This book examines the dynamics of the presence of Latino candidates relative to Latino electorates' responses, that is, turnout, candidate choice, and ethnically targeted mobilization. Matt A. Barreto uses multiple methods and data sources to explore these relationships. In doing so, he raises the following question: “Specifically does the presence of Latino candidates mobilize the Latino electorate resulting in elevated turnout and strong support for the co-ethnic candidates?” (p. 5).

Barreto has established himself as a major contributor in the areas of the political behavior, public opinion, and survey research of Latinos and other minorities. The integral concepts to this research effort are shared ethnicity, identity politics, mobilizing forces, voter support, and ethnic group consciousness. He develops an electoral model of co-ethnic electoral behavior that applies both when a Latino candidate is present and when one is not. If one is present, Latino co-ethnics will demonstrate political attitudes and behaviors in the following ways: 1) They will be more politically aware and interested in the election and the candidates; 2) they will more likely be contacted by co-ethnic campaigns; 3) they will determine the group benefits of supporting a co-ethnic candidate; and 4) they will be more psychologically engaged in the electoral process. According to Barreto, Latino voters who have higher levels of ethnic identity will be more likely to support and vote for the co-ethnic candidate. This support can transcend party affiliation, leading voters to support the co-ethnic candidate even if their party identification is different from the candidate's party affiliation.

The evidence provided by Ethnic Cues includes elite interviews, exit surveys, ecological analysis based upon voting records and demographic data at the precinct level, and general surveys of Latino populations. By means of different modes of analysis, Barreto's results serve to identify the linkages between co-ethnic candidates and co-ethnic electoral behaviors. The author concludes that the presence of Latino candidates has the mobilization effect of increasing both Latino turnout and Latino support for these candidates. The success of mobilization efforts by co-ethnic candidates that target Latino voters will depend on viable or competitive Latino candidates and a growing Latino electorate.

Barreto states early that “[n]o comprehensive body of empirical evidence has suggested that ethnicity is salient for Latinos and no coherent theory exists for separating out the role of co-ethnic candidates and the role of party affiliation” (p. 4). He adds that a “handful of studies have examined the connection between ethnicity and political participation, [and] they [have] repeatedly concluded no direct link exists for Latino voters” (p. 8). In other words, Barreto asserts from the outset that his work is groundbreaking in identifying both a link between Latino ethnicity and voter behavior and the specific ways in which Latino voter behavior is affected by the presence or absence of co-ethnic candidates. His reference to the “handful of studies” that previously explored the same set of issues is a minimal acknowledgment of a long-standing and well-established body of research literature. Voter polarization studies, directly tied to voting rights research, have demonstrated that the absence of a “co-ethnic candidate” has had a depressing effect on co-ethnic voter turnout. In addition, this body of research has demonstrated that the role of political orientations, such as political interests, efficacy, trust, and so on, have been problematic for minority communities. Issues of political representation, lack of policy responsiveness, and the inability to elect candidates of this community's choice have indeed been a major part of the voter polarization research that Barreto sets aside. Voter polarization studies have also examined crossover partisan voting of minority voters. In direct contrast to Barreto's claim, there already exists a great amount of evidence indicating that ethnicity is a powerful determinant for minority voter choice.

Indeed, Baretto's suggestion that, prior to his work and other contemporaries' research, the linkage between co-ethnic candidates and co-ethnic voting support had not been analyzed is unfortunate. His failure to recognize and integrate the findings from voter polarization studies and voting rights research undermines his own research project.

The author contends that a sense of shared ethnicity and ethnic group consciousness are central for the mobilization of Latino voters. That is, possessing a sense of group affiliation and affinity that is coupled with an evaluative and collective orientation toward group empowerment and change can be a catalytic combination for greater levels of political engagement among Latinos. While he is clear on this point, he is much less clear in defining and distinguishing among his variables. As it stands, both the presence of a co-ethnic candidate and the response of Latino voters are presented as the result of the mobilization efforts of Latino candidates. The resulting analysis does demonstrate gains in turnout and Latino voter support for co-ethnic candidates. Yet direct measures of mobilization are not part of the analysis (see Table 3.1, p. 55). One assumes that co-ethnic candidates do engage in targeting Latino voters (see the chapter with elite interviews). At the same time, what these campaigns did, how much investment took place, and the differential campaign strategies for voter segments is not well known. The presence of a co-ethnic candidate acts as the surrogate for the mobilization factor in these elections. Hence, we are looking at the indirect effects of mobilization. At the same time, despite the lack of use of direct measures, Barreto's results serve as a good empirical base for his conclusions

In Chapter 2, the author lays out the role and indicators of ethnic identification and consciousness with the elements of fluidity (i.e., changing demographics, antinativist movements, and legislative initiatives, etc.) and social content (i.e., political and historical status of Latinos in the area, status of intergroup relations, etc). The concepts of ethnic identification and ethnic group consciousness are complex and interrelated, yet as separate concepts and measures, they require greater clarity in terms of the distinctions between them and the way they work together than is provided by Barreto. His bases for ethnic identification include, but are not limited to: heritage, language, immigrant experiences, and perceived discrimination. Linkages between Latinos and co-ethnic candidates are described by surname, policy stances, and other ethnic cues. The party factor is discussed as a direct effect, and ethnicity is viewed as an indirect effect on voter choice. Within Barreto's framework, evidence of Latino voter crossover from “normal” partisan affiliation would indicate an increase in the extent of ethnicity's effects both directly and indirectly. It is less clear within the context of local nonpartisan elections how his analysis demonstrates the partisanship affect on Latino mobilization (for example, Chicago's elections are nonpartisan). The literature on governmental structures and voter participation and choice would have been useful here.

The accounts of several mayoral elections are interesting. The reader is provided with insights as to the ways in which candidates perceived and carried out campaign strategies based upon their understanding and connections with their co-ethnic community. It also illustrates how party is muted from the voter choice process. We see the specifics of campaign strategies to attract co-ethnic voters: co-ethnic staffing, Spanish media, precinct targeting, and so on. It is interesting that where Latino candidates are present on the ballot, in a majority-minority district, the turnout among non-Latinos is not affected. Other research has found that when minority and nonminority communities compete for elected office, a co-ethnic candidate can raise awareness and increase the probability for higher turnout among minority voters, and nonminority voting turnout is also depressed. It is unclear if the findings view intergroup competition and respective groups' turnout as nonissues or as infrequent occurrences.

Barreto presents an experimental design in which two candidates are distinguished by surname and policy statements. His primary concern with this aspect of his analysis is the sorting out of effects of ethnicity and policy stances. That is, are the prospective voters reacting to the candidates' surnames, their policy statements, or both? If the treatment effect cannot be isolated, it would seem that there is an indication that ethnicity is playing a role, but it is less clear what is specifically driving their co-ethnic choice. For example, voter response to a co-ethnic candidate could be based on ethnic identity, surname, preference for a co-ethnic, ability to speak Spanish, and/or policy preference congruence. These represent a number of different ways in which voter choice is affected by the presence of a co-ethnic candidate.

Barreto then looks at a series of elections in which several Latino candidates are running for different offices in overlapping jurisdictions. The “mobilization effects” that occur when several Latino candidates run for federal- and state-level offices would suggest some cumulative effects of their races, or a multiplier effect, and/or coordinated collaborative efforts of mobilization strategies. The presence of multiple Latino candidates satisfies the author's contention concerning co-ethnic mobilization, yet there are no direct measures of specific mobilization activities. As a result, it is unclear what these mobilization efforts entail. He acknowledges the multiplicities of existing connectors when he says that “because of the plethora of community networks, ethnic candidates can easily locate avenues through which to attempt to engage and mobilize Latino voters” (p. 127). Yet he does not identify detailed delineation of these mobilizing connectors.

Barreto concludes that the mobilizing effects of Latino candidates produced higher turnout and higher levels of co-ethnic candidate support. This pattern is replicated for African American voters and candidates, and so exploring coalitional possibilities across communities of color are mentioned. The author acknowledges that there have been both successful and unsuccessful experiments along these lines. My previous mention of the voter polarization literature is germane as the findings in this book are consistent with the findings of those works. The author, by working with diverse data sources, is able to creatively construct variables/measures that try to link concept to operationalization. The claims of mobilization effects are couched as indirect measures or latent variables through the presence of Latino candidates.

Some suggestions for this author and others would include the following: 1) Reference to a greater number of Latino candidates should be measured as growth rate of Latino candidates, rather than as absolute increases; 2) determination of what is a viable Latino candidate would require looking beyond the mere presence of Latino candidate(s); 3) the 2010 Latino freshman congressional class are Republicans (some defeated Latino Democrats), and so examining crossover voting and non-Latino turnout would be a good project; 4) refining the types of ethnic cues and linking them to levels of shared ethnicity and the differentials effects among types of Latino voter segments tests mobilizing effects directly; 5) a broader examination of non-Latino turnout and presence of Latino candidates; and 6) adding local governmental candidates would capture a fuller range of the political environment in which Latino voters find themselves.

Ethnic Cues takes the reader through the contemporary literature on co-ethnic candidates and co-ethnic voters and uses a variety of contexts and data to connect the continued importance of ethnicity and political behaviors. Baretto does a good job extending our empirical and conceptual knowledge of Latino electoral politics through his multimethod approach, inclusivity of electoral context, multiple office-level competition, and Latino group-identity dynamics.