Girma Parris, Ph.D. – Visiting Assistant Professor of Political Science

Dear Colleagues:

Since before the turn of the millennium, many commentators have argued that long-term demographic change, especially the shrinking proportion of “white” voters, would create a Democratic majority in U.S. politics. This analysis explicitly referred back to Kevin Phillips’ 1969 The Emerging Republican Majority, which argued that the Democratic embrace of civil rights would move white southerners and some of the northern white working class, and so the balance of power, into the Republican column. The Republican choice to become (or allow themselves to be seen as) mainly a “white” party was in spite of arguments among some Republican campaign professionals, especially after the 2012 election, that the party needed to increase its appeal to growing demographic groups. In spite of such appeals, the nomination, election, and subsequent domination of the party by President Donald Trump appear to have doubled down on making the Republicans a party dominated by white voters – and the Democrats something different.

President Biden’s victory might seem to suggest that the demographic pattern continues to favor the Democrats. So does the fact that Democrats have won the national presidential vote in seven of the last eight elections – a dominance that has never occurred, for either party, before. Georgia’s flip into the Democratic column represents the Democratic dream of how the demographic dynamics can develop.

And yet… there are still a heck of a lot more whites, by census definition, than all other ethnic groups put together. We are a long way from the point at which most voters will not define themselves as “white” on census forms. From this perspective, being defined as the “white party” – if it means the Democrats are defined as the “not white party” – could actually help Republicans – as political scientist Larry Bartels pointed out in 2014. The Constitution currently gives Republicans (or rural whites) disproportionate odds of controlling the Senate, while gerrymanders, which can be self-perpetuating, favor the Republicans for winning the House.

Moreover, the concept of “white” or, conversely, “minority” is rather plastic. Lots of Americans might not have thought Jews or Italians “white” a century ago (as shown by the politics of the 1924 Immigration Act). Now those groups are “majority,” and largely see themselves as such (though some Jews might be getting worried). Similarly, as has been widely noted, a noticeable portion of Hispanic-heritage voters shifted towards Trump in 2020. This was even or perhaps a bit because of his position on immigration in places like the Rio Grande valley, but was definitely not limited to highly-publicized examples such as the Mexican border and Miami-Dade County. One should not assume that as groups become more assimilated into the mainstream economy, they will not move to the right like many immigrant groups before them.

And yet… it would be hard to move into a Republican party that is attacking you (though that might not matter if your vote is successfully denied). And the demographic trends have some other dimensions. One is that religious affiliation and commitment appear to be declining quickly. That is not a good sign for a party that has much stronger support among more-religious voters – though it appears to also be a result of the tight link between the Republicans and some religious groups driving moderates away from religion. Another is that Republican emphasis on white identity has been part of the arguably autocratic radicalization of a substantial portion of the party’s supporters – as Larry Bartels argued in another paper, even before January 6.

So, after all that background – what should we think about the Republican party and demographic change? Join us as Professor Parris, who teaches both our introduction to U.S. politics and our course on “Race, Immigration, and American Political Development,” gives his perspective on one of the major factors in our country’s past, present, and future.

Signing In

This semester’s discussions will begin at 12:30 p.m., the usual time. The meeting will be set up as from Noon to 2:00 p.m., so people are not all signing in at the same time and to allow for the discussion to run a bit long. Each week we will send out this newsletter with information about the topic. It will also include a link to register (for free) for the discussion. Every Monday the same information will be posted on our website: fridaylunch.case.edu.

If you register, you will automatically receive from the Zoom system the link to join the meeting. This week’s link for registration is:

https://cwru.zoom.us/meeting/register/tJMvd–hrDsoHtwswW9f_LuWvrdHyBYePa-C

After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the meeting.

Please e-mail padg@case.edu if you have questions about how the Zoom version of the Friday Lunch will work or any other suggestions. Or call at 216 368-2426 and we’ll try to get back to you. We are very pleased to be partnering this semester with the Siegal Lifelong Learning Program to share information about the discussions.

Best wishes for safety and security for you and yours,

Joe White
Luxenberg Family Professor of Public Policy and Director, Center for Policy Studies

About Our Guest

Girma Parris is a Visiting Assistant Professor in the Department of Political Science at Case Western Reserve University. His research focuses on race, ethnic relations, issues of race and immigration in education, and comparative immigrant integration.

Dr. Parris completed his dissertation, “Why the Turks Have it Better: A Comparative, Historical Analysis of U.S. Bilingual Education and Islamic Religious Instruction in Germany, 1965-2010,” in the Department of Political Science at Johns Hopkins University. Dr. Parris’ dissertation looks at two issues in political incorporation through a focus on explaining their respective policy trajectories since the 1960s. The study treats Islamic religious instruction in Germany and US bilingual education as comparable issues of political incorporation and as issue areas central to the respective national debates over national cultural identity. The dissertation investigates how the history, politics, and institutional structures of the U.S. and Germany affect the respective prospects for immigrant integration of the main immigrant target groups of these policies—immigrants of Mexican origin in the U.S. and those of Turkish descent in Germany.

Schedule of Friday Lunch Upcoming Topics and Speakers:

May 7: New Normal? First Thoughts on Life After (?) the COVID-19 Pandemic. A discussion with Joe White, Luxenberg Family Professor of Public Policy.