Filipino American political participation

ABSTRACT

This paper describes initial findings from our ongoing research on Filipino American political participation. We seek to understand why, despite its long history and considerable number in the U.S.A., the group remains politically invisible. We interviewed 33 politically active community members to gain information and insight on how and why Filipinos engage politically (or not). Most of the interviewees indicated that the main mode of participation among Filipinos is voting, and that they tend not to support political campaigns with financial contributions or volunteer time, which may partly explain the group’s lack of visibility and clout. Interview respondents discussed various influences on Filipino engagement: their family and peers, their personal relationship with a political candidate, the alignment of personal values with a candidate’s values, the church and other community organizations, and their economic interests. We believe that these factors are not mutually exclusive and additional research is necessary to understand how these various influences interact to motivate Filipinos. We also learned about barriers to political participation and share suggestions on ways Filipinos can gain visibility. Our study provides information and understanding of Filipino American political participation which may inform future research and theorizing on their political incorporation.

KEYWORDS:

• Filipino American
• political participation
• Filipino invisibility
• Filipino vote
• Asian American
• Asian American politics

View correction statement:

Correction

Acknowledgement

The authors would like to thank the alumni of University of Maryland’s Filipino American studies classes for transcribing interviews: Andrew Aggabao, John Dagdag, Andrea Dauz, Ateela Koraganie, Joyce Rasing, Carrington Reeves, Jonathan Reyes, and Joel Vazquez.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1 The authors are choosing to use the words assimilated or assimilation throughout the paper because we reference assimilation theories and because of U.S. colonial policies. We are aware there are similar words such as integrated/integration, but any alternative carries nuances that deserve a longer examination than we have space for in this paper and we wish to allay any confusion that may result from using various terms interchangeably.

2 After Chinese (4.9 million) and Asian Indian (4.0 million).

3 A study by the Pew Research Center (2013) showed that 57.8% of recent Filipino immigrants (3 years prior to the surveyed year) already had a college degree. This is similar to Chinese (56.1%), higher than Vietnamese (16.7%), and lower than Japanese (67.6%), Korean (69.5%), and Indian (81.0%). Moreover, the proportion of degree-holding recent Filipino immigrants has been increasing since 1980 when it was 45.4, to –48.1% in 1990, 52.8% in 2000, and 57.8% in 2010 (Pew Research Center 2013). This means that educational attainment statistics may overstate the accomplishments of U.S.-born Filipinos.

4 Asian Americans tend to live in high-cost urban and suburban areas, whereas the white population is dispersed in both urban and rural settings (Cohen 2012). Moreover, when comparing Asian Americans and whites with the same level of educational attainment, Asian Americans earn less (Austin 2012).

5 Founded in 1972, Samahang Pilipino is a student organization at UCLA.

6 The National Federation of Filipino American Associations.

7 Literally, kababayan is Tagalog for compatriot. Among Filipinos in the diaspora, it means a fellow Filipino.

8 Ferdinand Marcos was president of the Philippines (1965–1986). He declared martial law in 1972.