A Muted Voice? Red Tape and Latino Political Participation

Abstract

ABSTRACTThis paper examines Latinos' perceptions of red tape in government policies and whether this impacts their political attitudes and participation. This research argues that, under the guise of national security rhetoric, policies and red tape disproportionately affecting Latinos in the United States have increased and may be linked to Latino political participation. This may account for variation in participation rates among Latinos that is not explained through the traditional socioeconomic (SES) model of citizen participation. This research uses the conceptual framework of Moynihan's and Herd's Model of Red Tape and Citizenship Impact (2010) and Schneider and Ingram's Theory of Policy Design (1997) to emphasize political participation is shaped from lessons learned through public policies, interaction with government entities, and experiences with red tape. Qualitative data was collected among Latinos residing along the southern international border of Arizona and New York. Findings suggest Latinos are not monolithic. Although Latino participants in both states perceived a deliberate targeting of Latinos through policies and red tape, subgroups emerged based on generational cohort, foreign or native born, immigration status, English proficiency, affiliation with communitybased organizations, and skin color.Key words: red tape, citizenship, policy design, Latino rights, Latino immigrant rights, Latino political participation, social justiceINTRODUCTIONNot all rules are red tape, and not all rules are bad; as Herbert Kaufman (1977) said, One's man's red tape is another's procedural safeguard. Still, the concept of red tape tends to carry a negative connotation because it consists of rules, regulations, and procedures in place [that] entail a compliance burden but do not advance the legitimate purpose the rules were intended to serve (Bozeman, 2000, p.12). Red tape is inherent to bureaucracy, commonly characterized as being wasteful and being slow to act, a hindrance to innovation. Kaufman (1977) is responsible for seminal work on red tape in public organizations; at the onset of this line of research, he characterized red tape as too many constraints, that many of the constraints seem pointless, and that the agencies seem to take forever to act (p. 4-5). Bozeman (1993, p. 275) reinforced this years later8 In common usage, red tape has a strongly negative tenor... red tape is not only of the 'most enduring and universal rejection symbols in the English language,' but it is a 'classic condensation symbol in that it incorporates a vast array of subjectively held feelings and expresses them succinctly.'Within the past 20 years, the literature on bureaucratic red tape in the public sector has become exceedingly richer; the sheer number of articles on red tape indicate a growing interest in the subject as it is a key characteristic of American public administration, and scholars have embarked on the study of the concept from a variety of perspectives (for example, see Bozeman, 1993; Bozeman & Scott, 1996; Pandey & Scott, 2002; Bozeman, 2000; DeHart-Davis, 2009).More recently in this dialogue, however, it has come to light how the study of red tape has neglected certain areas inherent to a democratic government, specifically its impact on basic citizenship (Moynihan & Herd, 2010, p. 655). The literature has evolved to acknowledge that a dimension of red tape is its unequal distribution of compliance burdens. Societal groups can be targeted with red tape; this can manifest itself in cumbersome and complex requirements that may add additional costs (both monetary and non-monetary alike), and groups can be adversely affected when access to their citizenship rights is challenged (Moynihan & Herd, 2010; Brodkin & Majmundar, 2010).STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEMBurdensome policies designed or implemented using extensive layers of complex rules play an important role in how citizens access fundamental citizenship rights and in whether citizens become either politically engaged or withdrawn. …

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 6 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.