................................................................... 54 4.1 Importance of qualitative methods .......................... 54 4.2 Sampling frame and organization description ........... 56 4.3 Groups that declined to participate ......................... 61 4.4 Interviews ......................................................... 62 5. Results ........................................................................ 65 5.1 Have Hispanic civil rights groups ........................... 65 reacted to the pending immigration reform bills? 5.2 If there is a reaction, do these advocacy ................. 74 groups use pending immigration reform bills to mobilize the Hispanic community to influence the policy process? vii

PAGE 8

5.3 Current tactics ................................................... 81 5.4 What are the types of action plans regarding ............ 83 immigration reform? 5.5 Summarizing results ........................................... 89 6. Conclusion .................................................................... 91 6.1 What we learned ................................................ 91 6.2 The role of Arizona SB 1070 ................................. 94 6.3 Weakness of the study ........................................ 95 6.4 What is the next step? ......................................... 97 6.5 Implications of the study and summary .................... 98 REFERENCES ......................................................................... 1 00 APPENDICES Appendix A .................................................................... 111 Appendix 8 .................................................................... 113 Appendix C .................................................................... 115 viii

PAGE 9

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 4.1. Types of organizations studied .................................... 59 4.2. Advocacy organization breakdown ............................... 60 5.1 Breakdown of responses ............................................. 87 vi

PAGE 10

1. Introduction 1 1 Background Calls for immigration regulation and reform have persisted throughout U.S. history. Hostility toward immigrants began early in America when settlers rejected a second wave of immigrants. In the United States, racism is often noted by scholars as a contributing factor in shaping immigration legislation (Burden, 2007; Eschbach & Waters, 1995; Finch, 1990; Lee, 2002). For instance, as early as 1882 racially driven immigration legislation was created to limit Chinese labor (Lee, 2002). The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 restricted the ability of Chinese immigrants to work in the United States and barred any court from granting citizenship to a person of Chinese descent. The Act was unpopular among the public and was eventually deemed racially insensitive and overturned in 1943 by the Magnuson Act, 1 setting in motion a 1 The Magnuson Act permitted Chinese immigrants residing in the United States to become citizens and provided a national quota of 1 05 Chinese immigrants per year. Large-scale Chinese immigration did not take place until the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965. 1

PAGE 11

path to citizenship for Chinese immigrants. Such a path has often been regarded as a priority for any comprehensive immigration legislation. After repealing the Chinese Exclusion Act, the United States again attempted to restrict the type of immigrants that came to the United States by passing a series of federal acts that restricted several immigrant groups, including Hispanics and the Japanese,2 from entering the country legally. In addition to these groups, criminals too were never welcome, but the United States began to accept a "better class" of immigrants. The issue was there was no way to know who the solid citizens were. Throughout U.S. history political or social prejudice against certain races or nationalities would partly determine who was thought to be a criminal. Early on, any Central European was suspected, and then Eastern Europeans. In the early 1900s suspicion shifted to Asians, namely the Japanese and Chinese, and in the mid-twentieth century Hispanics. Currently Hispanics and Middle Easterners are receiving this attention. Throughout United States history persons judged to be productive by supplementing the labor force were allowed to immigrate.3 For instance acts 2 Acts include the Page Act of 1875, the Naturalization Act of 1870, the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, the Immigration Act of 1882, the Geary Act of 1892, the Immigration Act of 1917, and the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965. 3 Economics has played a key role in immigration reform. Settlers allowed immigration due to the need for cheap manual labor. The same concept has persisted throughout the United States' history. Even today immigration reform is discussed in the context of how restricting access to Hispanic immigrants will affect the United States agriculture industry. 2

PAGE 12

such as quota acts allowed for states such as California, with its Bracero Act of 1942, to accept immigrants who would supplement the work force in areas whose working populations were low, often taking agricultural jobs that citizens were less likely to perform.4 The decision to enact strict immigration legislation began, for the Hispanic population, in the 1940s. During the sixty years since, Hispanic immigrants have watched as a number of legislative acts have been passed that restrict their ability to seek refuge or their fortune in the United States. While federal and state governments were looking for ways to restrict Hispanic immigration, persons from Mexico, the Caribbean, and South America were continuing to enter the United States and integrate into the workforce, especially in manual labor and agricultural trades (Crawford, Meade, Spiller & Stamper, 2004). California's Bracero Act of 1942 restricted employers to contracting with only two million immigrants. Although those immigrants fought to stay in the country, despite the legislation a large number were deported. Congress attempted to curb the flow of immigrants in 1986 with the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA). Using sanctions on employers, the United States 4 One example of a quota act is the Emergency Quota Act of 1921. 3

PAGE 13

attempted to stem the flow of illegal immigrants seeking work in the United States.5 Beginning with President Ronald Reagan, the United States government has sought to develop programs providing paths to citizenship. Presidents George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush have upheld this concept, which aims to provide law-abiding and taxpaying immigrants the opportunity and education to become United States citizens. These immigration policies have sparked a number of Hispanic organizations to incorporate advocacy for just, comprehensive reform into their groups' platforms. That fight has been at the forefront of many national organizations' agendas for the past forty years (NCLR representative, 201 0). With states queuing to present and pass immigration reform, the fight for influence in the policy process regarding immigration reform is a pressing issue for national and local groups (NCLR representative, 201 0). 5 It is very important to understand how the term "illegal immigrant" is used. In many cases, among both the Hispanic population and the general public, illegal immigrants are the targets of those wanting immigration reform. The problem arises when legal immigrants are confused with their unauthorized counterparts, or are made the collateral damage in the pursuit of stringent reform of illegal immigration. This is an aspect that I am not able to examine fully in this thesis, but it is a point of interest. 4

PAGE 14

1.2 Issue While immigration reform has been unsuccessful, the implementation of workers' rights, along with a failing economy and stricter employment and deportation laws, has caused unauthorized or illegal immigration at the national level to stabilize (NALEO research project, 201 0). Despite the fact that the number of illegal immigrants in the United States dropped from 12 million in 2007 to 11.2 million in 2010 (Cohn & Passel, 2011 ), the federal government has come under pressure from community, state, and local governments to address the issue, especially in the southwest where Texas, Nevada, New Mexico, California, and Colorado have experienced an increase in illegal immigrants (Cohn & Passel, 2011 ). With the importance of illegal immigration varying from state to state, recent calls for national comprehensive immigration reform have gone unanswered. The lack of a nationwide public mandate may deter the federal government from concentrating on immigration, but public opinion in the southwest is different. Given that region's proximity to Mexico and Latin America, immigration is a hot-button topic in Texas, Nevada, Arizona, Louisiana, Oklahoma, New Mexico, and California. Groups advocating against immigration believe that these states are being forced to create expensive social welfare programs because of illegal immigrants. 5

PAGE 15

States in the southwest are now taking matters into their own hands and creating legislation that attempts to restrict illegal immigration. Arizona was the first state to take notable action, introducing Senate Bill (SB) 1070, which imposed restrictions regarding immigrant IDs and granted law enforcement officials the right to detain and question those suspected of being illegal immigrants. Nevada and Texas have followed suit, with similar laws being proposed in both states. However, sweeping change has been met with disdain, as evidenced by the response to Arizona's attempt to pass its recent immigration reform. The call for immigration reform has increased in the past decade. As the number of immigrants has risen, the public has pressured the government to provide legislation to regulate entry into the country. In a May 2010 Gallup poll 68 percent of those asked said that halting illegal immigration was "very important" or "extremely important."6 In the same poll 67 percent felt the same way about developing a plan to deal with illegal immigrants currently residing in the United States. In June 2010, a Gallup poll placed immigration reform as one of the top six policy issues facing the nation.7 The trend holds true among Hispanics. Garcia Research and Santiago ROI conducted the LatinoMetrics research project (Latino Metrics Study, 2010). The study polled 504 Latinos randomly selected from across the 6 See Appendix A. 7 See Appendix B. 6

PAGE 16

country about immigration reform and Arizona SB 1070 in May and June of 2010.8 The results align with those of Gallup a poll indicating that immigration reform is an important policy issue facing the nation, and that 78 percent of Latinos believe that immigration reform is "very important."9 The differences emerge upon consideration of what immigration reform should address. In the Gallup polling referenced above, the respondents believed that reform should address immigrants currently in the United States, along with the tightening of the nation's borders. From this research it is safe to assume that immigration reform that promotes tougher sanctions on current immigrants, such as those included in Arizona SB 1070, and that protects the border, falls in line with the opinions expressed by the Gallup poll research (Saad, 2010). Hispanics, on the other hand, favor reform that provides a path to citizenship. In the same LatinoMetrics poll, 76 percent of Latinos supported legislation that included a path to citizenship. Conversely, 74 percent of those polled strongly disagreed with Arizona SB 1070 because they believed it would be used by law enforcement to promote racial profiling and human rights infringements. Polling suggests that for Hispanics, immigration reform is 8 "Latino" is a term used by the research group. This term is synonymous with the term "Hispanic" used in this project. 9 Respondents were asked, "How important is it to you that the government takes steps this year to deal with each of the following-extremely important, very important, moderately important, or not that important?" 7

PAGE 17

about basic human rights, while for the general or non-Hispanic population it is an issue of citizenship and access to public services. From both perspectives immigration reform is gaining traction. 1.3 Problem The differences in public opinion about immigration reform are evident when separate populations are polled about the issue. In short, there is considerable disagreement about what should be done about illegal immigration. For many Americans the term "immigration reform" suggests that the government should move to reduce immigration. Yet among Hispanics reform is seen as an avenue to legitimacy and citizenship. According to the representatives from NALEO and NCLR, their Hispanic membership sees immigration reform in a positive light. The community believes there is a need to regulate entrance into the country and protect the population from any criminal element seeking enterprise in the United States. However, reform cannot be supported by the community if it does not provide an economically and socially feasible path to permanent citizenship. "It's not like it was in the early centuries when immigrants came to Ellis Island and were sworn in and allowed to pass. Citizenship costs, in both time and money, and it's more than the current immigrant population can afford" (Representative of HCAFL-CIO, 201 0). 8

PAGE 18

Arizona SB 1070 offers an excellent example of what Hispanic groups feel is unjust legislation. "The law, which proponents and critics alike said was the broadest and strictest immigration measure in generations, would make the failure to carry immigration documents a crime and give the police broad power to detain anyone suspected of being in the country illegally" (Archibald, 201 0). However, opponents of the legislation see the legislation as an affront against immigrants' basic human rights and believe the law is unconstitutional. Arizona Governor Jan Brewer signed the bill into law at the encouragement of a segment of her constituency. The legislation provided a possible solution to a general immigration problem for politically motivated elected officials and public figures seeking to gain the support of a conservative voting bloc. Conversely, the passage of the legislation alienated the Hispanic community and fostered concerns about racial profiling and the restriction of basic civil rights (Archibald, 201 0; Hagmann, 201 0; Rangel, 201 0; Sigal, 201 0). The reaction to Arizona SB 1070 was a massive political activist movement among the Hispanic community. According to those interviewed for this project, the Hispanic community is not devoid of political ambition, yet research suggests that the community's level of activism fluctuates depending on the issue. On the surface the passing into law of SB 1070 was a "lightning 9

PAGE 19

rod" for Hispanic political activism, as groups across the nation held demonstrations and joined Hispanic groups in Arizona and achieved an injunction to suspend the carrying out of the legislation. 1 .4 Research Question While Arizona SB 1070 has been halted by injunction, largely due to political activism, copycat legislation has been proposed in Nevada, Maryland, and Texas, among a number of other states (NALEO representative, 2011).10 This study will focus on activism in Texas regarding pending legislation similar to SB 1070. Included in the separate bills are requirements for identification, grounds for immigration checks when detaining individuals, and voter requirement laws. All were hot-button issues for Hispanic advocacy groups in Arizona and may be so in Texas. Efforts to study the reaction of Hispanic organizations to immigration reform are starting to increase, but the current literature is limited. This research addresses three major questions concerning how Hispanic organizations have reacted to pending immigration legislation in the state of Texas. First, have Hispanic civil rights groups reacted to the pending 10 "Copycat legislation" is a term that was used throughout the interviews for this project. In this case, the interviewees used this term to describe upcoming or existing legislation that has many of the same elements as Arizona SB 1070. 10

PAGE 20

immigration reform bills in Texas? Second, if they have reacted, do these advocacy groups use pending immigration reform bills to mobilize the Hispanic community to influence the policy process? Third, if advocacy groups are concerned with immigration reform, what types of action plans do they create? To address these questions I conduct interviews with leaders of ten national and local Hispanic advocacy groups about pending immigration legislation in Texas. 11

PAGE 21

2. The Role of Advocacy Groups in the Policy Process Much has been written about the role of advocacy groups in the policy process (see Birkland, 2011; Burnstein, 1991; Burnstein & Linton, 2002; deleon, 1995; Pralle, 2003). This study expands upon the role of advocacy groups in the policy process by examining Hispanic civil rights organizations and immigration reform in Texas. The first step in examining how Hispanic civil rights view and influence immigration policy is to better understand the role advocacy organizations can play in the policy process. This chapter is organized to cover the major themes surrounding the role of advocacy organization in the policy-making process. First, I present the basic reasons why individuals join advocacy groups, in order to understand the decision-making process that contributes to how these groups are formed. Next, I examine advocacy organizations' responsibility in the policy process, focusing on their role as an intermediary between the public and the policy-makers. Third, I present six common types of advocacy groups 12

PAGE 22

to understand how these groups organize and operate. Fourth, and most importantly, I outline how the literature suggests that these groups attempt to influence the policy process. Fifth, I present the ways in which these groups participate in the policy process and the possible results of those actions. And sixth, I outline some of the possible tactics these groups can use to effect change and exert their influence. This literature provides the basis for the major questions asked in this thesis, guides the exploration of how groups determine what issues they act upon, and shows how these groups can take steps to address their community's concerns. 2.1 Why individuals join advocacy organizations Individuals represent one actor in the policy process (Birkland, 2011 ). According to Birkland, individuals are the target of both policy-makers and advocacy groups, and the number of actors in the policy process creates a logjam or cluster of opinions. If the opinions of individuals were addressed one at a time, this would confuse or hinder the process further. The remedy for this is the creation of localized groups to advocate and deliver a centralized opinion, such as the advocacy organizations involved in this study. 13

PAGE 23

The number of actors in the policy-making process is often seen as a detriment because a large number of actors influence many different interests that will need to be addressed in order to form policy. This is where advocacy, or interest, groups come into the process. "Interest groups are importantperhaps central-to the policy process because the power of individuals is greatly magnified when they form groups" (Birkland, 2011 ). Concentrating their individual power into one group provides an avenue for individuals to be heard, which addresses a concern that prevents many people from participating in the policy process. At the basic level, the main reason people join interest groups is to increase the power of their political voice. Thus, interest groups are attractive because individuals can share their ideas with those who have similar ideological viewpoints. While the allure of an improved concentrated stake in the policy process is important, it is not the only reason, or even the primary reason, that individuals join advocacy groups. Rather, they join such groups because the groups address issues that affect them personally, building a personal connection between the person and the group (Marsh, 1971 ). While the personal connection is essential to an individual's joining a group, it is important to examine how the connection is forged. Long ago, Truman (1951) presented disturbance theory to explain why people engage with interest groups. This theory suggests that individuals decide to 14

PAGE 24

participate in group activity when a disturbance alters the status quo. Once this happens, individuals are apt to join groups of like-minded people or those facing similar issues in order to act against the disturbance and restore their personal equilibria. This is an appealing and easily accepted theory because it is grounded in a logical formula. "Its essential reasoning is quite logical: there is a cause and effect relationship between external forces (disturbances) and the formation of new interest group organizations" (Berry, 1978, p. 382). The results of this thesis provide evidence that disturbance theory is what is at work in regard to immigration reform. Most notably, a number of these groups are seeing a rise in membership and resources based on individuals' interest in immigration reform. Another theoretical basis for joining advocacy groups is exchange theory (Salisbury, 1969). Salisbury suggests that individuals join groups because they receive a benefit for doing so, and this drives individuals to become more civically engaged. Exchange theory is similar to disturbance theory in that it suggests a cause-and-effect relationship, but it is not expressly reliant on a signaling or focusing event. Both theories suggest that to become involved, individuals must realize what is important to them. Building on these theories, Doan and Wood (2003) propose that problem definition can be measured using a threshold model to determine when individuals will actually take action. This theory 15

PAGE 25

conceptualizes how the public identifies issues and starts to push for new policy. Doan and Wood's theory is based on the rational choice perspective that issues exist on a spacial plane that has a tipping point, namely the balance between cost and benefit. When the cost outweighs the benefit for an individual, the threshold is crossed and the individual starts to mobilize. Once this happens to a group of individuals, momentum is created in the community and issues are brought to the attention of decision-makers regarding the balance between the public's need and the lack of current policy. Salisbury (1969) and Truman (1951) suggest that individuals take action in groups only when they are prodded to by outside influences. Another view on participation in groups is that individuals feel the groups serve a civic or altruistic purpose (Moe, 1980). While materialistic and reward-based models provide an obvious reason for advocacy group identification, there is a segment of the population who joins advocacy groups for a simple reason: to do their civic duty, which includes influencing public policy. The desired result of the activity is a collective benefit and not an individual one (Forsythe & Welch, 1983; Moe, 1980). These three theories provide three solid, rational bases for individuals' joining advocacy groups. While they differ in their ideology, all have proven to be correct in some cases. Therefore, my intention is not to debate which is 16

PAGE 26

correct, but to provide three possible explanations as to why individuals join advocacy groups and take part in the policy process. This literature underlies one of the main questions posed in this thesis: is immigration reform a strong enough event to push Hispanics to get and stay involved with advocacy groups fighting against immigration reform? In the results section of this thesis, a main observation is that the current battle over reform has spurred additional advocacy among the Hispanic community at the local and national levels. In answering this question we are potentially provided with another reason why individuals join groups. For example, it may be that impending legislation in Texas-or in other states such as Arizona, Massachusetts, and Nevada-serves to support the disturbance perspective, that is, immigration legislation threatens the status quo of Hispanics in Texas and elsewhere in the country. If immigration reform does serve as a disturbance to the Hispanic community in Texas, then we should find evidence for this in interviews with group leaders. This research may provide support for the idea that individuals are likely to join groups as a result of the impact a policy issue can have on their lives or the lives of those close to them. Where that disturbance originates (Texas or other states) is in question. In short, if Hispanic advocacy and civil rights groups have responded to legislation in Texas, then 17

PAGE 27

disturbance theory may help explain that response by providing an explanation for it. Most significantly, the ability of immigration reform to stimulate Hispanic activism provides evidence of a way for advocacy groups to reach a rapidly growing population, which many in political science and politics have been seeking to learn how to do for a number of years (Marquez, 2000). 2.2 Advocacy groups' responsibilities in the policy process There is a place in policy science/democracy dynamic for public input (deleon, 1995). An informed public can make a valuable contribution to effective policy if these members, or their groups, are given the opportunity to take part in the policy process. Providing the public with information and opportunity can increase civic engagement, especially in a decentralized government. Yet ensuring these groups have a coherent and understandable voice is an issue that needs to be addressed. One potential solution is the inclusion and identification of advocacy groups. Policy-makers work with the community, often via community groups or public advocates, to determine the facts and aspects of issues that establish the criteria for future policy (deleon, 1995). Questions that policy-makers might ask of community representatives deal with who will be affected by a proposed policy, and to what extent. This collaboration helps to determine 18

PAGE 28

what is possible, which often is not the optimal or perfect solution, and is vital to the success of the policy process. While public advocates take part in all aspects of policy-making, they can be especially useful in identifying environmental parameters and time constraints. They work within the community to educate and mobilize efforts to identify issues and put them into a policy context. These advocates, most notably advocacy groups and community leaders, work for specific causes and usually on behalf of specific population groups. Especially at the local level, they serve as a bridge between public opinion and policy (Andrews & Edwards, 2004 ). In many cases, these groups are more knowledgeable about the needs of the community than any other participant in the policy innovation process. The value of public advocates lies in their ability to speak in a unified voice to analysts and decision-makers on behalf of their constituency. Putting the issue into context is vital to the success of the public's having an influence on policy. If decision-makers receive thousands of letters, this demonstrates interest in a problem but does not provide a concise view of how the community would like to see the issue resolved. In mobilizing together, often under the umbrella of an advocacy organization, the public can address decision-makers with one clear voice and vision. 19

PAGE 29

The fact that these advocates act in congruence with the public interest gives them increased value, as opposed to a corporation. Lobbyist, or special interest group, who are not dedicated to addressing public, needs (Herrington, 2005). Without input from the public, having a realistic idea of the urgency of needed activity would be difficult. Working with these groups helps decision-makers and policy analysts define the scope of a given problem throughout the policy process. 2.3 Types of advocacy groups There are a number of ways to classify advocacy groups. Groups can be studied as national or local, public interest or special interest, or institutional or membership-based. In this section I will examine the differences between these types of groups and what each can offer to the policy process. 2.3.1 Institutional versus membership organizations The first distinction to examine is that between institutional and membership-based groups. Institutional groups are formed through association gained by belonging to a specific entity (Birkland, 2011 ). An example involved in this thesis is the Harris County AFL-CIO, which is included in the category of Hispanic advocacy groups because it is interested 20

PAGE 30

in advancing the rights of Hispanics who participate in the labor union. This group is active in protesting immigration reform in Texas, but the majority of its membership is not Hispanic, and therefore are supporting a cause as members of the group and not to meet their individual interests. Membership groups, on the other hand, are created by choice and often out of a desire to join together with like-minded individuals (Birkland, 2011 ). These types of groups are often categorized similarly to the civil rights groups I examine in this study. Groups of Hispanic advocates seek a coalition within the group model to address issues that pertain to them individually and others in the group. Most of the Hispanic advocacy groups examined in this study fall into the category of membership groups. These groups are made up of different individuals who are drawn together simply by their affiliation with the institution. In this case, the groups studied are all membership-based organizations that were created by community leaders and advocates to champion a specific cause. Their membership is composed of individuals who have a connection with that cause, which is prompting them to make a conscious choice to get involved to work toward an acceptable solution. The exception is the Harris County AFL-CIO, a group that advocates for Hispanic rights but which is not focused solely on that segment of the community. 21

PAGE 31

2.3.2 Public interest versus economic interest groups Another difference to examine is that between public and economic interest groups. Public interest groups are formed to provide political and policy guidance to effect change and to work toward the greater good (Birkland, 2011; Cigler & Nownes, 1995; Rothenberg, 1989). Public interest groups work toward the "common cause," suggesting that these groups are formed in line with Moe's (1980) concept that civic duty or altruistic views and desires are the primary motivations for group participation. The downside to public interest groups according to Birkland (2011) is that they often cannot show a tangible gain to sustain membership, which means these groups have a hard time growing in both power and size.11 Groups involved in this study, however, have shown such gains regarding immigration reform, which has allowed them to sustain their memberships. Economic interest groups fall in line with disturbance theory (Truman, 1951) or exchange theory (Salisbury, 1969). Groups are formed and joined by people seeking change or wanting to sustain a status quo that provides an individual benefit. Special-interest groups are in this category. These groups work toward the benefit of a selected portion of the public, and the benefits yielded likely accrue to those who have substantial resources (Birkland, 2011; 11 A tangible gain is an example of a group's success that the group can present to current or potential members, or evidence that it is able to convey members' opinions in a bottom-up process that makes the individuals' opinions count. 22

PAGE 32

Blais & McCallum, 1987; Schmitz, 1988). Often their work involves specific events or "causes" that infringe on the particular group interest of those they represent. With the literature presented, discerning where the civil rights groups involved in this study and such groups in general, fall on this continuum is a difficult task. Although none of the groups involved in this study is focused solely on immigration reform, their intention is to cause change that can directly affect their community. While free-riders do exist in this case, in that fair immigration reform would benefit all races who immigrate, there is evidence that the community that stands to gain the most from the action of the organizations involved is the community these groups represent. The exception, as in the last section, is the Harris County AFL-CIO, a labor-based organization serving the labor rights of its membership. While some aspects of these groups would align with those of special-interest groups, for instance in some of the lobbying tactics used, I believe the groups surveyed in this project are public-interest groups, as they are working toward a general policy solution that will provide benefits to the public within and outside their target community. 23

PAGE 33

2.3.3 Large versus small organizations The final distinction I will examine is that between large and small groups. Large groups are classified as peak organizations (Birkland, 2011 ), which are considered the most influential and connected groups. The effect of these large organizations is an increased stature in the policy process. "Money, knowledge, and information are related to the size of the group and the resources that it and its members can bring to policy conflicts" (Birkland, 2011, p. 135). These resources are what make groups powerful and increase their political power. The most important resource is knowledge (Howlett & Ramesh, 1995), which is often reserved for those with access to decision makers and subject matter experts. Typically larger or peak organizations have such access. In contrast, small groups, a classification that applies to seven of the groups surveyed in this thesis, normally have difficulty providing these types of incentives for membership and have trouble building their stature in the policy process (Birkland, 2011 ). Power often lies in increased numbers; however, there are cases in which resources such as increased money and knowledge can outweigh membership size. As mentioned above, knowledge is an important indicator of the influence or power of an organization. But money places a close second. Therefore, it is possible for there to be a small group composed of wealthy and influential subject matter experts. These are 24

PAGE 34

often special interest groups that have a specific set of goals and a small number of individuals being served by the work. However, most often this is not the case. Smaller public interest groups struggle to gain an audience and to accrue the power necessary to effect change or have some influence on their own. This is where coalitions come into the equation. Smaller groups are often drawn to other groups that have increased stature, in order to improve both groups' place in the policy process (Brams, Jones & Kilgour, 2005). These coalitions offer a way for smaller groups to become more influential and often lead to the development of peak organizations or social movements. We see examples of this in the results section of this study. The larger groups involved in this study are national groups. Those groups and the larger state groups are confident that their political resources and current stature in Texas politics will provide the advantage in gaining an audience with Texas legislators. The smaller groups in this study understand that their levels of resources are not high and are looking to those groups with larger memberships and greater resources to provide information and power through coalition. The results show that these groups understand the concepts discussed in the previous section and are working either to take advantage of the larger groups' resources or to build coalitions to gain access to those resources. Also of interest is the fact that these groups are working 25

PAGE 35

together, as the threat of unfair immigration reform is fostering a willing partnership between the levels. These are just three contrasting organization types. Groups fall into a number of categories simultaneously. A group can be public interest and be either institutional or membership-based. The common thread is that these groups are developed and individuals join them to enact some type of overall public change or benefit (Birkland, 2011 ). While the resources and motives differ, advocacy, in its basic form, is developed out of a desire to improve the public welfare. 2.4 Power development Organizational power is derived from the organization's ability to apply pressure through membership or resources to cause change in the early parts of the policy process. Understanding the power an organization has is vital to examining how the Hispanic groups involved in immigration reform may respond to immigration legislation. Defining power in the policy process can be difficult. One way to understand it is to recognize that power is derived from the resources an organization can use to persuade or educate (Birkland, 2011 ). However, Arts and Tatenhove (2004) assert that power is generated not only from resources, but from success or outcomes. In addition to tangible resources 26

PAGE 36

such as money, resources in persuasion and argument to sway points of view and affect public discourse should be considered when determining a group's power. Power is the organizational and discursive capacity of agencies, either in competition with one another or jointly to achieve outcomes in social practices, a capacity which is however co determined by the structural power of those social institutions in which these agencies are embedded. (Arts & Tatenhove, 2004, p. 347) The best opportunity for advocacy groups to wield their power is in the policy innovation stage (Birkland, 2011 ). This is when these groups can use their resources to attempt to force decision-makers to make or not make certain policy decisions. In Texas, this is the stage that immigration reform is currently in. Policy-makers are deciding which bills to review, introduce, and pass on to the Governor for signing. This is the stage in the policy-making process in which advocacy groups, as policy actors, can attempt to use their power to arrange policy in a way that aligns with their organizational views. With immigration reform yet to be discussed in the state legislature, immigration reform bills are still being developed. While these reforms are not yet laws, nor have they been discussed at the time of this thesis, Hispanic advocacy groups are working to address both the policy innovation stage and the agenda-setting stage. The results of this thesis suggest that, before the 27

PAGE 37

Texas legislature meets to act on the proposed reform, groups are mobilizing in response to the proposed legislation while simultaneously trying to address the policy agenda by pushing their views of what fair immigration reform includes. This is discussed more in the next section. When discussing issue identification and how it transfers to the policy process it's important to examine the types of power that exist (Bachrach & Morton, 1962). The elitist power model suggests that those with ample resources and influence have the most influence and reason for participating in the policy process. This falls in line with the theory that groups that have the most resources have the most influence on policy-makers and the process in general. However, a pluralist view suggests that power is derived from activity, which means that membership-driven groups are more influential in the policy process. Examining this debate in the context of the immigration debate in Texas, it seems that the answer falls somewhere in the middle. There is evidence that resources provide groups-sometimes called special interest groups-the most influence. However, there is strength in numbers, and policy-makers are known to respond to the power of both types of groups (Birkland, 2011 ). Manzer (1984) suggests that the pluralist and elitist planning models are useful in partial consumption and are most effective when combined. 28

PAGE 38

Unfortunately neither of the two types of models that dominate current studies of public policy has an adequate concept of substantive rationality. Pluralist-exchange models are constructed on the assumption that the only good reasons, those given weight or worth consideration by decision makers, are self-regarding ones. Elitist-planning models are constructed on the assumption that the only good reasons backing policy decisions are other-regarding. Essentially each type of model has assumed away the issue of substantive rationality by adopting a one-sided view of practical reasoning. (Manzer, 1984, p. 593) His study provides two model types with which to view policy-making as a practical response to an issue facing the community. Both model types would be based mainly on incorporating substantive rationality into the decisionmaking process. The first involves a sequence of decision-making that accepts that actors assign different values and weights to events that influence their decision. The second involves institutions and problem-solving classified by their modes of reasoning. These types expand on the pluralist and elitist views by introducing rational decision-making activity. One view of how advocacy groups can use their power is Bachrach and Baratz (1962), who suggest that power is derived from two faces: the ability to influence decision-making and the ability to influence non-decisionmaking. Under this concept, groups can wield power by influencing decisionmakers in the policy process to make and not make certain decisions. This 29

PAGE 39

concept is very important because it takes the idea of power from a onedimensional view to a two-dimensional view. It shows that power can be utilized in various ways, meaning that organizations can be effective in various ways. The result of this gain in power is that groups have the ability to address and influence the policy process. This is a central concept to this thesis: that the groups examined have the ability and political power, either singly or in coalition form, to push their issues up the agenda and alter what they feel is unfair immigration reform. The underlying question is whether, in an attempt to gain power, these groups are better off building coalitions to increase power, and whether these coalitions, combined with the efforts in other states, will create a social movement. In the results section of this thesis it is suggested that groups, as mentioned in the previous section, understand that power is important, and that immigration is unifying the efforts of those with and without power to gain an audience with legislators.12 12 The question that comes to mind with these results is whether this is limited to issues that are considered focusing events or rallying points. Power and resources are considered to be a coveted commodity among advocacy groups and not something these groups would give up. This is an aspect of the literature I was not able to explore in this thesis but it bears examination in future research on Hispanic advocacy activity. 30

PAGE 40

2.5 Ways groups can participate Now that we understand how these groups gain their powers, the next step is to examine in what part(s) of the policy process they can use these powers to mobilize the Hispanic community. While there are a number of avenues through which organizations can participate, for this thesis I will concentrate on the organizations' ability to effect policy change and set the policy agenda. First I will discuss agenda setting. "Agenda setting is the process by which problems and alternative solutions gain or lose public and elite attention" (Birkland, 2011, p. 169). Organizations are in a constant struggle to influence the current place of their important issues on the policy agenda and promote their viewpoint on those issues. The ultimate goal is to use their power to move their viewpoints on issues and concerns to the top of the current policy agenda, which is called enactment (Birkland, 2011 ). This happens in the first stages of the policy process, when the parameters of that policy are being developed and nurtured. This offers these organizations the opportunity to promote their ideas and provides the biggest window for creating significant policy change. The second aspect of agenda setting is to keep the relevance of the issue or particular platform current or fresh in the minds of the other actors involved in the policy process. In the next section I will examine some of the 31

PAGE 41

tactics that organizations use to accomplish this, but at this point it is important to understand that groups must stay active to preserve their power and their issue's place on the policy agenda. Maintaining an issue's importance in the public eye provides a tangible result that groups can use to promote their organization, something that, as mentioned above, is a major concern for public interest groups. From the policy-maker's point of view, organizations are given a role in agenda setting for a number of reasons, the most salient of which is as subject matter experts (Burnstein, 1991; Burnstein & Linton, 2002). Organizations are seen as vehicles to help policy-makers understand issues. While the organization is seeking an audience with the policy-maker, the policy-maker is sometimes looking for the organization to provide guidance. Burnstein (1991) suggests this happens in cases where organizations have the power in the policy process to serve in this role. Overall, organizations are seen in this initial policy stage as advocates and suppliers of information on the subject, offering insight into the feelings of that group's community. After the initial stage, organizations play a significant role in causing policy change. Often this takes place when policy-makers' goals cause them to overlook the role and expertise of advocacy groups and create policy outside their organizational objectives. This is the case in Texas, along with other states such as Arizona, regarding immigration reform. Organizations are 32

PAGE 42

both reactive and proactive in this stage of the process. Groups are looking to change the status quo or current legislation while also looking to advance their organizational views for future agendas and policy-making. Burnstein and Linton (2002) suggest that organizations have the greatest impact during the agenda-setting stage. Their study argues that once issues transfer from the agenda to actual policy, the role of political or advocacy organizations diminishes. If we accept this, we see that creating policy change can be a daunting task. The researchers suggest that at this stage a larger show of force and resources is required to provoke policy makers into changing course. Birkland (2011) suggests that the most effective way to enact policy change is to take advantage of political opportunities. These occur when new officials are elected and when policy is up for a general debate. Another opportunity to effect policy change is to sway public opinion. There is evidence of a congruency between Congressional and public ideals, especially on the major issues, so the framework for a working partnership exists. Bridging the gap between the groups to create effective policy options is the main issue (Baumgartner & Jones, 2004 ). It is important to acknowledge the role that advocacy organizations play as facilitators in this part of the policy process (Andrews & Edwards, 2004 ). 33

PAGE 43

There are a number of ways for advocacy organizations to participate in the policy process, but I have chosen to focus on agenda setting and policy change because they are the stages of the process most relevant to this thesis. Groups also have the ability to sway opinion in different stages of the policy process, most notably to induce the termination of the policy (deleon, 1983), to name one example. Yet I believe that agenda setting and policy change are the stages of the process these groups are involved in currently, with regard to their fight against what they believe to be unfair immigration reform coming up for debate in Texas. 2.6 Potential advocacy group tactics The final section of this chapter will concentrate on the third research question, which addresses the types of participation and tactics that may constitute these groups' potential action plans for addressing immigration reform. Now that we have examined how organizations are formed, how they develop power, and the stages of the policy process they are most involved in, it is prudent to examine the tactics these groups can use to make their mark. By "tactics" I am referencing the avenues and methods these groups can employ to actually move issues up and down the agenda and effect policy change. For this thesis, I chose to concentrate on four specific maneuvers: lobbying, mobilization, use of the media, and venue shopping. 34

PAGE 44

Lobbying is a term and activity that is often associated with special interest or economic groups, but all groups utilize the tactic. "Lobbying is the organized, continuous act of communicating with the government" (Birkland, 2011, p. 139). Birkland makes the case that lobbying has a negative connotation because the public associates it with "shady backroom dealings" or drives to increase campaign finance or pork-barreling (Campos & Giovannoni, 2007). Under the above definition lobbying takes place every day as a tool of groups or coalitions seeking an audience with policy-makers to plead their case, promote issues, or air grievances. Lobbying is one of the most useful tactics because lobbyists can provide useful information from a variety of groups and sources, including the public (Brint, 1990; Potters & van Winden, 1992). And while not all groups have the clout, power, or resources to hire or gain access as lobbyists, it is a tool that these groups and coalitions covet. While lobbying is a tactic all organizations with sufficient resources can use, mobilization or mass mobilization is one that is integral to advocacy group success. However, groups do not simply choose to mobilize their resources for their cause (McCarthy & Wolfson, 1996). Mobilization takes place when a catalyst or focusing event-a sudden event that draws interest-occurs that groups can rally around (Birkland, 1998). When this occurs, groups, or numbers of groups, take the opportunity to work together 35

PAGE 45

to push a unified agenda to policy-makers. A recent and pertinent example is the recent reaction to Arizona SB 1070, in which groups from across the nation were called to arms to fight legislation similar to the upcoming bills in Texas. The focusing event occurred when Governor Brewer signed the bill into law, providing a rallying cry for groups both national and local or large and small. The reaction was a mass mobilization that took place nationwide. The result of successful mobilization can be the creation of a social movement. While the social movement literature is expansive, for the purpose of this discussion I am focusing on the development of social movements and their impact on the policy process. Social movements occur when those with less power or influence over the policy process unite and mass-mobilize to carry on a burgeoning fight (Birkland, 2011 ). A popular and primary example of a social movement is the movement for civil rights in the 1960s and 1970s. Movements against unjust and unfair policies were initiated in various pockets of the nation. As voices of dissent were ignored or silenced, the groups moved to create a coalition to pool their resource and political strength. Often, building these social movements involves creating coalitions not only with groups concerned with the major issue but also with those who could receive benefits in the fight for their related issues. Therefore, social movements are the graduated result of mass mobilization. The fight against immigration 36

PAGE 46

reform is picking up steam in the United States, and with its profile growing it is possible that it could grow into a large-scale movement. Another of the tactics groups can use is to employ media and personal relationships with elected officials to facilitate an audience with policy-makers. An example is Greenpeace's use of the media to initiate a campaign against Shell Oil in the United Kingdom over ocean pollution. Green peace employed a series of media (print, video, and internet) to put pressure on the government to promote policy change regarding the environment. The government received so much pressure from the public based on Greenpeace's media campaign that it was forced to revisit its environmental policy, and these efforts ultimately led to policy change (Bahkir, 2006). This is evidence of two things: (1) the immense influence an advocacy group and the media can have on public opinion, and (2) the level of attention that public officials will pay to a mobilized public. For this thesis the final tactic I will examine is venue shopping, which occurs when policy-makers or actors, including advocacy groups, seek to change the framework or environment in which decisions are made regarding policy (Baumgartner & Jones, 1993; Pralle, 2003). "Policy venues are institutional sites where the portrayal of problems and solutions take place" (Baumgartner & Jones, 1993, p. 32). These actors can be frustrated by 37

PAGE 47

potential bias and the current landscape of a venue in which decisions are being made (Goodwin & Schrodel, 2000; Burnett & Davis, 2002). For advocacy groups, venue shopping offers an avenue for the group to establish a venue that will serve their organizational needs and their understanding of policy (Pralle, 2003). Pralle identifies three potential drawbacks for advocacy groups: (1) groups are likely acting with complete knowledge of an issue, (2) the existence of internal and organizational constraints, and (3) the belief that the root cause of an issue will lead to the policy venue, which could be incorrect. As with other subjects addressed in this chapter, the literature and types of tactics are extremely extensive. For the purpose of this thesis I chose to concentrate on the tactics that relate to the upcoming battle against pending immigration reform in Texas. To select them I used the recent happenings in Arizona as a barometer to obtain a better understanding of the type of actions that similar groups in Texas could take, which I believe is shown in the results and discussion sections of this thesis. 38

PAGE 48

2.7 Relevance of the literature An examination of the role of advocacy groups and how they can take part in the policy process is an important part of this thesis. To understand the upcoming battle and views of the advocacy organizations interviewed we must understand the accepted theories and concepts under which these groups are attempting to operate. Concepts presented in this chapter suggest that for advocacy groups in Texas to be successful they will have to ensure that their power and resources are adequate to gain an audience with the influential policy makers. With immigration reform still in the concept stages in Texas, the groups are focusing on pushing their platform up the agenda of public opinion and government officials. Given the strong presence of Hispanic advocacy groups in Texas it is reasonable to assume that these groups are an established and influential entity. The battle they are fighting is to convince policy-makers that reform similar to that in Arizona would not be a positive step in the heavily Hispanic state. The focusing event is a combination of the activity that took place in Arizona and the inclusion of a growing number of potential immigration reform bills on the docket for the next state legislature. The questions asked in this thesis examine whether these groups and the Hispanic community are being mobilized by immigration reform. If they 39

PAGE 49

are in fact being mobilized, which the results of this thesis suggest has happened, the resulting questions involve how advocacy organizations can use immigration reform to mobilize otherwise inactive members of the Hispanic communities that are represented by the organizations involved in this study, and the types of action plans they are working toward to address immigration reform in the agenda-setting and policy innovation stage of the policy process. This literature supports the contention that there are opportunities for Hispanic advocacy groups to take these steps and provides basic concepts that assist in understanding and the motivation of those steps. While the literature supports the research questions, the results of this thesis provide further confirmation that many of the concepts outlined in this chapter apply to the Hispanic advocacy community. One significant concept that is supported is that Hispanics are compelled to act because of a focusing event, which falls in line with disturbance theory (Truman, 1951) and exchange theory (Salisbury, 1969). In the results section of the study it is reported that the groups are not only seeing an increase in membership due to immigration reform but are using immigration reform to rally support. Further proof is that these groups are not confident that they will be able to sustain the level of support once the immigration issue is resolved. The implication is that without a focusing event participation in these groups and on this issue would wane. 40

PAGE 50

Also, the results of this thesis support the idea that resources and power are valuable commodities and also raise a question about the willingness of these groups to share their power and resources with groups of both greater and lesser means. We see from the results that these groups are advocating coalitions and working toward action plans that share power and resources in an effort to make significant change. What this suggests is that while groups must be ambitious to gain power and improve resources, these groups are issue-conscious in the sense that they realize that there are some policies that require a sharing of these valued commodities. Lastly, this thesis contributes the concept that groups are able to use issues to gain power, resources, and membership. The literature offers insight into why individuals become involved and into aspects of the groups' intentions and use of resources. What I believe is added in this thesis is the idea that these groups are able and willing to use issues to build their profiles, which is something that is useful to understand when examining the activities and intentions of these groups. 41

PAGE 51

3. History of Hispanic Civil Rights Examining Hispanic advocacy in the context of immigration reform in this case benefits from a brief examination of the history of Hispanic civil rights. Under many names, immigrant groups from Central America and Mexico have fought a number of fights for basic rights in the United States.13 Immigration reform is a clear part of that history, as evidenced in the first chapter, as are battles over education, labor rights, and political representation, along with issues that reach across races, such as the allencompassing civil rights movement of the 1960s and 1970s, the anti-war movement, and major contemporary movements concerning environmental issues and economic reform. Looking back over the history of Hispanic civil rights I will focus on three basic issue areas: education, labor laws, and political representation. I believe that looking at the early stages and evolution of the Hispanic civil 13 Chicano, Latino and Hispanic are monikers that have been associated with social movements. 42

PAGE 52

rights movement will provide a framework for examining the current state of immigration reform, which will occupy the last section of this section. Understanding where these civil rights movements originated and how the role of Hispanic advocacy groups and the movements that helped generate them evolved provides a better understanding of the role these groups can play. 3.1 How social movements develop Social movements compose a large section of United States history. Some high-profile movements in the United States include the movements to improve women's rights (Minkoff & Paltrow, 2004), labor rights (Derks, 2000; Cranford & Wilton, 2002; Schiavone, 2008), and the environment (ParkerGwin, 2000 & Walter, 2007). Before I discuss the major points of Hispanic civil rights movement history it is important understand how social movements develop. When groups of people mobilize and coalesce around a set of high visibility issues; a social movement may result. A social movement involves far more people-although not all at a high degree of activity-than the membership of relevant interest groups. Social movements often involve a coalition of groups with similar goals; and other people that support groups without affiliation. (Birkland, 2011, p. 134) 43

PAGE 53

Hispanics have been a part of several important social movements. The most visible was the civil rights movements of the 1960s and 1970s. Hispanic groups rallied alongside AfricanAmerican and other civil rights activists to force change in the laws that governed minorities. Public advocates work within the community to educate and mobilize efforts to identify issues and put them into policy contexts. These public advocates, most notably advocacy groups and community leaders, 14 work for specific causes and usually on behalf of specific population groups. Especially at the local level, these advocates are a bridge between public opinion and policy (Andrews & Edwards, 2004). In many cases, leaders and subject matter experts employed by these advocacy groups are more knowledgeable about the needs of the community than any other participant in the initiation process and their decisions about how and when to mobilize are critically important.15 For elected officials, understanding this reality means the constant search for equilibrium points on policy to stabilize policy monopolies and to palliate political constituency, giving enough to quell disturbances, but not so much as to generate disruption from the other side. For activists, 14 The term "community leaders" in this paper excludes elected officials. 15 "Employed" does not imply "on the payroll." By "employed" I am referring to either employees or volunteers who have experience and knowledge of the legislative process and the issue-related background to provide information to members of the group and the community. 44

PAGE 54

understanding this interaction means making hard calculations about the costs, as well as the benefits, of concessions on matters of policy and political conclusion. Realizing that the prospects for continued mobilization are limited, in no small part due to the dynamics of coalition politics, should help in considering the trade-offs inherent in cultivating institutionally oriented allies, recognizing better deals, and negotiating them. And for analysts, the recognition of the ongoing interaction between social movements and policy makers means adopting an analytic focus that accepts a long time frame for mutual influence, and an iterative approach to the process of political institutionalization. (Meyer, 2003, p. 14) Mobilization often takes place in the context of advocacy groups at the grassroots level. Groups of local citizens mobilize against an issue with group activity such as small demonstrations, education and recruitment campaigns, and applying pressure on decision-makers. To do this organizations act within a specific collective action frame. "Collective action frames are narrative maps guiding movements toward their goals. Frames include interpretations of the injustice or immorality of specific social conditions, an attribution of blame for the, some kind of action agenda for solving them, and a motivation for taking that action" (Edwards, 1995, p. 41 ). These coalitions and movements can develop from a number of different avenues. Among the considerable social movement theory literature, political opportunity theory is the most applicable to understanding how 45

PAGE 55

advocacy groups become a vital part of the initiation process. Political opportunity theory (Tarrow, 1983) expands on the frameworks provided and constructed by organizations to convey a message that was developed by Esiniger (1973). "As defined by Tarrow (1983, p. 28), the concept has three dimensions: the degree of openness or closure of formal political access, the degree of stability or instability of political alignments, and the availability and strategic posture of potential alliance partners" (Kriesi, 1995, p.167). Combined with political conflict, these elements deal with the structure of the political system and the power that individual actors and, in our case, groups wield in the political process. Advocacy groups are now one of the actors, according to social movement theorists and the public policy literature above. Using political opportunity theory we see that organizations have the ability to frame messages and issues to elicit certain reactions from their target audiences. Tarrow (1989) examined this ability in his research on why certain issues are reacted to in different ways across the nation. Looking at ethnic issues that caused violent outbursts in certain regions and not in others, Tarrow found that the opportunity for groups to have a viable and valued voice was a key factor. The research showed that in areas where organizations had a voice the protest or activity was peaceful, and where it was not the opposite happened. 46

PAGE 56

3.2 Labor rights: The first Hispanic movement When reviewing the history of Hispanic civil rights, the first struggle that may come to mind is the fight over employment laws for migrant workers (Mathitessen, 1972; Shaw, 2008; Young, 1969). Cesar Chavez led a successful revolution in that spanned the time between the 1950s and 1970s to overturn numerous labor laws. Chavez operated mainly in California to generate a mass mobilization against the lack of labor oversight by state and federal government agencies. The mobilization was epitomized by the creation of organization such as the United Farm Workers Organizing Committee (Young, 1972). The labor movement was instrumental in developing not only Hispanic activism but also the sense that workers have the ability to organize and impact the laws and regulations that govern them (Mathitessen, 1969). Chavez, who originally intended to be a community activist, was drawn to the fight for economic rights due to his family's background as laborers and knowledge of the system (Shaw, 2008). His rallying not only his fellow workers but also other workers to coordinate their efforts and develop unions and organizations was a standout moment in the history of Hispanic civil rights and labor law advocacy in the United States. "Chavez and the farm workers movement developed ideas, tactics, and strategies that proved so 47

PAGE 57

compelling, so original, and ultimately so successful that they continue to set the course for America's progressive campaigns" (Shaw, 2008, p. 1 ). The movement to fight and effect change in the labor system was a vital starting point for Hispanic advocacy. It also has a connection to the current immigration issue. Chavez felt that illegal immigrants and the reluctance of recent immigrants to apply for citizenship or visas to work legally in the United States would hinder the labor movement (Taylor, 1975). Connecting this concept to the immigration movement, there was early awareness that the fight for immigration means and avenues would be important to Hispanic ascendency in the United States. This is one of the findings of this thesis: that Hispanic advocacy groups and their communities are not opposed to immigration reform, but to unfair immigration reform. The consensus of the groups in this study share Chavez's concern that a lack of determination by Hispanics to naturalize will hurt the overall status of Hispanics. But as is evidenced by Chavez's workers rights movement and by the findings of this study, the goal is to create an accessible path to citizenship (Taylor, 1975). 48

PAGE 58

3.3 Education reform The movement to advocate for workers rights was the first major social movement among Hispanics in the United States, and the second was the movement for education rights. Hispanics across the nation organized to effect change in education opportunities for Hispanics (Guajardo, F. & Guajardo, M., 2004; McBrien, 2005; Orfield, 1986; Rodriquez, 2003). However, like the workers movement, the movement started in California and proceeded in Texas. Guajardo and Guajardo (2004) make a case that the education reform movement epitomized the Hispanic civil rights movement. After Brown v. the Board of Education held that all races were entitled to equal and quality education, the movement began for Hispanics to work toward taking advantage of the ruling. While Hispanics often faced unfair practices, including being punished for speaking Spanish at school and being told to drop out or not pursue college educations, the motivation to work toward this reform was not difficult to find. The preferred tactic was to stage walkouts. These walkouts took place in California and Texas and showed that these groups could organize and work together to effect change (Rodriquez, 2003). In addition to specific tactics, the movement also spurred the organization of groups such as United Mexican American Students (UMAS), 49

PAGE 59

Mexican American Youth Association (MAYA) in California, and the Mexican American Youth Organization (MAYO). This movement illustrates a concept that was also raised by the workers' rights movement, namely the necessity of the involvement of young Hispanics (Rodriquez, 2003). As we will see in the next section, young Hispanics have been at the forefront of Hispanic advocacy, due to, among other factors, their ability to break the cultural bonds that the previous generations have had with their home countries (Rodriquez, 2003). Without these bonds, the younger generations see their future in the United States and are more likely to work on current issues (Patterson, 1975). Immigration is one such issue. 3.4 Political activism The umbrella movement that encompasses both of the previous movements is the role and activity of Hispanic groups in basic political activism (Lopez, 1992). For the past fifty years Hispanics have been involved with high-profile issues, the most notable of which were the anti-war movement and voter rights. The anti-war movement and protests against the Vietnam War proved that, as I argued in the previous section, younger generations took up new fights and used new tactics (Oropez, 2005). In anti-war protests younger 50

PAGE 60

Hispanics, or Chicanos, debunked the previous generation's ideals of military history. Instead the group chose to fight against the traditional view and chose to voice their displeasure and disenchantment with the government's decision to participate in the Asian conflict. The Chicano Moratorium could be considered the face of the movement as the group worked to bring to light the discrimination against Hispanics in the United States and the military. Another aspect of Hispanic political activism is Hispanics' work advocating for voting rights and participation. Hispanics of all nationalities have fought to engage their own community as well as outside political actors due to the group's vast potential (Guerra, 1988; Marquez, 1993). With Hispanic participation traditionally low (Marquez, 1993) advocacy groups have rallied in their communities to foster civic engagement and participation. Two of the groups surveyed in this thesis (NCLR and NALEO) have played a large role in this effort. Groups such as NCLR and NALEO have worked to educate Hispanics about their rights and duties to participate in the political process and by extension the policy process as well. "Political participation depends significantly on political mobilization, that is, on which persons are targeted for political recruitment" (Hero, Garcia, F., Garcia, J. & Pachon, 2000, p. 530). This is a gap that Hispanic groups and advocates have tried to fill since the 1950s. Work continues to this day to organize and invigorate the Hispanic 51

PAGE 61

community to get involved in the political process, but it is an uphill battle, as Hispanics are likely to get involved only in issues that pertain to their lives or community (Patterson, 1975). 3.5 Hispanic advocacy groups' impact on immigration reform Three examples of high-profile issues that have rallied Hispanic support in the past are given in the previous sections of this chapter. This thesis provides evidence that immigration reform could be the next social movement issue facing the Hispanic community, as there are similarities between immigration reform and issues such as education and labor rights. The movement against immigration reform involves many groups that have taken action. This thesis shows that these groups are willing to work together toward a common cause, which meets Birkland's (2011) definition. These groups are joined by members both within the Hispanic community and outside it, as demonstrated by the inclusion of the HCAFL-CIO's point of view in this thesis. This, coupled with the mass mobilization that has emerged out of an opportunity to rally support, provides evidence that immigration reform has the makings of the next high-visibility issue to be considered a Hispanic social movement. The transcendence of the issue over time and across state borders provides evidence that this could happen. Also, the ongoing intentions of state legislatures to propose reform suggests that the opportunity 52

PAGE 62

to react to the issue will continue to present itself, a fact that is supported by some of the results in this thesis. The intention of this thesis is not to characterize immigration reform as a social movement. Immigration issues, however, do emerge in the movement for Hispanic civil rights. As such, many of the organizations that often deal with these movements can be considered civil rights organizations. However, I do think the results of this thesis, combined with circumstances at the state government level and the evolution of the arguments pertaining to immigration reform, provide sufficient evidence that immigration reform should be considered the next high-visibility issue in the Hispanic community. This thesis provides evidence that community and advocacy groups are reacting in a way that would support the assumption: the groups are using immigration reform to recruit members, those groups have taken action in Arizona with regard to SB 1070, and individuals in the Hispanic community have been willing to get involved in an issue that affects their day-to-day lives. 53

PAGE 63

4. Methods 4.1 Importance of qualitative methods To conduct this research I chose to employ a qualitative research methodology using semi-structured interviews with executives, key personnel, and other representatives at various Hispanic advocacy groups. I chose this method with the belief that it is the best technique for addressing a question related to current events (Auerbach & Silverstein, 2003; Seidman, 2006). Group interaction with the community can be quantified, but the reasoning behind the groups' action plans are better understood through a qualitative process (Seidman, 2006). For this study, I believe that an understanding of the reasoning behind group decisions, especially those made by personnel in the executive or upper organizational levels, is better achieved through an interpersonal question-and-answer section. This approach not only allows for explanation by the respondent, but it also reduces the possibility of a paperor web-based 54

PAGE 64

survey being "passed off' or answered by a person other than the intended respondent. Survey data is applicable to answering the questions addressed in this thesis but is not guaranteed to elicit the needed data. Therefore, by interviewing key officials in these groups I gathered what I believe is an accurate view of the each organization's views on immigration reform and how that reform may shape the group's mobilization of member support. The semi-structured interview style I chose is characterized as "More or less open-ended questions brought to the interview situation in the form of an interview guide" (Flick, 1998, p. 94). I entered each interview with a set of questions, but follow-up questions were presented as the conversation dictated. This yielded a number of unsolicited responses and key data used in this study, and allowed the respondents and me to create a rapport that was vital in gaining their trust and setting them at ease, which in turn increased their willingness to be candid. The interview process also allowed the examination of running commentary among the groups. Running commentary refers to phrases, concepts, and issues commonly used and discussed by the respondentspatterns that lend empirical substance to the results and conclusions of this thesis, and which were not anticipated in the planning stages. 55

PAGE 65

4.2 Sampling Frame and Organization Description To obtain my sample I relied on two main sources of information. The first consisted of lists of Hispanic organizations, which I obtained from signed petitions, other research, published white papers regarding Hispanic organizations, and publicly available information materials (both printed and online) regarding Hispanic advocacy. My second source was the member affiliate lists of national organizations, which provide contact information and primary sources for gathering more materials, and which directed me to specific information about the hundreds of Hispanic organizations operating in Texas. Several problems surfaced during this process. First, a number of organizations were small or did not have readily available information. Second, a number of groups listed had incorrect or faulty contact information, and in some cases I was unable to verify that they were currently in operation. Finally, a large number of organizations list immigration as a focus but do not follow through in practice. Ascertaining the degree to which an organization was actively involved in immigration-related issues was the most difficult part of the process of developing a list of possible organizations to contact. After conducting this research, I compiled a list of 64 groups. From these, I randomly selected 22 for participation in the study by selecting every third group from the Jist of 64. Each of these groups fit the necessary criteria 56

PAGE 66

based on the information available. Groups that I chose to contact all have a presence in the state of Texas and are heavily involved in promoting a Hispanic platform regarding federal and state immigration reform, and are thus involved in the policy process. The criteria are as follows. Each group contacted: Lists immigration as a priority either on its website or in communication material. Provides services and education to the public regarding immigration reform. Takes a public stance regarding immigration. Serves the interests of the Hispanic community. Has a board of directors. Meets generally accepted membership practices and accepts all members regardless of race, religion, education, and sex." All 22 organizations contacted have a strong affiliation with immigration reform. Before engaging with these groups I contacted each by email to ascertain not only their willingness to participate, but also their expertise in the area of immigration. In addition, I asked questions in pre-interview conversations, both on the telephone and through email,16 to ensure that their participation would be applicable to this thesis. I also confirmed that each organization's online information and literature were accurate, after corresponding with personnel in these organizations (not always the individual I ultimately interviewed) and getting verbal confirmation that the 16 No potential interviewee was contacted more than three times before accepting the invitation. Potential respondents were contacted first by email and then by telephone. All pre interviews were conducted on the telephone after an initial email. 57

PAGE 67

group does in fact actively participate in attempting to promote or address immigration reform. Representatives from the following organizations agreed to participate in this thesis project. Asociacion Salvadorena de los EUA National Alliance of Latino Elected Officials (NALEO) National Council of La Raza (NCLR) League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) Texas LULAC Labor Council for Latin American Advancement America Para Todos Harris County AFL-CIO FIEL HADAS Most of these organizations use lobbying efforts and are actively engaged in rallying public support. Each of them holds meetings, with varying regularity, to convey information and raise awareness. The HCAFL-CIO is a labor organization that is active in lobbying for local and state immigration policy, and works with local groups to assist in connecting them with elected officials. Therefore the group acts as both a coordinating organization and an individual action organization. Membership in the organizations ranges from 21 to 135,000 members; among the issues the groups address in addition to immigration reform are civic participation, education, health care, economics, and naturalization. 58

PAGE 68

Table 4.1 lists the groups that participated in this thesis, indicating where these groups fall within the categories discussed above and providing a snapshot of their makeup. Table 4.1: Types of organizations studied Organization Harris County AFL-CIO America Para Todos Asociacion Salvadorena de los EUA FIEL HAD AS Labor Council for Latin American AdvancementHouston, TX Membership or Institutional Institutional Membership Membership Membership Membership Membership League of United Latin Membership American Citizens (LULAC) Texas LULAC Membership National Alliance of Latino Membership Elected Officials (NALEO) National Council of La Membership Raza (NCLR) 59 Size (Membership) Large (45,000) Small (131) Small (21) Small (47) Small (80) Small (27) Large (135,000) Large (978) Large (6,000) Large (300 member organizations) Special or Public Interest Special Public Public Public Public Public Public Public Public Public

PAGE 69

Table 4.2 provides basic information about the groups surveyed in this thesis, including demographic information and the types of issues these groups concentrate on, in order to better illustrate why these groups were chosen for this study. Table 4.2: Advocacy organization breakdown Organization No. of Issues Year National, Members* Started Local, or State Harris County AFL-CIO 45,000 Labor, Immigration, 1938 Local Economics America Para Todos 131 Legal, Immigration 2003 Local Asociacion Salvadorena de 21 Immigration, Health Care 2008 Local los EUA FIEL 47 Civic Participation, 2005 Local Education, Immigration HADAS 80 Immigration, Labor, Civic 2007 Local Participation Labor Council for Latin 27 Labor, Economics, 1972 Local American AdvancementImmigration, Housing, Houston, TX Women's Issues League of United Latin 135,000 Civil Rights, Economics, 1945 National American Citizens (LULAC) Immigration, Health, Education, Technology, Housing Texas LULAC 978 Immigration, Legal, 1954 State Economics, Civic Rights National Alliance of Latino 6,000 Voting, Immigration, 1976 National Elected Officials (NALEO) Nationalization, Census National Counc/J of La Raza 300 (member Advocacy, Census, Youth 1968 National (NCLR) organizations) Development, Civil Rights, Economy, Education, Health, Immigration The number of members was provided by the organization personnel in conversation. If no membership number was given, the figure was retrieved from the organization's website. 60

PAGE 70

4.3 Groups that declined to participate Twelve of the 22 groups declined to participate, for reasons including a lack of trust in me (one organization), 17 the fact that while immigration is a focus of the organization it is not considered a top priority and the group lacked a subject matter expert (two organizations), and the group's not having a "significant" presence in the state of Texas (one organization). The remaining eight organizations failed to reply to the three attempts to contact the organization to request its participation, as mandated by the Colorado Multiple Institutional Review Board (COMIRB). All eight of these organizations have websites that show their activity in the community and each answered my telephone calls. However, I was never connected to an appropriate person to participate in the study. Without more specific knowledge of these organizations or the people I was referred to there, I cannot pinpoint the reasons for the lack of response from these organizations. 17 The organization replied that it would not accept the interview unless I committed to three months of volunteer work. The requirement is part of its standard operating procedures and suggests that it wants researchers to have full knowledge of the organization, and possibly a sympathetic opinion of it. 61

PAGE 71

4.4 Interviews Eight interviews with key personnel took place by telephone and two in person, and they ranged from 18 to 47 minutes in length. All interviews were recorded with the subject's permission for transcription and analysis purposes18 The interview schedule is included in Appendix C. Each interview featured the following questions: 1. Are you aware of the basic issues of immigration reform? 2. How important do you feel the issue of immigration reform is to the Hispanic community as a whole? 3. Is immigration reform an issue of importance for your organization? 4. Has your organization spoken out officially on the issue of immigration reform? 5. Is your organization for or against immigration reform? 6. Do you feel immigration reform is a divisive issue for the Hispanic community? 7. Do you believe immigration reform will drive more Hispanics to be politically active? 8. Do you think your organization does/can use the attention from immigration reform to recruit more members? 9. Do you think your organization does/can use the attention from immigration reform to generate more interest or raise its public profile? 10. If so, do you believe this is an effective strategy? 11. Do you believe there is controversy surrounding immigration reform? 12. If so, does the controversy surrounding immigration reform serve as a positive for organizations to improve membership, recruiting, and/or funding? 18 The process used to contact subjects, conduct the interviews, and analyze these data was approved by the human subjects committee at the University of Colorado Denver. 62

PAGE 72

13. Are there any other issues in addition to immigration reform that can provide a boost to Hispanic political advocacy? 14. Are there any other comments you would like to add about your group's activity or the effects of immigration reform?19 Interview transcripts and recordings were analyzed by me to identify themes pertaining to the research questions (Glaser & Strauss, 1967).20 No one declined to have their personal or organizational identity included in the results of this project, but I chose not to include these identities for privacy purposes. These transcripts and recordings include verbal confirmation of the interviewee's willingness to participate in the study and his or her permission to be recorded. To code the interview data I used a system of theoretical concepts to identify relevant themes and repeating ideas (Auerbach & Silverstein, 2003). To do this I transcribed the interviews and searched for statements and ideas that addressed the research questions in this thesis. After highlighting the text I discovered a series of running patterns or commentary among the interviews. A number of themes emerged, which are grouped by research 19 A copy of the approved script for this thesis is attached in Appendix C. 20 "Such a theory fits empirical situations, and is understandable to sociologists and laymen alike. Most important, it works-provides us with relevant predications, explanations, interpretations and applications" (Glaser & Strauss, 1967, p. 1). 63

PAGE 73

question in the results section. 21 The results drawn from these theoretical concepts and themes are reported in the following section. 21 This is my interpretation. According to Auerbach and Silverstein (2003), a drawback of qualitative interviewing is that data can be interpreted differently. After reviewing the data I believe these eight themes stood out from the ten interviews, which took roughly 318 minutes in total to conduct. 64

PAGE 74

5. Results After conducting the interviews for this project I analyzed transcripts for common themes or running commentary among the ten conversations I had regarding immigration reform. 22 After coding them, I grouped these themes in sections according to the research question they addressed. 5.1 Have Hispanic civil rights groups reacted to the pending immigration reform bills? Immigration is certainly a "lightning rod" policy among Hispanic communities. From the literature it is clear that individuals are often provoked to join groups because of focusing events that drive their personal interest. The first research question addresses whether immigration reform is this type of event. From the responses in this thesis I believe that we will see that the 22 During the interview process themes developed among the responses from the ten subjects. To coordinate these results I examined each interview after it was completed and coded specific answers or responses in the themes listed as the sub-sections in Chapter Five. 65

PAGE 75

current battle and the previous battle, mainly in Arizona, against unfair immigration reform will prove to be an event that will promote increased activity in the Hispanic community. First it is important to look at how national Hispanic advocacy groups were active in driving resistance in Arizona and how they have used immigration reform. The results of the protest in Arizona pushed national groups to change their focus from that of an umbrella organization to one working more with state affiliate organizations and reaching out to individual members of the community. Over the past year, national groups have made immigration reform a high priority and have experienced interesting trends. The first of these is that immigration reform is the type of issue that can galvanize a community of individuals. NCLR has found that immigration reform has a strong effect on a large majority of both illegal and legal immigrants. This point contradicts a stereotype that immigration reform is an issue only for illegal immigrants seeking to evade deportation. Legal immigrants often take up the fight for relatives or friends who they feel will be wrongly persecuted by unjust immigration laws. This is the concern in Texas, where immigration reform is not a novel issue. For many Hispanics it has been the most important policy/political issue over the past three decades (Texas LULAC representative, 2011 ). With votes pending on a number of immigration-related policies, the reaction from 66

PAGE 76

the Hispanic community has been strong and in some cases fearful. While those reactions may seem contradictory, based on the interviews conducted I believe that recent events, both the introduction of these bills and the recent happenings in Arizona, have empowered the Hispanic community to rally and show force. Yet, according to my conversations, this response may stem from fear of reprisal from an unfair law. An interesting point is that because of SB 1 070-a subject that was raised voluntarily throughout the conversations-and the new bills, the Hispanic community and their representatives finally have to take a collective look at what they would like and how they want to mobilize at the state level. That has drawn out a sense of community and shown that from a grievance point of view (deleon, 1983), groups that demonstrate the ability to organize and that provide results can effect change in political and social consciousness within a minority community. A good place to start to examine how Texans are reacting is to look back at the reaction to Arizona SB 1070, as all of the interviewees identified that activity as having some level of influence on the pending action. Each respondent alluded to "past activity" or the "policy in Arizona" during their responses to the scripted questions. Their responses prompted me to ask questions about the legislation, and while the importance or relevance of the demonstrations in Arizona varied, every respondent mentioned some version 67

PAGE 77

of what the FElL representative told me: "What happened out West will have a major effect on what happens in other immigration battles" (FElL representative, 2011 ). While all ten agreed that it is impossible for the activity in Arizona not to have an effect on how groups in Texas will plan their response, they were not sure how effective their tactics would be. The HADAS representative pointed out that while the action in Arizona will help, there are different factors and political cultures in Texas and Arizona. Throughout that interview the representative said that Texas was a unique case because of the population and current politicians. A general theme among those interviewed is that Arizona provided an issue with which groups could approach the community and garner attention, something that advocacy groups struggle to obtain. Arizona SB 1070 not only had the effect of increasing membership in advocacy groups in Texas, but it showed the power that such groups can wield in the policy process even after a policy progresses past the initial stages. The representative from Texas LULAC made the point that the activity in Arizona set a positive standard for Hispanic groups nationwide: "The work done in Arizona provided a battle plan for groups around the nation. Their ability to rally groups on both the local and national level showed that groups can take big-time action" (Texas LULAC representative, 2011 ). He said also 68

PAGE 78

that a battle his group fights is proving that groups can be effective in policy initiation. His comments throughout our conversations suggested that having Arizona as a positive example of Hispanic activism gives local groups evidence to show apathetic members of the public that their activity will matter. This is an issue that advocacy organizations grapple with: "Our biggest problem among our community is getting our members to understand they can make a difference. Many come from low-income backgrounds and don't feel they can make that difference. Arizona provides evidence otherwise" (Texas LULAC representative, 2011 ). While the reaction to SB 1070 can provide a blueprint, three of the interviewees were quick to point out that the same plan of attack may not work in Texas. The representative of America Para Todos was adamant that while the group can look to Arizona as an example, to insist that the activity there would be a "blueprint" would be going too far. There are too many things in Texas that are different. We have a different political and social landscape here. Plus politicians saw what happened there also and those who want to push legislation through here can learn from the mistakes in the writing of the policy and in the public activity from their counterparts (America Para Todos representative, 2011 ). There are a number of factors at work in framing the opportunity that immigration reform presents for advocacy organizations in Texas. The 69

PAGE 79

HADAS representative alluded to the differences in the political landscapes of Texas and Arizona. In subsequent responses she said that tactics that worked in Arizona would not, on the whole, work in Texas. She felt the relationship between the Hispanic population and policy-makers in Texas was much more strained and that the connection between "their" public and the policy makers had a "big gap" to cross. While this notion was not expressly corroborated by other respondents, it raises the interesting point that a grievance, by itself, is not enough to cause groups to mobilize. Sociological and political factors also influence mobilization. An aspect of immigration reform that repeatedly arose in my conversations with these advocacy group leaders was the misconception that Hispanics are against immigration. Seven respondents made it clear that Hispanics are in favor of fair immigration reform that protects the rights of legal immigrants while restricting access for illegal immigrants. The representative of Texas LULAC spoke at length against the stereotype that Hispanics favor legislation that reduces the criminal element of immigration law, and said that a majority of Hispanics involved with his organization are against immigrants who circumvent the tax and public service system. A general concern among those interviewed is that mainstream America feels that Hispanics are unanimously opposed to immigration reform. As one local representative notes, 70

PAGE 80

People in this country find it hard to differentiate between immigrants who are here to make an honest living and those here to do badly. A majority of immigrants simply want to come to America and work but, unfortunately, get lumped together with the negative element (Texas LULAC representative, 2011 ). NALEO's representative spoke to the fact that this misconception affects how elected officials approach the issue. NALEO represents the interests of both its member organizations and Latino elected officials nationwide. In many cases elected officials pressured by their non-Hispanic constituents to vote for unjust immigration reform legislation based on this generalization. The most common point made by the local group representatives is the desire for immigration reform to include a path to citizenship. Six of the ten organization leaders interviewed stated that this was a concern of their organization, and they believed it was a chief concern of the movement to defeat unfair immigration reform in Texas. They feel that legislation such as Arizona SB 1070 and the upcoming Texas legislation lacked a way for current immigrants to become citizens. Most [Hispanics] just want to live here without the fear that they will be deported. But to go through that process, the time and money involved, is just unrealistic. They can't afford it and would rather simply live the way they are now (HADAS representative, 2011 ). 71

PAGE 81

This representative went on to say that she felt that if immigration reform provided an obtainable path to citizenship, a large percentage of her community would support immigration reform. Getting this support from the organization's membership and community is integral for an advocacy group to be successful in influencing policy at any stage. Policy-makers, first and foremost, are looking to create policy that meets the needs of their public. The question is, whom is immigration reform being geared to? Are policy-makers looking to satisfy the Hispanic community or others? This is a question that will be answered once decisions on the final versions of the policies are made. HCAFL-CIO works with Hispanic labor groups and pushes for just immigration reform at the local level. The group's representative was adamant that if the government provided a legitimate, feasible path to citizenship, the workers he has encountered would be eager for the chance. "If they did that, then the government could finally find out who wanted to be here legally and illegally. Seems like a better starting point if you ask me" (HCAFL-CIO representative, 2011 ). After discussing this subject, each interviewee was asked why it is important. The responses had a common theme: to show that Hispanics are capable of identifying policies that benefit the public as a whole. When pushed, three of the interviewees added that Hispanics, whether 72

PAGE 82

undocumented immigrants, documented immigrations, or citizens, feel a connection to the United States and are in favor of policies they feel better the nation. All of those interviewed agreed that organizational cooperation was the best way to address the issue of immigration reform. Texas LULAC' representative said explicitly that the organization is reaching out to other groups around the state for one reason: to have a bigger influence in Austin. "We need to be able to talk as one solid block against this reform if we hope to defeat, which means more talking with each other as much as with elected officials" (Texas LULAC representative, 2011 ). Eight respondents who mentioned communication and cooperation said that increasing their political power in the state of Texas would be easier if there were a unified voice. According to three of the respondents, there are a number of groups or coalitions lobbying to effect change in the current bills. It is clear from the concerns presented that it would behoove these coalitions to organize into one bloc with one unified message. The literature indicates that groups that have strong representation have the best ability to effect change. The goal of coordinating is in line with this theory. 73

PAGE 83

5.2 If there is a reaction, do these advocacy groups use pending immigration reform bills to mobilize the Hispanic community to influence the policy process? Now that we have established that immigration reform is a triggering event, it is important to understand how these groups can use reform to mobilize the community. Throughout history there have been issues that have caused increased activism. Determining if the current battle over immigration reform is such an issue is important in predicting whether groups will be able to use this issue to recruit new members or encourage activity from their membership. When asked about the effect of immigration reform on the level of Hispanic advocacy, eight of the ten respondents said that the current battle for fair reform is a rallying point for the Hispanic community and advocacy groups across the nation.23 However, all three respondents from national organizations were quick to point out that immigration has been a persistent issue throughout history. These groups have seen an increase in activism each time immigration reform has emerged as an issue. Another point made by representatives of NCLR and NALEO is that Hispanics are active in political matters in general, and while certain issues 23 The two remaining respondents felt that while the reform battle is important, it is not a rallying cry. These interviewees felt that other issues as well as past immigration battles neutralize the novelty factor they feel is required for an issue to act as a rallying point. 74

PAGE 84

can provoke a greater response, immigration is not the only concern that causes Hispanics to become active in policy matters. According to the literature, questions concerning the finer points of Hispanic activism persist. Each group acknowledges being able to speak only on behalf of its community, but their representatives felt strongly that Hispanic activism is not issue-dependent. "I don't feel that immigration reform is any different than much of the work we've done here.24 We see activism at the local levels with our organizations that shows that our community is active on a number of issues" (NCLR representative, 2011 )25 While the impact of immigration reform is up for debate, four of the local groups that participated in this study specifically acknowledged that the threat of strict immigration reform has caused their membership numbers to rise. More individuals in their target communities are participating as immigration reform has become more high-profile in the past year. Our members are worried about immigration reform. They are showing up to meetings more and bringing people with them. The issue is that we can't always count on their continued participation. But we've seen more and more people come out and when I speak to them immigration is a big worry (HADAS representative, 2011 ). 24 The respondent offered to share statistics to support this, but they were never forwarded to the researcher. 25 I chose to interview national representative because they play a role, especially at the organizing level, in local reform battles. Their opinions provide a necessary big-picture point of view, but it did seem that they were very guarded about singling out immigration reform as a special case. 75

PAGE 85

The HADAS representative's major concern was that immigration reform would make it harder for the group's members to earn a living in the United States. As organization leaders suggest, immigration reform has been responsible for bringing new members into these groups because many people associate calls for reform with unjust and unfair laws that will be applied to all Hispanics. "Our members' concern is that they're not immigrants but they're worried that they'll be treated like criminals or border jumpers if they run a stop sign" (Texas LULAC representative, 2011 ). These worries provide a way for organizations to frame the issue, and can also offer the opportunity to use such fears as a focusing event to increase their audience and demonstrate to their members the organization's plans and scope of influence. The ability of organizations to frame the issue on the local level is vital to their success. "Sure it helps to show that we can make a difference. That's why people join our group" (America Para Todos representative, 2011 ). Despite the contention from the NCLR and NALEO representatives that the current round of immigration reform is not the first in history, this does not lessen the degree to which the issue can be used by organizations to promote increased activism. The response from local representatives provides preliminary evidence that grievances such as these have the ability 76

PAGE 86

to mobilize and publicize agenda-setting Hispanic organizations. This theme also offers evidence that immigration reform or contentious policies regarding the Hispanic community can increase Hispanic activism on the whole, a question that might be examined in a future project. The most diverse group of answers came in response to questions about how immigration reform activity has affected membership and how the groups can sustain those new relationships. Eight of ten respondents believed their groups saw a significant rise in membership and fundraising as a result of the immigration issue in Arizona and pending immigration issues in Texas. All of the local groups said that of recent new members, a "large majority" list immigration reform as an important issue. While groups are working to provide a voice to their communities in the fight for immigration reform, they do see the issue as an opportunity. The high-profile nature of the legislation brings with it a chance to reach a segment of the community that they may otherwise not. Gaining this kind of additional access to this community is vital to a grassroots organization's survival as it can mean increased membership and contributions. HADAS alluded to this fact in our interview, indicating that willingness to participate with the group rose as the issue of immigration reform became more mainstream. Now the group is active in a community with a wider audience. While working for immigration reform is its main goal, the group 77

PAGE 87

hopes to use the attention to promote HADAS and build membership and power on other policy issues as well. Its profile as a political advocacy group is also a result of its work on a high-profile policy; NADAS has gained access to elected officials and lobbying groups. Building such a profile can help smaller advocacy groups survive and maintain their place as the connection between elected officials and the community. The Texas LULAC organization has seen an increase in their activity since the Texas immigration legislation has been on the agenda. It was clear in my conversation with the Texas LULAC representative that the organization is looking to further educate the Hispanic community. Texas LULAC functions as a legal representative for its membership, and has taken up the mantle of providing a bridge between the Hispanics in Texas and their government. That membership is growing with the rise of immigration reform. "Immigration reform is a rallying point for Hispanics in the state of Texas" (Texas LULAC representative). "The happenings in Arizona spurred the interest, and in some cases fear, that the state could adopt similar legislation and I think that makes them want to act." The national groups have also seen a significant rise in activism. NCLR saw about an 18% increase in responses to action alerts, which it feels 78

PAGE 88

is very significant.26 Both NCLR and NALEO stated that immigration reform has risen on the political agendas of their member organizations in those states where reform is being discussed by the state legislature. NALEO believes that immigration reform had a significant impact on state and federal elections in Nevada, Arizona, and Maryland. When asked if this level of activism can be maintained, the general consensus-agreed to by six of the ten respondents-was that they did not believe so. While the interest in immigration reform would likely result in some new permanent members, these subjects felt that membership spikes surrounding any one issue were temporary. However, eight of the ten believe it is useful for the sake of their organization's future to get their foot in the door with these community members. Building a relationship with any segment of the community is vital to local group survival. While these individuals may not take part in every policy debate, the general feeling was that having built a relationship would provide more power for advocacy groups when speaking to elected officials about policy development. While there was no consensus on how these groups can retain new members, group representatives believed that although Hispanic activists 26 The representative did not have exact statistics readily available, and she did not believe a study had been done on this specific question. Her response was based on the group's ongoing study of immigration reform and membership. However, NCLR is working on providing a precise answer to this question. 79

PAGE 89

may not continue their involvement after immigration reform concludes, immigration reform is unlikely to end anytime soon, and therefore there is really no need to develop a plan to deal with declining membership. From their perspective, immigration reform has the potential to become a perennial issue as long as crime and the importing of drugs from south of the U.S. border are a major concern. Politicians are unlikely to relinquish an issue that their target public is passionate about. Also, they do not need a bill to pass in order to propose it; they just need to show that they are taking steps to address immigration. As long as this is the case, immigration reform and the battle to ensure that it is comprehensive and fair will exist. These advocacy groups are attempting to increase their role in the policy process in Texas to change or strike down pending immigration legislation they feel is unjust. Therefore they are lobbying and banding together, mobilizing their resources and improving their affiliations with decision-makers to gain traction in the state's policy process. 80

PAGE 90

5.3 Current tactics The transcripts of these interviews reveal that these groups use a number of common tactics and types of action to positively influence upcoming policy. These organizations are seeking both to have their stance on immigration reform shape the policy agenda and to bring about a change in the types of legislation being proposed for the upcoming legislative session. Public demonstrations at the state and local levels were mentioned by nine of the ten groups surveyed. These groups are organizing these demonstrations in their cities and are traveling to Austin to gain an audience with state policy-makers. They feel that this kind of power is the most effective tool with which to accomplish their goal of making positive change. As the representative from HADAS stated, the number of Hispanics in the state of Texas provides a unique opportunity to use public demonstrations as a policy tool. The literature on policy-making and advocacy groups shows that resources are important for advocacy organizations to improve their place in the policy process. One resource that all of these groups have is a large membership base. Another tactic mentioned was coalition building, which is another example of ways in which the happenings in Arizona has played a role in configuring the development of action plans in Texas. After seeing the type of mobilization that was achieved in Arizona and around the nation by groups 81

PAGE 91

working together, those surveyed believed that building strong relationships in the state of Texas between organizations is important to voicing the concerns of Hispanics regarding immigration reform. Discussion did not include specifics of how these coalitions are being built, but this tactic is one that these groups are intent on using. The mass mobilizations and demonstrations in Austin have served as an opportunity for these groups to build their networks and continue to show a united front. Another avenue for these coalitions to grow is through national organizations. The representative of NCLR mentioned that the group's network of member organizations is reaching out to others in their community and taking part in the state demonstrations. These similar organizations are looking for others to join them in their fight. Education was unanimously mentioned as a tool for advocacy groups to gain and increase advocacy activity. According to Texas LULAC' representative, the issue for many Hispanics is their lack of understanding of the specifics of the proposed immigration reform. As we see in the policy making literature this is a gap in policy process that advocacy organizations can fill. By acting as policy and issue experts, these advocacy groups can work to provide positive and accurate representations of proposed and upcoming legislation. This is where national or umbrella organizations can have the most impact. All three national groups surveyed said that their 82

PAGE 92

biggest role in the fight against unfair immigration reform at the state level is to provide their local members and organizations with accurate information, which gives individuals who may be reluctant the tools to promote advocacy, and as a result, aids in increasing membership. This information is helpful as local groups conduct meetings to educate Hispanics about what is involved in the legislation and about how to get involved in the fight against unfair immigration reform. Finally, and most importantly, gaining an audience with elected officials and policy-makers is the main goal. Through the tactics mentioned in this section, these organizations focus on meeting with elected officials to promote their viewpoint. Building resources though increased membership, power, and funds will mean getting an attentive audience with those in power. 5.4 What are the types of action plans regarding immigration reform? After surveying the current tactics these groups are using to address immigration reform, to consider the third research question I will outline some of the responses the groups gave regarding their plans for future advocacy. As stated above, each group interviewed for this thesis has connections to the state of Texas. All ten respondents felt that a battle is upcoming similar to that seen in Arizona. Four local groups said that they foresee a similar reaction from the Hispanic community regarding protest and public activism. 83

PAGE 93

Each local group felt that the issue in Texas could be the most important battle nationwide, given the rising number of immigrants entering the state. The battle to secure the Texas border against drug importers was mentioned by five respondents as a point of worry. It is reasonable to assume that immigration reform may be seen as a way to stem the wave of drugs and violence moving back and forth across Texas' southern border. HADAS felt that in the absence of criminal legislation, immigration reform at the state level could be perceived as a protective measure and a way to curb the problems at the border. This is a valid concern that many Hispanic groups should be considering. The result of this is that these local groups are attempting to educate the community in order to put pressure on their elected officials to realize that immigration reform is not criminal reform. The continued use of public demonstrations is vital. In our discussions the four groups that specifically mentioned the tactic alluded to the impact of a visual presence, implying that having a visual spectacle that people could see on the internet and on television aided support during the fight against reform. This is one of the tactics that local groups are looking to utilize through coalitions and demonstration coordination. "On any issue it helps to see that other people share your point of view. In any community it aids those who are 84

PAGE 94

apprehensive about joining public demonstration feel at ease when they see people fighting the cause. It instills confidence" (NCLR representative, 2011 ). It is clear that these organizations feel their power lies in their ability to show strength against immigration reform and to pressure elected officials. Local groups in the state of Texas are following Arizona's lead in organizing with each other. They are developing new partnerships among organizations and want to bring in any ally, whether political and social, including labor groups, human rights groups, or politically motivated groups. Regardless of group size, each of those interviewed had sent a representative to Austin to lobby for the group and community. Also, all the groups had a person working on tracking immigration reform, as either a volunteer or an employee. The groups plan to work with national organizations to increase their political power, something that is integral to obtaining access to policy initiation, the stage that Texas is currently in. The local groups may not, and in most cases do not, have the political clout to maximize their voices. It's clear that elected officials can blow us off one by one. We have come together and that's why I've been going to rallies with and for my group to make a united front. But it's also why we became an affiliate member [of a national organization]. We want to be able to make our voice heard (Texas LULAC representative, 2011 ). To accomplish this, national groups can provide guidance to local and state groups when called upon. The dynamic between the two levels on 85

PAGE 95

immigration reform has been interesting. Each national organization leader expressed that their organization was engaging in local politics only when asked by either their local chapters/member organizations or elected officials. The representative from NALEO mentioned specifically that the group reached out to elected officials and their member organizations but would not take a more involved role unless asked. The representatives from NCLR and LULAC made similar statements. While the national groups made it clear that their presence on the local level was not high-profile, the local groups emphasized that they can lean on their parent organizations, whichever they may be, to provide information and guidance on how to address immigration reform. Thus, for local groups one strategy is to draw upon national organizations to help influence policy. The end result is a relationship between two levels, one in which the goals may be different and the weight of influence can fluctuate, but one that both sides feel is valuable to advancing the fight against what they feel is unjust immigration reform. All three national organizations indicated that they provide information for local groups regarding recruiting strategies and policy. 86

PAGE 96

Table 5.1 provides details of the major themes and how these groups responded when asked about them. The response "no answer" means that the respondent did not give a clear answer or failed to answer the question completely. Table 5.1: Breakdown of responses Organization Arizona 58 Battle in Immigration Immigration Retaining level Immigration 1070 will have Texas will reform as a resulting in of activism reform opens an impact on be similar rallying point? rise in associated with avenues to Texas reform? to membership? immigration possible Arizona? reform? future advocacy? Harris County Yes Yes Yes No No Answer No AFL-CIO America Para Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Todos Asociacion Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Salvadorena de los EUA FIEL Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes HAD AS Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Labor Council Yes Yes Yes Yes No No for Latin American Advancement Houston, TX League of Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) LULACTexas Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes National Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Alliance of Latino Elected Officials (NALEO) National Yes Yes No Yes No Yes Council of La Raza (NCLR) 87

PAGE 97

Table 5.1 (Cont.) Organization In favor of fair Advocating Coalitions will Public Educating Importance of immigration coalition lead to demonstrations the Hispanic path to reform building increased are effective? population is citizenship power? atop priority? Harris County No answer Yes No No answer Yes No AFL-CIO America Para Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Todos Asociacion No answer Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Salvadorena de los EUA FIEL Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes HADAS Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Labor Council No answer Yes No Yes Yes No for Latin American Advancement Houston, TX League of Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes United Latin American Cittzens (LULAC) LULAC-Texas Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes National Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No answer Alliance of Latino Elected Officials (NALEO) National Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No answer Council of La Raza (NCLR) 88

PAGE 98

5.5 Summarizing results For local groups, having an umbrella organization to guide them, recommend best practices, and share expertise, is of great value. One organization leader admitted that without their national group they wouldn't have all the information they need to provide their community. I do not contend that the tactics discussed above represent a final list or course of action for these groups, but they do address research question three of this thesis, and can be considered a unified plan to address immigration reform in the state of Texas. A number of other tactics were mentioned, including staging protests, walkouts by manual laborers, and boycotts, but none of these activities was confirmed as having taken place. Examining these responses provides a snapshot of how the ten organizations perceive and are addressing the upcoming immigration reform battle. From the interviews conducted in this study it is clear to me that immigration reform in Texas is an important battle for promoting and maintaining Hispanic advocacy. It is also clear that the happenings in Arizona will play a role in how these organizations proceed in the fight for fair immigration reform. Based on these conversations, I believe that Arizona provided a new model for these organizations to use when answering the questions posed to them. With the consequences of that movement still fresh 89

PAGE 99

in their minds, this is understandable. From the results of this research we can derive that immigration reform in Texas is being addressed early in the policy innovation and agenda-setting process. The current tactics and potential future tactics outlined in this thesis offer a glimpse of what the future battle over immigration reform could hold for Hispanic advocacy groups and their ability to increase individual activism. 90

PAGE 100

6. Conclusion This thesis provides a window on the current battle for fair immigration reform in the state of Texas. A survey of a small but diverse set of advocacy groups allows us to view the issue from a few different perspectives. While this research has some shortcomings I believe that this thesis provides evidence of the current state of advocacy activity in Texas regarding an issue that is increasing in importance and that will have significant potential consequences for Hispanics in Texas. 6.1 What we learned Of the three research questions in this thesis, the most significant is the first one, regarding Hispanic groups' recognition of immigration reform. From their responses it is clear that the Hispanic advocacy groups surveyed are well aware of the potential impact and the potential dangers of the 91

PAGE 101

immigration reform bills currently being proposed in Texas. These groups are ready and willing to play an active role in the early agenda-setting and policy innovation stages of the policy process. The groups are currently taking significant action to address the issue, including lobbying, protests, and education campaigns. They are well aware of the ramifications of inaction and want to play an early and vital role in the policy process regarding immigration reform. Although it is obvious that these groups are taking action against immigration reform, the answers to research questions two and three are not as easy to interpret. Question two deals with the impact that immigration reform has on the membership and resources of these groups. The responses reveal that immigration reform is a focusing event. The issue carries significant weight in the Hispanic community and is one that Hispanics will rally around. What is less clear is whether the interest will persist once the battle over immigration reform has concluded. There are two sides to this question. As one respondent points out, immigration reform in Texas is not an issue that is likely to be solved, rendering the question less important than it would otherwise be. However, on a larger scale it is important to examine whether these groups can retain these members, and if so, how. Another viewpoint is that immigration reform is not the only issue of importance to the Hispanic community. While the issue is a critical one and does prompt 92

PAGE 102

Hispanics to get involved, it is not the only issue that does so. If these individuals retreat back into political apathy, it is reasonable to assume that others will take their place. To summarize, immigration reform does act as a unifying event but the long-term commitment of those motivated to act is in question. Lastly, the responses to research question three, regarding the type of action plans being developed, is at a speculative stage, as the nature of the question makes it difficult to provide a concrete answer. Therefore, I will offer a few notes on what we can expect. The most important finding here is that high priorities for these groups include coalition-building and increasing their stature in the policy process. This shows that the groups understand that to improve their influence on the policy process they must increase their size and resources and build coalitions that allows the groups to increase their power. An increase in numbers and power will allow these groups to play a larger role in the process of deciding what immigration reform will look like in the state of Texas. 93

PAGE 103

6.2 The role of Arizona SB 1070 An unexpected set of results that surfaced in this study was the impact of the reaction to Arizona SB 1070 on future immigration reform advocacy. The respondents felt strongly that the then-recent fight unfair immigration reform was both a demonstration of how successful advocacy groups can be in changing or altering the impact of policy and a blueprint these groups can use to develop future strategies. Speculating on why that particular movement was important leads me to believe that the timing of the interviews for this thesis and the results of that movement were important in influencing the subjects' responses. One point made during the discussions and in the literature is that groups, especially smaller ones, struggle to find tangible success stories with which to build their name and reputation in the community. Without this, gaining new members can be a challenge. I believe that the high-profile nature of the battle in Arizona and the success of tactics such as coalition building and public demonstrations, as well as mass media coverage of these activities, have provided the groups in this thesis with an example of the impact these groups can make on the policy process. One observation made about the fight in Arizona and the potential fight in Texas is that legislators will look to the activity in Arizona as an example as 94

PAGE 104

well. In an attempt to avoid the national political issues that Arizona faced, Texas legislators may be quicker to grant activist groups an audience. Because the Texas groups are getting started extremely early in the process and their membership is already increasing, this could be the residual change from Arizona that has the greatest effect on the upcoming discussion over immigration reform in Texas. 6.3 Weakness of the study This thesis uses qualitative analysis to examine the reaction of Hispanic advocacy organizations to the current battle over immigration reform in the state of Texas. As detailed in chapter four, the methods used to collect data for this study were based on semi-structured interviews with executives and key personnel at randomly selected advocacy organizations operating in the state. The detailed findings in this thesis are listed in chapters five and six. However, there are limitations to the research and methodology, which I will detail in this section. One weakness of the study is the limited number of advocacy organizations that responded to my inquiries. Of the 22 organizations selected only 10 chose to participate, which is less than the accepted 68 percent participation rate (Johnson, 2003). The lack of participation can be interpreted because a fear of misrepresentation of the advocacy group or a 95

PAGE 105

lack of trust in me as the researcher. In either case, a participation rate of only 45% renders the results inconclusive and can be seen as only a partial representation of the general views toward the response to and results of immigration reform. Another aspect of the study that is suspect is the use of qualitative analysis. While I stand by my choice to use this methodology, the open-ended questioning allows for gaps in information and opens avenues for respondents to misrepresent certain things and attempt to steer or skew the results in a preferred direction. Although a script was used, the interviews flowed in several directions and at times the respondents used questions to promote personal or organizational motives that were not pertinent to immigration reform or this study. With such varied responses, coding was an issue. Certain aspects touched on by a minority of respondents were important but were not corroborated by other respondents. In this study I presented those results but made it clear that the views of that person or organization were not volunteered by other respondents. These weaknesses do not discount the study, in this researcher's opinion but they do suggest a need to conduct further studies. As this research takes place and the viewpoints of organizations and the opinions of their key individuals are discovered, studies should focus on collecting 96

PAGE 106

quantitative data to determine if political opportunity theory is in fact a useful framework for analyzing the actions of these groups. Gathering evidence from these groups, their members, and policy-makers will provide a more accurate representation of how the groups are reacting to immigration reform issues in Texas. 6.4 What is the next step? Future research can expand on that provided in this thesis. In this study we have found that there is an influential role for these groups to play in the policy process. A retrospective study after the legislation is finalized would be useful, along with a study examining the methodology and motivations from the policy-maker point of view. The ultimate drawback of this thesis is that it is unclear whether immigration reform represents an isolated incident of increased activism. The fight in Arizona could skew the results of this thesis by provoking distorted responses. However, I believe this thesis provides a valuable look at Hispanic advocacy groups' level of influence and provides a glimpse of their potential action plans for addressing immigration reform in Texas. Also, it provides a basis of study of these Hispanic groups and how they validate the role of advocacy groups in the frameworks of public policy and political opportunity theory. 97

PAGE 107

6.5. Implications of the study and summary This thesis provides evidence that Hispanic groups understand the role they can play in the policy process. Also, it suggests that these groups, with the help of outside events and examples, have taken action and are developing a strategy to impact Texas' policy process regarding immigration reform. The responses in this study show that the civil rights groups surveyed are aware of the impact that immigration reform can have on their power in the policy process. If these groups are successful in maintaining the momentum begun in Arizona and building on the publicity immigration reform can bring with regard to building membership, the groups have an opportunity to gain leverage in the policy process. This thesis suggests that these groups should concentrate on developing resources and membership in a way that increases their standing in the policy process, in order to make inroads with policy-makers in a bottom-up relationship. The best way to do that would be to work from their station downward, as information providers and educators on immigration reform and as a rallying point for Hispanics concerned about the impact of unfair reform. In conclusion, I believe the work done on this thesis provides a view into the mindset of a sample of Texas' Hispanic activist culture. The results of 98

PAGE 108

this thesis show that these groups understand the unique situation they are facing with immigration reform and how this discussion and battle could impact their role in the policy process, as well as the toll that failure could take on their base communities. It is clear from this study that these groups are actively seeking ways to show a unified front against what they characterize as unfair immigration reform. 99

PAGE 109

REFERENCES Abrajano, M., Branton, R. & Dunaway, J. (2010). Agenda Setting, Public Opinion, and the Issue of Immigration Reform. Social Science Quarterly, 91 (2). pp. 359-378 Adams, B. (2004). Public Meetings and the Democratic Process. Public Administration Review, 64(1), pp. 43-54 Agnone, J., Aisenbrey, S. & Minkoff, D. (2008). Organizational Diversity in the U.S. Advocacy Sector. Social Problems. 55(4), pp. 525-548 Alcott, L.M. (2005), Latino vs. Hispanic: The Politics of Ethnic Names. Philosophy Social Criticism, 31, pp. 395-407 Andrews, K.T. & Edwards, B. (2004 ). Advocacy Organizations in the U.S. Political Process. Annual Review of Sociology, 30, pp. 4 79-506 Archibald, R. (201 0). Arizona Enacts Stringent Law on Immigration. New York Times, published April 23, 2010 Arts, B. & Tatenhove, J.V. (2004). Policy and Power: A Conceptual Framework between the 'Old' and 'New' Policy Idioms. Policy Sciences, 37(314), pp. 339-356 Auerbach, C. & Silverstein, L. (2003). Qualitative Data. University Press, 100

PAGE 110

New York: New York Bala, S. & Wright, J. (2001 ). Interest Groups, Advisory Committees, and Congressional Control of the Bureaucracy. American Journal of Political Science, 45 (4), pp. 799-812 Baumgartner, F.R. & Jones, B.D. (2004). Representation and Agenda Setting. The Policy Studies Journal, 32 (1), pp. 1-24 Baumgartner, F.R., Gray, V. & Lowery, D. (2009). Federal Policy Activity and the Mobilization of State Lobbying Organizations. Political Research Quarterly, 62(3), pp. 552-567 Berger, B.K. (2001 ). Private Issues and Public Policy: Locating the Corporate Agenda in Agenda-Setting Theory. Journal of Public Relations Research, 13 (2), pp. 91 -126 Berry, J. (1978). On the Origins of Public Interest Groups: A test of two theories. Polity, 1 0(3), pp. 379-397 Birkland, T. (1998). Focusing Events, Mobilization, and Agenda Setting. Journal of Public Policy, 18(1), pp. 53-74 Black, R. (1996). Ideology and Interest Groups. Public Choice, 88 (1), pp.147160 Blais, A. & McCallum, J. (1987). Government, Special Interest Groups, and Economic Growth. Public Choice, 54(1), pp. 3-18 Bond, P. (2006). "Global Governance" or the World Social Forum: Divergent Analysis. Voluntas, pp. 1-23 Brams, S., Jones, M. & Kilgour, D.M. (2005). Forming Stable Coalitions: The Process Matters. Public Choice, 125(112), pp. 67-94 Branton, R. (2007). Latino Attitudes toward Various Areas of Public Policy. 101

PAGE 111

Political Research Quarterly, 60 (2), pp. 293-303 Branton, R. & Dunaway, J. (2009). Spatial Proximity to the U.S.-Mexico Border and Newspaper Coverage of Immigration Issues. Political Research Quarterly, 62(2), pp. 289-302 Brewer, M. & de Leon, P. (1 983). The Foundations of Policy Analysis. Homewood, IL: The Dorsey Press Brint, S. (1990). Rethinking the Policy Influence of Experts: General Characterizations to Analysis of Variation. Sociological Forum, 5(3), pp. 361-385 Burden, D. (2007). Reform Before La Reforma: Liberals, Conservatives and the Debate over Immigration 1846-1855. Mexican Studies/Estudios Me xi ca nos, 23 (2), pp. 283-316 Burstein, P. (1 991 ). Policy Domains: Organizations, Culture, and Policy Outcomes. Annual Review of Sociology, 17, pp. 327-350 Burstein, P. (2003). The Impact of Public Opinion on Public Policy: A Review and an Agenda. Political Research Quarterly, 56 (1 ), pp. 29-40 Burstein, P. & Linton, A. (2002). The Impact of Political Parties, Interest Groups, and Social Movement Organizations on Public Policy: Some Recent Evidence and Theoretical Concerns. Social Forces, 81 (2), pp. 381-408 Campos, N. & Giovannoni, F. (2007). Lobbying, Corruption and Political Influence. Public Choice, 131(112), pp. 1-21 Casanova, E.M. (2010). New Allies for Immigration Reform: A Cincinnati Story. Latino Studies, 8, pp. 121-125 Cigler, A. & Nownes, A. (1 995). Public Interest Groups and the Road to Survival. Polity, 27 (3), pp. 379-404 102

PAGE 112

Cohn, D. & Passel, J. (2011 ). Pew Hispanic Center, Unauthorized Immigrant Population: National and State Trends, 2010 Dahl, R. (1998). On democracy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press Dawson, E. (1915). The Initiation of Legislation. The Sewanee Review, 23 (3), pp. 257-276 De Ia Garza, R., Falcon, A. and Garcia F.C. (1996). "Will the Real Americans Please Stand Up: Anglo and Mexican-American Support of Core American Political Values". American Journal of Political Science. 40 (2), pp. 335-51 De Ia Garza, R. (1974). Voting patterns in "Bi-cultural El Paso: A contextual analysis of Chicano voting behavior. Aztlan, 5 (1-2), pp. 235-260 Deleon, P. (1995). Democratic Values and the Policy Sciences. American Journal of Political Science, 39(4), pp. 886-905 Deleon, P. & Kaufmanis, K. (2001 ). Public Policy Theory: Will it Play in Peoria? Policy Currents, 10 (4), pp. 90-104 Diaz-Barriga, M. & Dorsey, M. (2007). Senator Barack Obama and Immigration Reform. Journal of Black Studies, 38 Doan, A. & Wood, D.B. (2003). The Politics of Problem Definition: Applying and Testing Threshold Models. American Journal of Political Science, 47 (4), pp. 640-653 Dobson, C. (2001 ). Social Movements: A Summary of What Works. The Citizen's Handbook: A Guide to Building Community in Vancouver. www. vcn. bc.ca/citizens-handbook Edwards, B. (1995). With Liberty and Environmental Justice for All: The Emergence and Challenge of Grassroots Environmentalism in the 103

PAGE 113

United States. In Taylor, B. Ecological Resistance Movements, Albany, NY: pp. 35-55 Edwards, B. & Foley, M. (1996). The Paradox of Civil Society. Journal of Democracy, 7 (3), pp. 38-52 Eschbach, K. & Waters, M. (1995). Immigration and Ethnic and Racial Inequality in the United States. Annual Review of Sociology, 21, pp. 419-446 Ewing, W. (201 0). The Many Facets of Effective Immigration Reform. Symposium: Breaking the Immigration Stalemate, pp. 110-117 Finch, W. (1990). The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986: A Preliminary Assessment. The Social Service Review, 64(2), pp. 244260 Freeman, G. (2010). Can Comprehensive Immigration Reform be Both Liberal and Democratic? Symposium: Breaking the Immigration Stalemate, 47, pp. 102-106 Forsythe, D. & Welch, S. (1983). Joining and Supporting Public Interest Groups: A note on some empirical findings. The Western Political Quarterly, 36(3), pp. 386-399 Garcia, C., Maya, S. & Santiago, C. (201 0). LatinoMetrics: U.S. Latinos' Perceptions & Actions around Immigration Debate Garcia, F., Garcia, J., Hero, R. & Pachon, H. (2000). Latino Participation, Partianship, and Office Holding. Political Science and Politics, 33(3), pp. 529-534 Glaser, B., Strauss, A., 1967. The Discoveryof Grounded Theory. Aldine Publishing Company, Hawthorne, NY Gregory, R. & Keeney, R.L. (1994). Creating Policy Alternatives Using 104

PAGE 114

Stakeholder Values Management Science, 40 (8), pp. 1035-1048 Guajardo, F. & Guajardo, M. (2004). The Impact of Brown on the Brown of South Texas: A Micropolitical Perspective on the Education of Mexican Americans in a South Texas Community. American Education Research Jounral, 41 (3), pp. 501-526 Guerra, S. (1988). Voting Rights and the Constitution: The Disenfranchisement of Non-English Speaking Citizens. The Yale Law Journal, 97(7), pp. 1419-1437 Guigni, M. & Passy, F. (1998). Social Movement and Policy Change: Direct, Mediated, or Joint Effect? Working paper, accessed in 2011 at http://www.nd .edu/-dmyers/cbsm/vol1 /geneva98.pdf Ha, S. (2008). The Consequences of Multiracial Contexts on Public Attitudes toward Immigration. Political Research Quarterly, 63 (29), pp. 29-42 Hagmann, D. (201 0). Obama Administration Reports to the UN on Human Rights Issues in U.S. www.Canadafreepress.com, published August 25,2010 Hammond, S.W., Mulhollan, D.P., & Stevens, A.G. (1985). Informal Congressional Caucuses and Agenda Setting. The Western Political Quarterly, 38 (4), pp. 583-605 Henry, P. & Vanderbush, W. (1999). The Role of Ethnic Interest Groups in the U.S. Foreign Policy: The Case of the Cuban American National Foundation. International Studies Quarterly, 43 (2), pp. 341-361 Hero, R.E. & Preuhs, R.R. (2009). Beyond (the Scope of) Conflict: National Black and Latino Advocacy Group Relations in the Congressional and Legal Arenas. Perspectives on Politics, 7, pp. 501-517 105

PAGE 115

Herrington, B.J. (2005). Players in the Public Policy Process: Nonprofits as Social Capital and Agents. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillen Howlett, M, & Ramesh, M. (1998). Policy Subsystem Configurations and Policy Change. Policy Studies Journal, 26 (3), pp. 461-481 Howley, K. Political Panel Discusses Hispanic Voting Patterns. The Hoya (Georgetown University's newspaper) www.thehoya.com/news/1 02000/news6.htm Jackson, R.A. (2009). Latino Political Connectedness and Electoral Participation. Journal of Political Marketing, 8 (3), pp. 233-262 Janis, I. (1972). Groupthink. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company Johnson, Gail. (2003). Research Methods for Public Administrations, 2nd Edition. M.E. Sharpe: London, England Kriesi, H. (1995), The Political Opportunity Structure of Social Movements: Its Impact on Their Mobilization. Printed in Jenkins, J. & Klandermans, B. (1995). The Politics of Social Protest: Compartive Perspectives on States and Social Movements. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, pp. 167-172 Lee, Erika. (2002). The Chinese Exclusion Exmample: Race, Immigration, and American Gatekeeping, 1882-1924. Journal of American Ethnic History, 21 (3) Lieske, J. (2009). The Changing Regional Subcultures of the American States and the Utility of a New Cultural Measure. Political Research Quarterly, 63, pp. 538-552 Light, P.C. (2000). Domestic Policy Making. 27, Sage Public Administration Abstracts, 2 106

PAGE 116

Lopez, F. (1992). Reflections on the Chicano Movement. Latin American Perspectives, 19, pp. 79-86 Mahony, R. (201 0). Thank You, Arizona! www.americamagazine.org Manzer, R. (1984). Public Policy-Making as Practical Reasoning. Canadian Journal of Political Science, 17(3), pp. 577-594 Marsh, D. (1976). On Joining Interest Groups an Empirical Consideration of the Work of Mancur Olson Jr. British Journal of Political Science. 6(3), pp. 257-271 Matthiessen, P. (1969). Sal Si Puedes: Cesar Chavez and the New American Revolution. New York: Random House Marshall, R. (2007). Getting Immigration Reform Right. Challenge, 50 (4), pp. 26-48 Marquez, B. (2000). Standing for the Whole: The Southwest Industrial Areas Foundation on Identity and Mexican-American Politics. Social Science Review. pp. 453-4 73 McBrien, J. (2005). Educational Needs and Barriers for Refugee Students in the United States: A Review of the Literature. Review of Educational Research, 75(3), pp. 329-364 McCombs, M. & Shaw, D. (1972). The Agenda-Setting Function of the Mass Media. Public Opinion Quarterly, 36, pp. 176 -187 McDevitt, M. & Spiro, K. (2008) Agenda Setting in Civic Development. Communication Research, 35 (4), pp. 481-502 McGurty, E.M. (2000). Policy Review: Warren County, NC and the Emergence of the Environmental Justice Movement: Unlikely 107

PAGE 117

Coalitions and Shared Meanings in Local Collective Action. Society & Natural Resources, 13, pp. 373-387 Meyer, D.S. (2003). Social Movements and Public Policy: Eggs, Chicken, and Theory. Center for the Study of Democracy. www.democ.uci.edu Mulhollan, D., Rundquist, P. & Stevens, A. (1981 ). U.S. Congressional Structure and Representatives: The Role of Informal Groups. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 6 (3), pp. 415-437 National Association of Latino Elected Officials Educational Fund (201 0). The 2010 Latino Vote Study Orfield, G. (1986). Hispanic Education: Challenges, Research, and Policies. American Journal of Education, 95(1), pp. 1-25 Pichardo, N. (1997). New Social Movements: A Critical Review. Annual Review of Sociology, 23, pp. 411-430 Patterson, 0. (1975). Context and Choice in the Ethnic Allegiance: A Theoretical Framework and Caribbean Case Study. Ethnicity: Theory and Experience. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. pp. 305-315 Peake, J.S. (2001 ). Presidential Agenda Setting in Foreign Policy. Political Research Quarterly, 54 ( 1 ), pp. 69-86 Poole, K. & Rosenthal, H. (1998). The Dynamics of Interest Group Evaluations of Congress. Public Choice, 97 (3), pp. 323-361 Potter, J. & van Winden, F. (1992). Lobbying and Asymmetric Information. Public Choice, 74(3), pp. 269-292 Pralle, S. (2003). Venue Shopping, Political Strategy, and Policy Change: The internationalization of Canadian forest advocacy. Journal of Public Policy, 23(3), pp. 233-260 Putterman, E. (2003). Rousseau on Agenda-Setting and Majority Rule. American Political Science Review, 979 (3), pp. 459-468 108

PAGE 118

Rangel, D. (2010). Police Join Fight Against Arizona SB 1070. News.chane.org, published May 1, 2010 Rodriquez, M.S. (2003). A Movement Made of "Young Mexican Americans Seeking Change": Critical Citizenship Migration, and the Chicano Movement in Texas and Wisconsin, 1960-1975. The Western Historical Quarterly, 34(3), pp. 274-299 Rothenberg, L. (1989). Putting the Puzzle Together: Why People Join Public Interest Groups. Public Choice, 60(3), pp. 241-257 Saad, L. (201 0). Gallup Polling. Americans Value Both Aspects of Immigration Reform Saad, L. (2010). Gallup Polling. Americans Closely Divided Over Immigration Reform Priority Schmitz, A. (1988). Gett and Agriculture: The role of special interest groups. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 70(5), pp. 994-1005 Scott, J. (2005). Rousseau's Anti-Agenda-Setting Agenda and Contemporary Democratic Theory American Political Science Review, 99 (1 ), pp. 137144 Seidman, I. (2006). Interviewing as Qualitative Research: A Guide for Researchers in Education and the Social Sciences. New York: Teachers College Press Shaw, R. (2008). Beyond the Fields: Cesar Chavez, the UFW, and the Struggle for Justice in the 2151 Century. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press Sigal, B. (2010). Minnesota Protest Against SB-1070, Arizona's Racist Anti Immigrant Law. www.FightBack!News.org, published April 27, 2010 Strolovitch, D. (2006). Do Interest Groups Represent the Disadvantaged? 109

PAGE 119

Advocacy at the Intersection of Race, Class and Gender. The Journal of Politics, 68 (4), pp. 894-910 Taylor, D. (2000). The Rise of the Environmental Justice Paradigm. American Behavorial Scientist, 43 (4), pp. 508-580 Taylor, R. (1975). Chavez and the Farm Workers. Boston: Beacon Press Teune, H. (1967). Legislative Attitudes Toward Interest Groups. Midwest Journal of Political Science, 11 (4), pp. 489-504 Tilly, C. (2003). Social Movements Enter the Twenty-First Century. Presented at the Contentious Politics and the Economic Opportunity Structure Conference, University of Crete Useem, B. (1998). Breakdown Theories of Collective Action. Annual Review of Sociology, 24, pp. 215-238 Vian, B. (2006). Policy Agenda Setting and Risk Communication. The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 11 (3), pp. 67-88 Weimer, D.L. (2008). Theories of and in the Policy Process. The Policy Studies Journal, 36 (4), pp. 489-495 Young, J. (1972). The Migrant Workers and Cesar Chavez. New York: Julian Messner Yzaguirre, R. (1987). Public Policy, Crime and the Hispanic Community. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. 494, pp. 101-104 110

PAGE 120

APPENDIX A: May 2010 Gallup Poll Data (Saad, 2010, http://www.gallup.com/poll/141113/americans-closely-divided-immigration-reform priority.aspx} Title: Americans Closely Divided Over Immigration Reform Immiqmtion Priorittl :( ..U iud 1 .. I!'". ;ILtt :h.111id hllt tll;titt I. II." !.It ; ., 111 .J ... din" . ith til 1'1:' .-.[ ill<:d itllllll' .. ot:i\j,q[ ,, r+ut int it, tl .. I ii L:,;ti i llllll i .. ;I >1\11 ., i! l i. 1 iII<'' l .. ' 'I I k' ... I' '['Ill .: ; I i 'I ;ill I' d .-:ti -,. i Ill i lll\11 i .'1:1 ll I,, -[t, .tl: Ill rnt.L Ill i!t:' l .' iJ!":,.tlh j'J .!OLO ,fun ll-L:'l Halting tlow uf illegal innnigranto; into the L.s. ..... ) ,_ 111 Dew! oping a plan to deal with immigrantl>l now in t; .S. illegally II( ., I,) :'lro up inion l . .,

PAGE 121

Impact lmmiynmts 1n Tw.:es :.\.lthh."Plll'".:j,-_ .. _,.1 j, .dlrfhJIIltl-.:-, .. ll.l!lil=;'li! '" :,,_j u, ii. :' iii-.. -II"' "11d 1;oY i h: 1'11! lodl ... ,( l:r: .. _. o1 d I --.:.oi i 111111 i .:r :r 11 !.-:, .,.i 'ii :p o 1 .-,, .. tnu . lli 11--in: l'.i -lik-,.,_[u, ,:!
PAGE 122

APPENDIX B: June 2010 Gallup Poll (Saad, 2010, http://www.gallup.com/poll/127649/americans-value-aspects-immigration-reform.aspx) Title: Americans Value Both Aspects of Immigration Reform Jmportunn: Policy Uoal:; ll'' 1111)'"1 l.t!l!.i' i( I >'L i!J IIi[:., ;'I !lllh'ill.l.ti.:.. it llti ..tl 1 d.d '-'I ill''"' l1 J! ![leo' 1 ,[l, ':, I I .. :I I '!! 1: i ; i; 1 I['"
PAGE 123

I Vony .lhout Hf{(et., (!f!llcqullmmiynmts ami. \nti-Ille(fallmmiqmtirm Luus How concerned are :;ou about of the ... be putting an unhtir hmden on t_:_:-;_ .'choob, h.!3pitab, and .'<"Pci('t':< Allowing illegal immigrant<; to stay in the U.S. might be encouraging others to move here illegally m;Jkin::; low might nuke U.S. emph'}<'L> will lo pay Amrric;m workt>rs a de(ent ww;e l hw, C'H1t'>!rned would vou be if law:< ,,ere passed ... Illegal immh;:m.nt-; and their f;nnilie!i who have lhed in the LT.S. peac:efuUy and produttiYely for many )'ears v.miid be forced to leave the cuuntn: Hi,;paniL> li\'ing in the FS. W(Uld lw lura .;,:ed by authm it.ie:' them l being Taking slritt measures against illegal immigmnts go against the .\me1ican tmdition of v.dtoming those ..vho come to the lJ.S. to tind a better life \! i 1 ; 114 '';, 1,, -

PAGE 124

APPENDIX C: Script for interviews Introduction Thank you for agreeing to this interview. My name is Darrell Lovell, the principal investigator of this study. I am an MPA candidate in the on-line Masters of Public Administration program in the School of Public Affairs at the University of Colorado Denver. This study will serve as my thesis and will provide a vital look at the role of immigration reform, and by extension the possible role of policy issues, on the activity patterns among Hispanic advocacy groups. Before we begin, I would like to make you aware of a few issues. First, you will be afforded complete anonymity in the reporting of this study. All information will be coded for use and password protected to preserve your personal and professional interest. Second, I would like to record this interview. This study does not require written consent, per Colorado Institutional Review Board (COIRB) guidelines, but I do need verbal approval to record this interview. At this point I ask you to say yes if you agree to have this interview recorded and no if you do not want to be recorded. Now I will ask a series of questions concerning the -----advocacy group. Please answer candidly and feel free to ask any questions you feel are necessary. This process will work best if this is more of a dialogue instead of a question and answer session. If at any time for any reason you wish to stop or postpone the interview let me know and we can make necessary arrangements. 115

PAGE 125

Questions 1 Are you aware of the basic issues of immigration reform? 2. How important do you feel the issue of immigration reform is to the Hispanic community as a whole? 3. Is immigration reform an issue of importance for your organization? 4. Has your organization spoken out officially on the issue of immigration reform? 5. Is your organization for or against immigration reform? 6. Do you feel immigration reform is a divisive issue for the Hispanic community? 7. Do you believe immigration reform will drive more Hispanics to be politically active? 8. Do you think your organization does/can use the attention from immigration reform to recruit more members? 9. Do you think your organization does/can use the attention from immigration reform to generate more interest or raise its public profile? 1 0. If so, do you believe this is an effective strategy? 11. Do you believe there is controversy surrounding immigration reform? 12. If so, does the controversy surrounding immigration reform serve as a positive for organizations to improve membership, recruiting, and/or funding? 13. Are there any other issues in addition to immigration reform that can provide a boost to Hispanic political advocacy? 116

PAGE 126

14. Are there any other comments you would like to add about your group's activity or the effects of immigration reform? Thank you for your time. I believe the information will be vital to answering the questions proposed in this study. 117