This year is critical for democracy, with roughly half of the world’s population living in countries holding elections. These contests are being held at a time when international migration is at a record high and has emerged as a central topic in electoral campaigns.
To better understand the role of migration in democratic politics, we invited a small group of scholars to reflect on how migration is influencing elections and democratic institutions in their country or region, with particular focus on Asia and Latin America.
India
Milan Vaishnav, director, South Asia Program
The largest democracy in the world headed to the polls from April to June, ultimately electing Prime Minister Narendra Modi for his third term. While the win was expected, his ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) did not achieve the landslide victory projected by pollsters. A staunch Hindu nationalist, Modi has been accused of encouraging Islamophobia and religious polarization.
How central was the issue of migration to the election and political campaigns in India?
Migration has been thrust into the campaign limelight in India thanks to the government’s decision to formally implement the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) on the eve of the election. The CAA, passed by Parliament in 2019, provides an expedited pathway to citizenship for undocumented migrants originating from Afghanistan, Bangladesh, and Pakistan, provided they belong to one of six religious communities: Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Christians, and Parsis. Notably, the provision does not apply to Muslims. The passage of the law attracted controversy from the outset because many critics believe it violates constitutional provisions of religious equality.
Is migration being linked with other policy issues?
The question of migration, including illegal migration, is of greatest salience in India’s northeast, where state governments and many local communities express concern that an influx of migrants will adversely impact local culture, political rights, and control over land. Assam and other northeastern states have been the site of violent protests against the legislation. Notably, many local units of the ruling BJP, which vociferously championed the bill, have strongly opposed its implementation.
Are regional dynamics factored into electoral discussions on migration?
The central government has argued that the CAA completes the unfinished business of Partition, when many religious minorities chose to remain in India’s neighboring countries only to find themselves victims of religious persecution and later sought refuge in India. According to the government, providing such individuals with a “right of return” is a humanitarian measure. Some neighboring governments have hit back, resentful of the implication that they do not protect the rights of minorities in their own countries.
Is migration purely an issue for the federal government, or is it a hot topic for subnational debates as well?
Migration is a hot-button issue both for the federal government as well as for select subnational entities. For instance, in the state of Assam, the matter has particular salience. Under Supreme Court direction, the state recently completed a process known as the National Register of Citizens (NRC) to determine who is a legitimate resident of the state and who is an undocumented resident. The NRC’s origins lie in attempts to regulate entry into the state, a problem that was aggravated by the 1971 war between India and Pakistan that led to the creation of Bangladesh. The final draft of the NRC has left 1.9 million Assamese residents off of its rolls, raising questions about what happens to them. For those residents excluded from the NRC, the CAA potentially gives them a lifeline, provided they are not Muslim.
The issue of migration is also a live issue in West Bengal, a state controlled by the opposition but where the BJP has made significant inroads. Many observers believe the CAA will polarize the electorate on religious lines, allowing the BJP to consolidate the state’s Hindu vote.
If you were to select a single quote to capture the role migration played in India’s election this year, what would it be?
“There is no question of timing, political gain or loss. Now, the opposition wants to consolidate their vote bank by doing appeasement politics. I want to request them that they have been exposed. CAA is the law for the entire country and I have reiterated nearly forty-one times in four years that it will become a reality,” said Amit Shah, India’s home minister.
Indonesia
Elina Noor, senior fellow, Asia Program
In February, Indonesia, the world’s third-largest democracy, elected Prabowo Subianto as president. Prabowo currently serves as Indonesia’s minister of defense but is a former commander of special forces accused of extreme violence and human rights violations during the country’s conflict with Timor-Leste. A sizable portion of Indonesia’s 270 million citizens work abroad. It has also received significant waves of refugees over the years
How central was the issue of migration to the election and political campaigns in Indonesia?
Migration was one of the issues addressed by all three presidential candidates in the run-up to Indonesia’s election. The topic would have been difficult to avoid for two reasons. First, Indonesia has a large migrant worker population abroad (figures range from 3 million to more than 9 million since 2000), with many in countries around Asia and at sea. Indonesia has afforded its citizens abroad the right to vote since 1955, but this year’s election came under criticism for inadequacies in increasing voter participation among migrant Indonesian workers and marginalization of their welfare by candidates running for office.
The second factor was the arrival of nearly 2,000 Rohingya refugees on the shores of Aceh—Indonesia’s westernmost province with special autonomy status—between November and December. The challenge of accommodating waves of Rohingya fleeing political violence in Myanmar became polemical. Locals in Aceh resisted even more refugees, contending that those who had been warmly received in 2015 had failed to adapt to local conditions.
The politicization of the matter was exacerbated by various reports of fake news on social media about how these asylum seekers could inflate Indonesia’s voter base, were being recruited to vote for a particular presidential campaign, or were rioting in East Java.
Is migration being linked with other policy issues?
Indonesia has one of the highest rates of unemployment in Southeast Asia. As such, many Indonesians move abroad seeking better economic opportunities, sometimes unfortunately in exploitative or perilous circumstances. From January to October 2023, household workers—who are usually overwhelmingly women—comprised the largest group of Indonesians working abroad.
Refugees entering Indonesia are primarily seeking safety from violence and persecution in their home countries. Over the years, Indonesia—which has not ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention—has been a transit destination for Afghans, Uyghurs, and Rohingya. The highest number of refugees in Indonesia came from Afghanistan (48 percent), Somalia (16 percent), and Myanmar (9 percent), as of December.
Are regional dynamics factored into electoral discussions on migration
The 2021 coup in Myanmar—as well as worsening violence and political intransigence there, declining humanitarian assistance in camps in Bangladesh, and a decrease in the cost of sea journeys—has resulted in an exponential rise in refugee arrivals in Aceh and North Sumatra. United Nations’ figures indicate that more than 2,300 Rohingya refugees arrived in 2023, which surpasses the previous four years combined.
That no regional country or international organization has managed to effect a positive change in Myanmar was implicitly acknowledged during Indonesia’s election season. Prabowo, accused of taking a populist stance on the matter when stating that it was unfair for Indonesia to receive all the refugees, had suggested that Indonesia coordinate with international organizations to reduce the burden on the country—but did not offer further details.
Is migration mostly an issue for the national government, or is it a hot topic for subnational debates as well?
Given the number of Indonesian migrant workers abroad, the matter is an important one for the national government. The Indonesian Migrant Workers’ Protection Agency offers placement and protection services for Indonesians seeking work abroad, and the government has raised the profile of abused or mistreated citizens employed in other countries. As chair of ASEAN in 2023, Indonesia shepherded the region’s commitment to migrant worker protection, including the adoption of a declaration aimed at protecting migrant fishers. But there are also subnational implications, since the local origins of Indonesian migrant workers can impact central-provincial relations, particularly during an election.
Similarly, with Aceh having received thousands of Rohingya refugees over the years—and given the province’s historically vexed relations with Jakarta—the issue of immigration can be a contentious one if not managed or coordinated well.
Tunisia
Sarah Yerkes, senior fellow, Middle East Program
Tunisians are expected to head to the polls in the fall, but whether President Kais Saied, who is in the final year of his term, will hold the presidential election on schedule is unclear. Inflation in Tunisia is currently high, and unemployment has been above 12 percent since 2005. Saied has blamed the arrival of African migrants for the state’s economic conditions.
How central is the issue of migration to the election and political campaigns in Tunisia?
Because the presidential election remains theoretical at this point, with no date on the calendar thus far, there is no real electoral debate or political campaign in Tunisia today.
However, migration is certainly part of the country’s political discourse. Taking a page from the populist playbook, Saied has consistently shifted the blame for Tunisia’s growing economic crisis on other actors, especially migrants. Saied’s racist and xenophobic rhetoric against African migrants that escalated last year has not only incited violence against migrants (and Black Tunisians) but has also led to global condemnation and further economic challenges, as some African countries cut trade ties with Tunisia. Despite this, Saied has refused to back down, further polarizing Tunisian society.
Although many Tunisians have spoken out against the anti-migrant rhetoric, the statements and actions have been normalized to a degree by Saied’s behavior and allowed those who share his views to come out publicly without much fear of backlash—similar to the way former U.S. president Donald Trump’s white supremacist rhetoric from the Oval Office allowed white nationalists to come out of hiding in the United States.
Is migration being linked with other policy issues?
Yes, most notably economic opportunity and human rights challenges. Saied blames migrants (among other groups) for Tunisia’s spiraling economic decline, even though his own government has failed to take action to address inflation, unemployment, and a massive deficit. Saied has also alienated Tunisia’s traditional donors, rejected an International Monetary Fund deal, and even returned an EU check—one of the few examples of foreign aid coming into Tunisia today.
Migration has also been a major issue for Tunisia’s economic and political relationship with Europe. The EU itself is divided between Italy—whose far-right government is most focused on preventing migrants from reaching its shores—and other member states that do not want to be complicit in supporting Saied’s antidemocratic behavior and human rights abuses, including the expulsion of migrants and allegations of torture, sexual assault, and use of excessive force against migrants. Europe is actively grappling with how to prevent further instability in Tunisia, which is located just over 100 miles from its shores, whilst signaling to Saied that it will not abide by his government’s human rights abuses.
Is migration mostly an issue for the national government, or is it a hot topic for subnational debates as well?
There is a severe lack of functional subnational governance in Tunisia today. Saied fired all of the municipal councilors and is in the process of establishing a second house of parliament that ostensibly will oversee local government, but it is not at all clear yet what that role will look like in practice. Furthermore, the 2022 constitution that Saied helped draft seriously consolidates political power in the hands of the presidency. So, most of the migration debate is being handled at the national level.
That said, Tunisia’s coastal regions—particularly Sfax, where most of the migrant departures take place—are far more engaged on issues around migration than are other regions that are less directly impacted by migration. The border regions with Algeria and Libya have also had to deal with this issue more recently, as Saied’s government has been engaged in forced expulsions of migrants from the coastal areas to the desert border areas in an attempt to remove them from Tunisian soil.
If you were to select a single quote or image to capture the role migration will play in Tunisia’s election this year, what would it be?
There are so many to choose from, but the images of boats capsizing between Tunisia and Italy stand out to me. Each story is so tragic, with bodies of migrants—including children, babies, and pregnant women—being pulled out of the water by the coast guard. Additionally, the images of migrants abandoned near the desert border with Libya without adequate food, shelter, and water are horrible.
As one PBS NewsHour report said, migrants face a choice in Tunisia: “Risk death in the desert or drown at sea.” Saied has been perhaps the loudest critic of Israeli actions in Gaza, while simultaneously inciting violence against Black Africans and overseeing serious human rights abuses in his own country.
Venezuela
Carolina Jiménez Sandoval, president, Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA)
Venezuela’s election is scheduled for July 28, but opposition parties have questioned the acting government’s unconstitutional disqualification of candidates, the imposition of voting barriers, and a marked increase in the level of repression against political activists and civil society. An estimated 2.8 million Venezuelans have migrated to neighboring Colombia since the 2010s, and in recent years, Venezuelans have also started migrating to the United States.
How central is the issue of migration to the election and political campaigns in Venezuela?
With approximately 7.7 million Venezuelans—nearly 20 percent of the population—living abroad, migration is a pervasive issue impacting both national identity and policy discourse. Political candidates leverage promises of repatriation, tapping into the sentiment of bringing back their compatriots, which resonates strongly with voters.
The issue transcends mere statistics: it embodies the aspirations and struggles of millions who left their communities due to economic hardships and political unrest. Both the opposition and the government of President Nicolás Maduro have attempted to position themselves as the only ones that can achieve this goal. Maduro has advocated for initiatives such as Plan Vuelta a la Patria to encourage Venezuelans to return home, but it is unclear if all returns are voluntary or are the result of immigration restrictions abroad. María Corina Machado, the winner of the opposition’s primary election, who has been illegally banned from running for office, connects with millions of Venezuelan mothers by speaking about her own experience as a mother with children living abroad. While the opposition and civil society have been campaigning for Venezuelans abroad to register to vote, the Maduro government is restricting the registration process in various embassies and consulates around the world.
Is migration being linked with other policy issues?
Migration in Venezuela is intricately linked with various policy issues, reflecting a range of perspectives across the political spectrum. The government frames migration as a consequence of an alleged economic war waged against Venezuela, often attributing exclusive blame to U.S. sanctions. This narrative attempts to deflect responsibility and emphasizes external factors as the primary drivers of migration. Conversely, the opposition often views migration through the lens of democratic deficits, asserting that the lack of democratic rights at home fuels emigration. Both sides agree on the need to facilitate the return of Venezuelans abroad but have yet to articulate concrete plans for achieving this.
The Venezuelan forced migration crisis is the result of different factors: massive human rights violations and an ongoing humanitarian emergency have created the perfect storm for the magnitude of the current crisis. Whoever wins the election must do everything in their power to mitigate and eventually overcome the complex humanitarian emergency, which existed prior to U.S. sanctions but has been deepened by them.
Are regional dynamics factored into electoral discussions on migration?
Regional dynamics significantly factor into electoral discussions on migration in Venezuela, but also into political discussions in other countries. Venezuelans represent the largest number of regional migrants, and their evolving migration flows and routes have impacted nearly all governments in the region.
These governments’ responses often depend on their relationships with the Maduro administration. Some governments influenced by diplomatic ties or political considerations show willingness to cooperate with repatriation efforts or facilitate the return of Venezuelans. Others prioritize internal policies, focusing on programs to integrate migrants within their borders or on expediting their transit across the country. These varying approaches underscore the complex interplay of regional politics and migration dynamics.
In electoral discussions, migration has become a hot topic in many countries of destination and, unfortunately, xenophobic narratives permeate part of these discussions. The current electoral debate in the United States shows how immigration can become a key electoral issue. In the case of Colombia, the main recipient of Venezuelan migrants and refugees, migration was surprisingly not central to the most recent presidential election. But there is an explosion of xenophobia in the municipalities with a higher concentration of migrants and refugees.
Is migration mostly an issue for the national government, or is it a hot topic for subnational debates as well?
In Venezuela, migration is primarily an issue for the national or federal government due to the country’s highly centralized governance structure under authoritarian leadership. The media messaging around migration and state policies is tightly controlled, limiting the scope for subnational debates or policy initiatives. Assessing and implementing policies independently at the local or regional levels is challenging. However, certain migration-related incidents, such as maritime tragedies involving migrants from coastal areas or the return of migrants and refugees to border areas during the COVID-19 pandemic, prompted local governments to get more involved in migration issues.
If you were to select a single quote or image to capture the role migration will play in the Venezuela election this year, what would it be?
At the start of the year, María Corina Machado posted a video with a message to Venezuelans saying, “My commitment to you is to unite every Venezuelan family, ensure that our children and siblings return home” I believe both the opposition candidate (now Edmundo González Urrutia) and Maduro will hone in on this message of bringing back Venezuelans and reuniting them with family and friends who are still in the country. Both sides will promise that they are the only ones capable of bringing back the diaspora, but this will be a tremendous challenge: not all will choose to return, especially if there is no political change—a key element to addressing the root causes of the economic collapse and humanitarian emergency.
Mexico
Ana Lorena Delgadillo, executive director and founding partner, Foundation for Justice
In June, Mexicans elected their first female president, Claudia Sheinbaum, in what was the country’s largest election—more than 20,000 positions were decided. Mexico has been described as a transitory state, as many foreign migrants cross through it seeking entry into the United States, but it also has significant internal displacement and emigration to the United States.
How central was the issue of migration to the election and political campaigns in Mexico?
Migration is indeed touched upon in debates and campaigns, but it doesn’t hold a central position. For instance, during the first presidential debate, Claudia Sheinbaum attempted to divert the discussion away from migration by saying, “Are we going to talk about something else?” This indicates a reluctance to delve deeply into the topic.
While all major presidential candidates addressed migration to some extent, it was not a primary focus in their government plans. Sheinbaum, the president-elect, intends to continue the policies of fellow MORENA party member President Andrés Manuel López Obrador. Meanwhile, the other candidates expressed opposition to the militarization of migration policy (for example, how armed authorities detain migrants near the U.S. border and force them to take buses south). These differing stances were evident in the first presidential debate, where opposition candidates reaffirmed their positions while Sheinbaum remained vague and evasive on the issue.
Is migration being linked with other policy issues?
Yes, primarily due to poverty. The current federal government and its chosen candidate have emphasized a position to address the root causes of migration, with a primary focus on poverty. Similarly, opposition candidates criticized the militarization of Mexican migration policy and highlighted the vulnerable situation faced by migrants as they cross the country.
Are regional dynamics factored into electoral discussions on migration?
No. There was no discussion of the candidates' plans to address the issue in a more structural manner, nor was there talk of the structural impunity in the region and violations of human rights. It seems that Mexico and the United States are discussed separately and in a disjointed manner in relation to migration, with little attention given to Central America.
Is migration mostly an issue for the national or federal government, or is it a hot topic for subnational debates as well?
Migration is primarily an issue for the national or federal government agenda, but it also features prominently in subnational debates. State and border-town governments actively discuss and address migration issues, particularly in the northern regions of the country. These governments utilize their own resources and often coordinate efforts with their counterparts in the United States. It’s not uncommon to hear about coordinated operations between subnational governments from both the United States and Mexico.
If you were to select a single quote or image to capture the role migration played in the Mexican election, what would it be?
The role of the migration issue in the presidential election agenda could be described as one of neglect. Sadly, despite being one of the most pressing concerns for the migrant population in Mexico, the issue of migration appeared to be of little significance to the presidential candidates. This is evident a year after forty migrants died from asphyxiation inside a federal government detention center.
Panama
Gisela De Leon, legal director, Center for Justice and International Law
On May 5, Panamanians elected José Raúl Mulino, a former security minister, as president. In recent months, Panama has been experiencing unprecedented political tension and turmoil, as well as an economic slowdown and a severe drought affecting the operation of the Panama Canal.
How central was the issue of migration to the election and political campaigns in Panama?
The Darien Gap is one of the most important migratory corridors in the region. The magnitude of the flows crossing through the area, coupled with the violence and the lack of adequate state and regional responses, has generated a serious crisis that makes it an inevitable part of the electoral debate, especially given the security approach to the migratory phenomenon. In this sense, several candidates, including the president-elect, referred to the issue and expressed positions on how it should be addressed.
Is migration being linked with other policy issues?
In Panama, as in most of the region, migration has been linked with security. The current first responders are the National Border Service, an eminent police entity that lacks, for example, training to address the protection needs of a population on the move, which may need health services that police forces cannot provide.
Although there are efforts by some social actors to raise other perspectives—such as those linked to climate change, economic opportunities, or development—these frames have not yet reached the mainstream political discourse.
Are regional dynamics factored into electoral discussions on migration?
Yes. The current government, whose vice president was one of the presidential candidates, has been proposing that the migration issue should be addressed through regional cooperation. Likewise, José Raúl Mulino has raised the possibility of requesting assistance from the U.S. government to “close” the Darien Gap and has held meetings with other governments in the region on the issue.
Unfortunately, the focus of this regional cooperation seems to be on stopping or regulating flows, rather than on addressing the humanitarian and international protection needs of the migrants.
Is migration mostly an issue for the national or federal government, or is it a hot topic for subnational debates as well?
Migration has traditionally been an issue for the national government, but there have been some discussions on the effects of migration in the communities near the Darien Gap—more than 520,000 people crossed the gap en route to the United States in 2023, many of them risking their lives as they battle criminal groups, hunger, and landslides.
If you were to select a single quote or image to capture the role migration played in Panama’s election this year, what would it be?
When Mulino said, “Stop that migration, I will close the Darien.”
Texas
Sarah Labowitz, nonresident scholar, Sustainability, Climate, and Geopolitics Program
In Texas, the U.S. Senate race between incumbent Republican Ted Cruz and Democrat Colin Allred features immigration as a key issue in the November vote. Both President Joe Biden and former president Donald Trump visited the border in February in an attempt to shore up support by pushing strict immigration policies for the next term.
How central is the issue of migration to the election in Texas?
As in most things, Texas is a heightened version of the rest of the United States: the foundational narratives about immigration in Texas are confusing and often contradictory. On the one hand, Texans are generally pretty proud of the state being a place where people want to move (there’s a U-Haul statistic that more one-way moving trucks are bound for Texas than any other state). And there’s pride in the diversity of our people, the Astros, and especially our food, not to mention huge reliance on a low-wage immigrant labor force. Texas is already a majority-minority state in terms of population.
At the same time, the foundational right-wing narratives about immigration— immigrants cause crime, immigrants will replace “us,” the United States is being invaded—are turned up to eleven here, with real—and tragic—implications. One of the deadliest mass shootings in American history—at an El Paso Walmart in 2019—was perpetrated by a man who was motivated by the great replacement theory and the idea that white people are victims of a nonwhite “invasion.”
How does migration show up in political campaigns in Texas?
On both the right and the left, there’s a kind of border theater that plays out during political campaigns. When either Trump or Biden wants to make a statement about their immigration stance, they come to the U.S.-Mexico border in Texas. In February, they came on the same day, 300 miles apart.
At the state level, it’s basically a requirement that conservative politicians don border costumes—a cowboy hat, gun, monogrammed fishing shirt, and sunglasses, with an optional bulletproof vest—for a photo-op on the border at some point during an election cycle. The ostentatious aspect of these visits is hardly a secret: Ken Paxton, the attorney general, has his staff accompany him for the explicit purpose of creating flashy immigration-themed videos, complete with dramatic music. Elon Musk also got in on the action in September 2023, with much debate about whether he was wearing the cowboy hat correctly.
Texas’s major metro areas are huge population centers where Democrats increasingly hold supermajorities in local government. These supermajorities are driven in part by turnout from immigrant voters, including big blocs of voters from Latin America, South Asia, and East Asia, as well as Africa and the Middle East. Expanding services to immigrants is often part of their campaign platforms and policy agendas, such as making pandemic-era rental assistance available to anyone, regardless of immigration status.
Is migration being linked with other policy issues?
Most depressing to me is how immigration is—falsely—linked with crime, as an intentional electoral strategy, especially at the local level. Then there’s the truly weird, like when the National Butterfly Center had to close because a Trump administration official falsely tweeted that its director was involved in human trafficking in response to a lawsuit about potential construction of the border wall that would have run through the center’s habitat. The tweet was picked up in QAnon circles and resulted in death threats against the director and protests at the center.
Migration shows up in other major narratives in Texas. When Paxton and Governor Greg Abbott deployed Child Protective Services to investigate the families of trans children, many of those families migrated out of state. Similarly, anyone who needs abortion care has to leave the state. The state’s near-total ban on abortion is causing doctors to leave the state, while medical residents increasingly decline to serve in Texas because of restrictions on abortion education in the OB-GYN curriculum.
The mass migration of Hurricane Katrina survivors from New Orleans to Houston is a foundational narrative about the region that has come to be linked to the changing climate. My guess is that we’re a year or two away from another round of very visible climate-driven migration in Texas, either due to a major storm event or the prolonged effects of heat stress.
Is migration mostly an issue for the national or federal government, or is it a hot topic for subnational debates as well?
Is this a good time to say I hate the term “subnational”? No one whose primary political perspective is shaped at the neighborhood, local, or state level thinks of themselves as living a “subnational” kind of life!
With that out of the way, the state of Texas absolutely has been waging a campaign to make local enforcement of immigration law not just a matter of debate in the state, but a matter of policy. Abbott’s Operation Lone Star is a stunning effort to contest the federal government’s role in immigration and border policy. It deploys state and local law enforcement to the border to arrest and detain migrants who have crossed the southern U.S. border seeking asylum. I like to do long drives across the state, and it’s not unusual to see a sheriff’s vehicle from Galveston (a beach town south of Houston) in Del Rio, which is seven hours away on the U.S.-Mexico border. Operation Lone Star gives the Galveston sheriff authority to do border enforcement activities well beyond its local jurisdiction. Obviously, the federal government is fighting back against Texas’s encroachment on its constitutional authorities. While the legal battle is ongoing, we see a lot of state and local involvement in immigration enforcement.
If you were to select a single quote or image to capture the role migration will play in Texas’s election this year, what would it be?
This is hard because the defining images that run through my mind are ones of visceral human cruelty. In 2018, it was very young kids lying on dirty blankets behind metal fences in government-run detention facilities. In 2021, it was Border Patrol agents whipping Haitian migrants crossing the border near Del Rio. And last year, it was the floating buoys that Abbott deployed in the Rio Grande with circular saws between them. This year, my guess is that the defining image will be in one of three areas: 1) local law enforcement of federal immigration laws, 2) migration driven by the state’s abortion ban, or 3) disaster-driven migration in a historic hurricane season.
California
Mark Baldassare, nonresident scholar, Carnegie California
In November, Democrat Adam Schiff and Republican Steve Garvey will face off in California’s race for the U.S. Senate seat held by the late Dianne Feinstein. California has a significant immigrant population: one in three working-age adults are foreign-born.
How central is the issue of migration to the election and political campaigns in California?
Immigration is one of the most important public policy issues facing the people of the state, according to recent California public opinion polling. California voters will want to know the policy solutions that are proposed by the candidates running for federal office, including the president, the Senate seat, and their House of Representatives seat.
Is migration being linked with other policy issues?
Many Californians say in public opinion polling that they are concerned about the impacts of population and environmental issues on the future quality of life and economic vitality of the state.
Are regional dynamics factored into electoral discussions on migration?
Migration has different implications for California voters living in the urban coastal areas than in the inland agricultural areas. The state also has distinctly “blue” and “red regions where political attitudes vary sharply on immigration and U.S. border policies.
Is migration purely an issue for the national or federal government, or is it a hot topic for subnational debates as well?
Solid majorities of Californians today say that immigrants are a benefit rather than a burden to California because of their hard work and job skills. But partisans are deeply divided on the impacts of immigration and policy solutions, thus assuring its place as a hot topic for debates.
If you were to select a single quote or image to capture the role migration will play in California’s election this year, what would it be?
Migration is one of the most important issues for vote preferences and turnout in California’s election this year where the fifty-two House seats will help determine the party in control of Congress.