Machine Bosses, Reformers, and the Politics of Ethnic and Minority Incorporation
OxfordHandbooksOnline
MachineBosses,Reformers,andthePoliticsofEthnicand
MinorityIncorporation StevenP.ErieandVladimirKogan
TheOxfordHandbookofAmericanImmigrationandEthnicity
EditedbyRonaldH.Bayor
OnlinePublicationDate: Aug
2014
Subject: History,HistoryoftheUSA,SocialandCultural
History
DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199766031.013.018
AbstractandKeywords
ThroughoutAmericanhistory,politicalpartyorganizationshaveservedbothaseffectiveforcesofpolitical
incorporationofnewlyarrivingimmigrantsandaspowerfulbarrierstofullerrepresentationforminoritygroups.This
chapterexamineshowurbanpoliticalleadersandinstitutionshaveshapedthepoliticalemergenceorsuppression
ofethnicgroupsfromtheCivilWareratotheearlytwenty-firstcentury.WithparticularfocusonNewYorkand
Chicago,itcriticallyreassessestheconventionalparadigmofbig-citypartybossesasethnicintegratorsfashioning
andrewardingmultiethnic“rainbowcoalitions”andofpoliticalreformersasdefendersofnative-bornProtestants.
Keywords:Machinepolitics,partybosses,urbanpolitics,politicalparties,immigration,politicalparticipation,ethnicpolitics,political
reform
Politicalmachines,thebosseswhocontrolledthem,andthereformerswhofoughtagainstthemhavebeena
mainstayofAmerica’sethnichistory.Acomparisonbetweenurbanpoliticsinthenineteenth,twentieth,andearly
twenty-firstcenturyprovidesawaytounderstandAmericanethnicpolitics.Doestheincorporationofimmigrants
andminoritiesintheearlytwenty-firstcenturyfollowthesamepoliticaldynamicsasinearlierperiodsofAmerican
history?Or,havetheprocessesandcharacterofethnicpoliticalincorporationfundamentallychangedovertime?
Answeringbothofthesequestionsrequiresareconsiderationofthepivotalroleplayedbyurbanpoliticalleaders
andinstitutionsinshapingthepoliticalemergenceandsuppressionofvariousimmigrantandethnicgroups
throughoutAmericanpoliticalhistory.Althoughmanyscholarlyaccountsidentifybig-citypartybossesasethnic
integrators—fashioningandrewardingmultiethnic“rainbowcoalitions”—andpaintpoliticalreformersasdefenders
ofnative-bornProtestants,thepoliticalrecordpointstoamuchmorenuancedandcomplicatedpatternofracial
andethnicpolitics.
NewYorkCityandChicago,twowell-studiedcitieswithstrongmachineandethnicpoliticaltraditions,providegood
exemplars.Inthenineteenthcentury,NewYorkpoliticianWilliamTweed(commonlyknownasBossTweed)built
TammanyHall—theexecutivecommitteeofNewYorkCity’sDemocraticPartyandaknownhotbedofpolitical
corruption—throughthepoliticalmobilizationandincorporationofIrishAmericans.InTweed’swake,theIrishfirmly
controlledTammanyHallandmuchofcitypoliticsuntilthe1930s,onlypartiallyincorporatinglater-arriving
immigrantgroups.Inthetwentiethcentury,NewYork’sfamedreformmayor,FiorelloLaGuardia(1934–1945),
defeatedIrish-controlledTammanyHall,inpartbyappealingtoandincludingJews,ItalianAmericans,and,toa
muchlesserextent,AfricanAmericansinhispoliticalcoalition.
InChicago,legendaryChicagoMayorRichardJ.Daley(1955–1976)establishedthecity’spowerfulDemocratic
machinewhileprovidingfewaccommodationstothecity’sAfricanAmericancommunity.Theseareamongthe
leadingexamplesofnineteenthandtwentiethcenturybossandreformrule.Intheearlytwenty-firstcentury,urban
politicscontinuestoparallelmanyofthesedynamics,withNewYork’sAfro-Caribbeancommunityconfronting
Page 1 of 12
PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2015. All Rights
Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in Oxford
Handbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy).
Subscriber: Ohio State University; date: 03 December 2015
Machine Bosses, Reformers, and the Politics of Ethnic and Minority Incorporation
challengesofleadershipdevelopmentandpoliticalinclusioninthefaceofrear-guardresistancefromtheremnants
oftheonce-powerfulboroughpartyorganizations.
BossTweed,TammanyHall,andtheIrish
WilliamM.TweedwasanearlyleaderofTammanyHall,thelegendarypoliticalmachinethatplayedamajorrolein
NewYorkCitypoliticsfromthemid-nineteenthcenturytothe1960s.TammanyHallcontrolledDemocraticParty
nominationsandpatronageinManhattanfromtheCivilWaruntiltheelectionofreformmayorFiorelloLaGuardiain
1933.Despiteabriefresurgenceinthe1950s,Tammanycollapsedinthe1960s.
Tweed,ofScotchIrishancestry,hadbecomeheadofTammanyHallin1863andconsolidatedcontrolovercity
governmentbyearly1869.Thereignoftheso-called,“TweedRing,”withtheboss’spoliticalalliesappointedto
keypublicoffices,wasshortlived.In1871,Tweedwasarrestedandlaterconvictedofstealinganestimated$25
millionto$45million—between$1billionand$2billionin2010dollars—orevenmorefromNewYorkCity’streasury
throughfraudandcorruption.
TheinitialresearchonBossTweed’slegacyand,moregenerally,nineteenth-centuryTammanyHall,wasfirmly
rootedintheearlytwentieth-centurymuckrakingtraditionandfocusedonthetechniquesandepicscaleofthe
TweedRing’sgraftandcorruption.Bythe1960s,however,amorepositivescholarlyviewofTweedandTammany
Hallbegantoemerge.SeymourJ.Mandelbaum’sBossTweed’sNewYork1invokedcommunicationsand
organizationtheorytoshowhowTweedorganizedandcentralizedapoliticalmarketplace,exchangingpatronage
jobsforthepoliticalsupportandvotesofnewlyenfranchisedimmigrantvoters.
ThenewparadigmplacedBossTweedandurbanpoliticalmachinesatthecenterofeffortstoincorporatethefirst
generationofEuropeanimmigrants,particularlytheIrish,intoAmericandemocracy.Between1846and1855,1.4
millionIrishimmigrantsescapingthepotatofaminecametotheUnitedStates.Thoughnearlyallwereruralcottars
andlaborers,morethan90percentofthemigrantswouldsettleincities.Theimmigrantswerefieldlaborers,not
farmers,inasingle-cropeconomythathadfailed.Becauseofthetransatlanticpacketboatroutes,mostofthe
immigrantslandedintheeasternportcitiesofNewYork,Boston,andPhiladelphiaandweretoopoortomove
inland.TheIrishdiasporadramaticallyalteredthecomplexionofthesenortherncities.By1850,therewere133,730
Irish-borninhabitantsofNewYorkCity,26percentofthetotalpopulation.2
TheIrishmigrationsoontookpoliticalform.Themachinerepresentedthedominanturbanpoliticalinstitutionofthe
latenineteenthcentury.AssistedbyearlypartyleaderssuchasBossTweed,theIrishbecamearguablyitsleading
architects.By1890,Irishbossesranmostofthebig-cityDemocraticmachinesconstructedinthepost-CivilWar
era.PartyorganizationssuchasTammanyHallorganizedandlinkedthe“input”and“output”dimensionsofthe
localpoliticalsystem.Ontheinputside,precinctcaptainsmobilizedtheelectorate.Localbossescontrolledparty
caucusesandconventionsandthusnominationstolocaloffices.Bycontrollingvotersandofficeholders,the
machinecouldcontroltheoutputsideofpolitics—patronagejobs,contracts,franchises,andservices.The
machinemaintaineditselfinpowerbyskillfullydeployingtheseresources.Bossespurchasedvotersupportwith
individualeconomicinducementssuchasoffersofpublicjobsorservices.
Advancingaculturaltheory,DanielPatrickMoynihan,3 asenatorfromthestateofNewYork(1977–2001),argued
thaturbanmachineslikeTammanyHallweretransplantsofvillagelifeinIreland.OtherscholarssuchasMartin
Shefter4 focusedontheroleofentrepreneurialpoliticalleaders.PartybosseslikeTweedbuiltcentralizedmachines
bysuccessfullyresolvingtheorganization’smaintenanceneeds—creatingawinningsupplyofvotes,rewarding
anddiscipliningtheparty’shenchmen,controllingpublicofficials,andsecuringadequatepartyfinancingand
patronage.
BossTweed’sprodigiouseffortsatincorporatingandrewardingpoorIrishimmigrantsarewelldocumented.First,he
crankedupTammany’snaturalizationmill.Duringhisshorttenure,thecity’selectoratenearlydoubledinsize,from
71,000to135,000voters.Under“HonestJohn”Kelly,Tweed’ssuccessor,Tammany’scitizenshipfactory
continuedtochurnoutnow-eligiblevoters.ByKelly’sdeathin1886,Tammanyhadnaturalizednearly80percent
ofthecity’sIrish,German,andother“old”(westernEuropean)immigrants.Thesenewcitizensswelledtheranksof
machinevotersandhelpedconsolidateTammany’sholdoverthepartyandthecity.
Page 2 of 12
PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2015. All Rights
Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in Oxford
Handbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy).
Subscriber: Ohio State University; date: 03 December 2015
Machine Bosses, Reformers, and the Politics of Ethnic and Minority Incorporation
Duringthisformativestageofmachinebuilding,Tammanyandotherbig-cityDemocraticPartyorganizationsdid
morethanmobilizeimmigrantvoters.Theyalsosubstantiallyincreasedpublicspendinginordertorewardthese
supporters.BossTweed,forexample,embarkedonaprograminthelate1860sofmassivedeficitfinancinginpart
toenlargethecitypayroll.Acontemporaryobserverestimatedthattherewere12,000to15,000membersof
Tweed’s“ShinyHatBrigade,”theholdersofnewlycreatedmunicipalsinecures.UnderTweed,thecity’sdebt
nearlytripled,risingfrom$36millionin1868to$136millionattheendof1870.By1868,Tweedcontrolledstateas
wellascitygovernment.Hebroadenedhisappealtoimmigrantandworking-classvoters,suchastheIrish,by
statesubsidiestoCatholicschoolsandtoreligiouscharities.
AsTammanyHallandtheotherbig-cityDemocraticmachinesconsolidatedpower,theybegantoturntheirback
onthe“rainbow”approachtocoalitionbuildingandpublicspending.Toreducethethreatofmiddle-classand
businesstaxrevolt,post-TweedTammanyHall,nowfirmlyunderIrishcontrol,fashionedallianceswiththebusiness
community.Whatensuedwasalatenineteenth-centuryeraofmunicipalretrenchmentaspercapitapublic
spendinganddebtfell.Themachine’smonopolystatusandmoreconservativefiscalpoliciesdidnotbodewellfor
laterarrivingimmigrants.AnentrenchedTammanyHallwouldnolongerquicklyturnoutnewlymintedvoters.
Between1886and1897,underbossRichardCroker,thecity’selectorategrewatone-halftherateithadunderhis
predecessor“HonestJohn”Kelly(1872–1886)—33percentasopposedto68percent.5
Theparadigmofbig-citybossesandmachinesasethnicintegratorsbestfitsthecaseofthenineteenth-century
Irishimmigrants.FortheIrish,therewereOldWorldrootstotheirpoliticalskills.InIreland,thelateeighteenthcenturyandearlynineteenth-centurystruggletorepealthePenalLaws,whichhadreducedIrishCatholicsto
penuryandpowerlessness,broughttheIrishgroupsolidarityandexperiencewithmasspoliticalorganization.The
Irishwouldalsobenefitpoliticallyfromthespreadofthenationaleducationalsystemintheearlynineteenth
century.TheproportionofthepopulationwhospokeEnglishrosefromanestimated50percentin1800to95
percentin1851.YetthedevelopmentoftheAmericanpartysystemalsoshapedthecharacterofIrishAmerican
politicalparticipation.TheIrishaffectedbythefaminearrivedinthelate1840sandearly1850sasthepartieswere
enteringtheirmodernormobilizationphase.UrbanIrishimmigrantsbenefitedfromthefiercecompetitionamong
urbanDemocraticPartyfactionsintheirelectoralcontestswithWhigsandRepublicans.
NewImmigrantsandtheRiseofLaGuardia’sReformCoalition
Duringthelasttwodecadesofthenineteenthcentury,growingeconomicandpoliticalhardshipsinpartsofEurope
transformedtheethniccompositionofmigrantsarrivinginAmericancities.Whileearlierwavesofimmigrationwere
dominatedbyIrishandGermanfamilies,newcomerscameincreasinglyfromsouthernandeasternEuropeduring
thisperiod.In1890,Jews—fromRussiaandPoland—andItaliansrepresentedoneintwentyNewYorkresidents;
overthenextfourdecades,thefigurewouldriseto36percentofthetotal,ormorethanoneinthreeNewYorkers.
AlthoughtheimmigrantsgenerallysupportedDemocratsandvotedforTammanyHallcandidates,ItaliansandJews
wereclearlythemachine’sjuniorpartners.ThesegroupsreceivedfarmorelimitedpublicbenefitsthanIrish
supportersand,partlyasaresult,maintainedweakertiestothepartyorganization.Thisarrangementrepresented
adeliberate,andinmanywaysrational,decisiononthepartofTammanybosses.AmongItalians,forexample,the
growingpopulationcountsgreatlyoverestimatedthegroup’selectoralimportanceduetoverylownaturalization
ratesamongItalianimmigrants.AlargenumberofItalianimmigrantsweretemporaryworkerswhoeventually
movedbacktoEurope.
UnlikeitsenergeticeffortstoincorporateIrishandGermanimmigrants,thenow-entrenchedManhattanmachine
hadfewincentivestoinvestresourcesinhelpingItalianimmigrantsattaincitizenshipandthusbecomeeligible
voters.AlthoughItalianswonsomelow-levelpositionswithintheorganization,Italianvotersreceivedsubstantially
fewerbenefitsinexchangefortheirsupportcomparedtothemachine’scoreconstituency,theIrish.
Bycontrast,JewsposedaconsiderablygreaterthreattothecontinuedelectoraldominanceoftheTammany
machineandthuswonsubstantiallygreaterrecognition.Overall,Jewishvotersweremorenumerouscomparedto
theirItaliancounterpartsandwerealsofarlessreliablyDemocratic,creatingaswingbloclargeenoughto
potentiallyhelpunseatthemachineinastronganti-Tammanyyear.DuringthetenureofpowerfulbossCharles
FrancisMurphy(1902–1924),TammanydiligentlycourtedJewishvoters.BossMurphyassiduouslyrootedoutantiSemitismwithinthepartywhileTammany-linkedpoliticiansinthestatelegislatureprovidedstrongsymbolicsupport
6
Page 3 of 12
PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2015. All Rights
Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in Oxford
Handbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy).
Subscriber: Ohio State University; date: 03 December 2015
Machine Bosses, Reformers, and the Politics of Ethnic and Minority Incorporation
fortheJewishcommunitythroughtheintroductionoflegislationoutlawingdiscrimination.6 However,intheireffortto
attractingJewishvoters,neitherBossMurphynorhissuccessorsattemptedtoredistributepoliticalresourcesaway
fromtheIrish.AlthoughthemachinehelpedmanyJewsfindwell-payinggovernmentjobs,thesewereprimarilynew
positionscreatedthroughthedramaticexpansionofthecity’spublicschoolsystemduringthisperiodratherthana
reallocationofspotspreviouslyfilledbyIrishworkers.
Thistwo-tieredcoalition—IrishatthecorewithJewsandItaliansenjoyingtheresidualbenefits—helpedpreserve
theelectoraldominanceoftheTammanymachinethroughthe1920s.However,bytheearly1930s,thelocal
DemocraticPartyfacedseriouschallengestoitscontinuedrule.First,highlypublicizedscandalstriggeredaseries
ofinvestigationsthatexposeddeepcorruptionwithintheorganization,stirringanti-Tammanysentiment.TheGreat
Depressionalsostrainedcityfinances,triggeringdeepretrenchmentinthecitybudget.InanefforttoprotectIrish
positions,cityleadersconcentratedthecutsonthepublicschools,hittingJewsparticularlyhard.Finally,national
presidentialcampaignsthatfeaturedFranklinDelanoRooseveltandAlSmith,thefirstCatholictorunforpresident,
ledtosubstantialmobilizationandparticipationamongnewimmigrants,Italiansinparticular.Thesenewvotersdid
nothavethesametiestothelocalDemocraticmachine,nordidtheyenjoyaccesstothesubstantialbenefitsthat
dependedonTammany’scontinuedelectoralsuccess.
Collectively,scandal,retrenchment,andrecordturnoutdramaticallyweakenedthemachine’selectoralfoundation
anddepriveditofkeyresourcesneededtosustainitspoliticaloperation.In1933,Tammany-supportedMayorJohn
PatrickO’Brien—firstelectedtothejobayearearlieraftercorruptionscandalshadforcedoutanothermachinebackedincumbent—wasdefeatedbyformerCongressmanFiorelloHenryLaGuardiainathree-wayrace.Although
LaGuardiawasanominalRepublican,hecamefromtheshrinkingprogressivewingofthepartyandwasastrong
supporterofRoosevelt’sNewDeal.LaGuardiarosetoprominencein1917whenhedefeatedanotherTammany
candidateandwonacongressionalseatlongcontrolledbythepartymachine.
HispersonalbackgroundandpoliticalhistorymadeLaGuardiaaparticularlyeffectivecandidatetowooJewishand
Italianvoters.BorntoItalianimmigrantparents,LaGuardiawashalf-JewishandcouldspeakYiddish.Duringhistime
inCongress,LaGuardiamadehimselfastrongadvocateforimmigrants,opposingeffortstoenactnewbarriersto
naturalizationandimmigration.HehadalsoopposedProhibitionandformanyyearsworkedwithgrassrootsgroups
tonaturalizeItalianimmigrantsandregisterthemtovote.7 UnlikeTammanyHall,whichsaworganizedlaborasa
threattoitspowerandheavilycrackeddownonunions,LaGuardiawasfriendlywithbothunionsandNewYork’s
SocialistParty,twogroupswithclosetiestotheJewishcommunity.Perhapsmostcriticaltothe1933election,La
Guardiaalsohadstrongsupportersinthenative-bornreformcommunitythathadlongsoughttoeliminate
corruptionandbringaboutchangesinlocalgovernmentthatwouldweakentheDemocraticmachine.
LaGuardia’ssuccess—and,inparticular,theroleofnewimmigrantsinhiselectoralcoalition—presentsan
importantchallengetotheconventionalscholarlywisdomaboutthemachine-reformdynamic.BothEdwardC.
BanfieldandJamesQ.Wilson’sclassictextonurbanpolitics,CityPolitics,8 andRichardHofstadter’shistorical
accountinTheAgeofReform9 stressthesharpethnicandracialdividethatdefinedthebattlelinesbetween
machinebossesandreformers.Bothoftheseaccountsemphasizedtheimportanceofimmigrantsinproviding
electoralsupportforthemachinesandidentifiedthenativeborn—especiallywhite-collarprofessionalsand
Protestants—asthepoliticalbaseofthereformers.AlthoughperhapsanadequatedescriptionofLaGuardia’sfirst
election,theconventionalmodeldoesapoorjobofexplainingthepatternsofelectoralsupportthatledtoLa
Guardia’stwosubsequenttermsandthepivotalroleofnewimmigrantsinsupportingthereformslateduringthese
elections.Inhissuccessful1933mayoralcampaign,LaGuardiaranonacombinedRepublican-CityFusionParty
ticket.Theticketwasethnicallybalanced,withItalianandJewishcandidatesnominatedforprominentoffices.La
GuardiawonasubstantialnumberofvotesfromthesetwogroupsandalsofromotherRepublicansandreform
voters.
Onceinoffice,LaGuardiaworkedquicklytodismantletheapparatusoftheTammanymachineandtocreatenew
opportunitiesforhissupporters.Themayorgreatlyexpandedthereachofcivilservicereforms,eliminating
thousandsofpoliticallyappointedpositionsandreplacingthemwithjobsfilledonthebasisonmeritand
competitiveexams.Hisadministrationalsochangedtheformalqualificationsrequiredformanycityjobs,increasing
theweightgiventoformalschoolingandimposingeducationalrequirementsformanycityjobs.Bothsetsof
reformsbenefitedLaGuardiasupporters,especiallywell-educatedJewswhoreceivedmuchgreateraccesstocity
jobspreviouslyreservedforTammanyHall’sIrishsupporters.Inaddition,LaGuardiaappointedbothJewsand
Page 4 of 12
PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2015. All Rights
Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in Oxford
Handbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy).
Subscriber: Ohio State University; date: 03 December 2015
Machine Bosses, Reformers, and the Politics of Ethnic and Minority Incorporation
Italianstopowerfulpositionsincitygovernment.LaGuardia’soutspokenoppositiontoNazism,amidrisingtensions
inEurope,furtherstrengthenedhisstatureintheJewishcommunity.
Overall,LaGuardia’sreformsprovedtoberesoundinglysuccessfulinforginganewelectoralcoalitionthat
attractedsubstantialsupportfromJewsandItalians,twogroupsthathadbeenneglectedbytheDemocratic
machine.In1937,LaGuardiabecamethefirstreformmayorinthecity’shistorytobere-electedforasecondterm,
winningmorethan60percentofthevoteinheavilyItalianprecinctsandalmost70percentinJewishdistricts.Four
yearslater,LaGuardiawasre-electedonceagain.Inthethirdcontest,heagainsecuredstrongsupportfromJews,
winningmorethan70percentofthevoteinJewishprecincts.HissupportamongItalians,however,declined
somewhatduetobothgreatereffortsbyDemocratstowinbacktheItalianvoteandLaGuardia’scriticismof
MussoliniandsupportforRoosevelt’sinterventionistforeignpolicy.LaGuardiawonaminorityoftheIrishand
Germanvotein1937,andhissupportamongthesepro-Tammanyvotersslippedevenfurtherin1941.10
Inbothofthelattertwoelections,LaGuardiaalsowonoverwhelminglyamongAfricanAmericanvoters.This
sustainedsupportisperhapssurprising,giventhelimitedgainsthatblackshadmadeduringtheLaGuardia
administration.BlackswerehitparticularlyhardbytheGreatDepression,whichonlyworsenedtheiralready-poor
livingconditionsandfurtherintensifiedgrievancesinthefaceofcontinueddiscriminationinbothhousingand
employment.In1935,falserumorsthatpolicehadkilledablackchildaccusedofshopliftingsparkedariotin
heavilyblackHarlem.Intheaftermath,LaGuardiaappointedabiracialcommissiontoinvestigatethecausesofthe
riot.Whenthecommissionreleasedareporthighlycriticalofcitygovernment,however,themayorburiedthe
reportandlargelyignoreditsfindingsandrecommendations.
ThereislittledoubtthatLaGuardiasympathizedwiththestrugglesofNewYorkblacksandinvestedmoreeffort
thanhispredecessorsdidinbringingneededeconomicdevelopmenttoblackneighborhoods.Particularlyafterthe
riot,LaGuardiaappointedAfricanAmericanstoseveralprominentpublicpositionsandopenednewreliefbureaus
inHarlem.However,progressfortheblackcommunityunderLaGuardiawasuneven.In1943,themayor’ssupport
foranewhousingprojectthatplannedtoexcludeAfricanAmericanresidentshelpedcontributetoanotherround
ofracialriotinginHarlem.
Indeed,theexperienceofAfricanAmericansduringthisperiodhighlightsLaGuardia’smixedlegacyinbringing
aboutgreaterminoritypoliticalincorporationinNewYork.GroupsatthecoreoftheLaGuardiareformcoalition—in
particular,JewsandItalians—wonaccesstogreaterpublicbenefitsunderthemayor’swatch.Blacks,however,
remainedmuchmoreontheperiphery,replicatingthetwo-tieredelectoralcoalitionthathadbeenthehallmarkof
theTammanymachine.SomeofreformspushedthroughbyLaGuardiawouldlaterhamperfutureincorporation
effortsbyemergingminorities.Forexample,strongcivilserviceprotectionsthatinsulatedbureaucratsfrompolitical
controlwouldeventuallycometorepresentakeybarriertoreversingacultureofracismanddiscrimination.
Excessiveeducationalrequirementskeptmanyqualifiedblacksfromattainingpublicemployment.Decadeslater,
strictheightrequirementsforfirefightingjobsputinplacetolimitthereachofpatronagepoliticswouldalsokeep
PuertoRicanimmigrantsandtheirfamilymembersfromsecuringcityfirefightingjobs.11
RichardJ.Daley,theChicagoMachine,andAfricanAmericans
RichardJ.Daley,whoservedbothasChicago’slong-servingmayorandDemocraticPartychieftainfromthemid1950stohisdeathin1976,wasarguablythemostpowerfultwentieth-centuryurbanboss.Despitethefactthathe
ruledthecitywithanironhandandextendedhisinfluencedeeplyintostateandnationalpolitics,RichardJ.Daley
andhissonRichardM.Daley,Chicago’smayorfrom1989to2011,wouldbeamongthelastofadyingbreedof
big-citybosses.
Thepost-WorldWarIIeramarkedthedeclineanddemiseofnearlyalloftheold-styleurbanpartyorganizations.
Themachine’straditionalsupplyofpatronagejobsandsocialservicesdwindled.Theflightofindustryandthe
whitemiddleclasstothesuburbscutsharplyintothetaxbaseoftheoldernortherncities.Theintroductionofmerit
systemsinthe1940sand1950scutfurtherintothemachine’spatronagestock.Inthe1960s,newurbanpolitical
actors—publicsectorunionsandminorities—mountedafrontalassaultontheremnantsofthepatronagesystem
usingcollectivebargainingagreementsandcourt-orderedaffirmativeaction.Themachine’scontroloversocial
servicesweakenedinthefaceofcompetitionfromthefederalgovernmentandlaborunions.TheNewDeal’s
legacyofsocialinsuranceandwelfareprogramslaybeyondthebosses’apparentreach.
Page 5 of 12
PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2015. All Rights
Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in Oxford
Handbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy).
Subscriber: Ohio State University; date: 03 December 2015
Machine Bosses, Reformers, and the Politics of Ethnic and Minority Incorporation
Perhapsthemostseriouschallengetobossrulewastherapidlychangingcharacterofthebig-cityelectorate.
Wartimeandpostwarprosperitybenefitedwhiteethnics,themachine’straditionalsupporters,manyofwhomhad
movedtothesuburbs.Thosewhoremainedinthecitydemandedlowtaxes,homeownerratherthansocial
services,andthepreservationofwhiteneighborhoodsandpropertyvalues.Thepostwarmachinesalsofacedthe
challengeofaccommodatingathirdwaveofpoormigrantstothecities.Southernblacksflockedtonortherncities
likeChicagointhelargestdomesticmigrationinhistory.TheywerelaterjoinedbyHispanicsmigratingfromMexico,
PuertoRico,andLatinAmerica.InChicago,AfricanAmericansandHispanicsconstitutedamajorityofthe
populationin1980,upfromone-quarterin1960.Thenewmigrantsdemandedthemachine’straditionalbenefits—
patronageandwelfareservices—atatimewhenthebosseswerelessabletosupplythem.Nevertheless,the
Daleymachinewouldshowremarkableingenuityandresiliencyinthefaceofdecliningresourcesandshiftsinthe
big-cityelectorate.
Chicago’sAfricanAmericancommunityappearedwellpositionedtomakeclaimsontheDaleymachine.RichardA.
Keiser12 arguesthatby1950,AfricanAmericanshadachievedmorepoliticalempowermentinChicagothanany
othercity.Thecity’srobustinter-andintra-partyelectoralcompetitivenessintheearlytwentiethcenturycreated
strongincentivesforcompetitorstowootheAfricanAmericanvote.Eventhoughtheblackvotewassmallinthis
era,whenitwasmobilized,itcouldmakeadifferenceincompetitiveelections.
Atfirst,theChicagoDemocraticmachineavidlycourtedtheminorityvote.CongressmanWilliamDawson,theonly
blackinDaley’sinnercircle,controlledChicago’smassiveSouthSideghetto.BlacksontheSouthSideandonthe
raciallychangingWestSidesuppliedthemarginofvictoryinthreeofMayorDaley’ssixvictoriouscampaigns.In
the1955election,DaleydefeatedhisRepublicanopponentby127,000votes,receivinga125,000-votepluralityin
heavilyblackmachine-runwards.In1963,whenwhitehomeownersstagedamajorrevoltagainsttheDaley
machinebecauseofa100percentincreaseinpropertytaxessince1955,DaleynarrowlydefeatedhisPolish
AmericanRepublicanchallengeronlybecauseofamassiveblackvoteinmachine-controlledwards.
Despitetheirelectoralfealty,AfricanAmericansreceivedfewmaterialrewardsfromtheDaleyorganization.Rather
thangivingCongressmanDawsonsignificantpowerorpatronage,Daleyrewardedhimwithcontrolofviceand
gamblingintheSouthSideghetto.Blackscomprised40percentofChicago’spopulationin1970,butonly20
percentofthemunicipalworkforce,largelyinmenialpositions.Untanglingthecomplexrelationshipbetweenthe
Daleymachineandtheblackcommunity,WilliamGrimshaw13 documentedthecreationofseveraldistinctparty
regimes.Daleycarefullychosewhichblackpoliticianstoelevatewithinthepartyhierarchy,particularlyCatholics
andpublicemployeestobetterensuretheirloyalty.Thepoorer“blackbelt”wardsontheSouthSidefaredworse
thanthe“plantationwards”ontheWestSide.
WhenMartinLutherKingJr.arrivedinChicagoin1966toleaddramaticmarchesintoall-whiteneighborhoodsas
partofanopen-housingcampaign,hewasgreetedbyhandpickedAfricanAmericanleaderswithstrong
allegiancestotheDaleymachine.Theresulting“summitaccord”betweenKingandthemayor,inwhichtheprotest
marcheswouldstopwhilecityleaderswouldpressforfairhousing,wasneverseriouslyimplementedbytheDaley
administration.In1968,afterKing’sassassination,Daleyissuedhisinfamous“shoottokill”ordertopoliceduring
theensuingghettoriots.
TheDaleyorganizationjudiciouslyusedwelfare-stateprogramstocontroltheminorityvoteandsiphonoff
discontentatminimalcosttothecitytreasuryandtax-consciouswhitehomeowners.PublichousingandAidto
FamilieswithDependentChildren(AFDC)representedmajorNewDealprogramsusedtoplacateblack
constituents.MigratingblacksconfrontedanacutehousingshortageinChicagoasthemachinecollaboratedwith
real-estatebrokerstoconfineblackstothecrowdedghetto.Daleysecuredfederalmoneytobuildlow-income
housingprojects,andthesepublichousingprojectsnotonlysoothedthefearsofwhiteethnics,buttheyalso
concentratedtheblackvoteandmadeitmorecontrollable.AlthoughthemachineexertedlittlecontroloverAFDC
eligibility,itassistedblackclaimantsinsecuringwelfarebenefitsandclaimedcreditforincreasingbenefits.Under
machineauspices,theAFDCparticipationrateforblackfamiliesinChicagorosefrom18percentin1969to32
percentin1979.ThemachinealsocommandeeredGreatSocietyprogramstobuildsupportintheblack
community,particularlyamongthemiddleclass.Federalantipovertyprogramscreatedsizableemployment
opportunitiesformanagersandserviceproviders.14
Usingfederalprogramstoinfluencetheblackvote,theDaleymachinebythelate1960shaddevelopedanew
Page 6 of 12
PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2015. All Rights
Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in Oxford
Handbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy).
Subscriber: Ohio State University; date: 03 December 2015
Machine Bosses, Reformers, and the Politics of Ethnic and Minority Incorporation
formulaforelectoralsuccess:mobilizethewhiteethnicvote,particularlyinwardsundergoingracialtransition.
Appealingtowhiteethnics,Daleyfrozethepropertytaxrate;prioritizedhomeownerandneighborhoodservices
suchasstreetrepair,treetrimming,andgarbagecollection;andsupportedthepreservationofwhite
neighborhoodsandschools.Incontrast,thelargeAfricanAmericanvote,socrucialin1963,wasnolongerneeded
forvictory.Infact,theblackvotenowloomedasarisk,particularlyifblackindependentscouldcaptureitand
challengemachinehegemony.Themachineworkedatdilutingthenow-superfluousminorityvote.Wardsonthe
SouthSidewereraciallygerrymandered.WhenblacksublieutenantWilliamDawsondiedin1970,themachine
groomednoreplacement.
AfterDaleydiedin1976,themachine’swinningformulaseemedtounravel.In1983,blackmayoralcandidate
HaroldWashingtonfashionedarainbowcoalitionofblacks,Hispanics,andwhiteliberalstonarrowlydefeat
RepublicancandidateBernardEpton.Thecity’swhiteethnics,themachine’straditionalmainstays,votedheavily
forEpton.Washington’srazor-thinvictorydependedonamassivemobilizationofblackvoters.In1979,only35
percentofeligibleblackshadvoted;in1983,anunprecedented73percentofblackvoterswenttothepolls.Yet
Washington’svictoryandtheprospectsforanenduringrainbowcoalitionprovedtobeshort-lived.In1987,
Washingtondiedwhilestillinoffice,creatingasuccessionproblem.In1989,RichardM.Daley,thelegendary
boss’sson,defeatedWashington’sappointedsuccessorandrebuiltthemachinewithwhiteethnic,Hispanic,and
businesssupport.Onceagain,AfricanAmericanswereleftlargelyontheoutsidelookingin.
Afro-CaribbeansinTwenty-First-CenturyNewYorkCity
Bythesecondhalfofthetwentiethcentury,theweakeningoftheDemocraticPartymachinesinbothChicagoand
NewYorkcreatednew—iftemporary—opportunitiesforminorityempowerment.Inbothcities,emergingAfrican
Americanleaderstookadvantageoftheopeningstoincreaserepresentationandparticipationfortheblack
community.Inthe1980sandearly1990s,fragmentationamongDemocraticrankshelpedleadtotheelectionof
thefirstblackmayorsinbothcities,HaroldWashingtoninChicago(1983–1987)andDavidDinkinsinNewYork
(1990–1993),althoughbothheadedweakadministrationsandservedonlyonetermeach.IncontrasttoChicago,
however,AfricanAmericanleadersinNewYorksucceededininstitutionalizingsomeoftheirnewfoundinfluence
followingDinkins’re-electionlosstoRepublicanRudyGiuliani.Blackofficialsroseupthroughtherankstosecure
topleadershiprolesinthevariousDemocraticPartyorganizationsintheouterboroughs.
Contrarytotheoreticalpredictionsthatblackmobilizationwouldcomeprimarilythroughthecreationofsuccessful
“rainbowcoalitions,”unitingblackswithLatinosandotherunderrepresentedminorities,thegrowinginfluenceof
AfricanAmericanleadersinNewYorkdidnottranslateintoanewminority-ledalliance.Indeed,neartheendofthe
twentiethcentury,strongpoliticalcoalitionsbetweenblacksandotherminoritygroupsfailedtomaterialize,with
conflictandtensionmarkingbothblackAsianandblackLatinorelations.15
DramaticgrowthinAfro-CaribbeanmigrationunderAmerica’spost-1965immigrationregime—withalargeshareof
thenewcomersfromEnglish-speakingCaribbeanareassettlinginNewYorkCity—createdseriousdivisionseven
withintheblackcommunity.Bytheyear2000,morethan500,000Afro-CaribbeanswerelivinginNewYorkCity,
comparedtojustunder1.5millionAfricanAmericans.16 Ratherthanhelpingtoincorporatethenewimmigrantsinto
thepoliticalprocesstoenlargethesizeoftheblackvotingbloc,however,AfricanAmericanswithintheestablished
DemocraticPartyorganizationshavefoughttopreservetheirowninfluenceagainstattacksfromemerging
Caribbeanpoliticalchallengers.
Growingconflictbetweenblack-ledDemocraticPartyorganizationsandthenewwaveofCaribbeanimmigrants
beliedthecentralrolehistoricallyplayedbyCaribbeanleadersintheparty.Duringthe1940sand1950s,New
YorkersofCaribbeandecentrepresentedsomeofthemostpowerfulblackfacesintheDemocraticParty.When
SaintLucian-bornHulanJackwaselectedastheboroughpresidentofManhattanin1954,hebecamethehighestrankingblackelectedofficialinthecountry.Bythelate1960s,however,Caribbeanswerereplacedbyanew
generationofAfricanAmericanactivistswhotookonleadershiprolesinDemocraticorganizationsinBrooklyn,
Queens,andtheBronx,hometoethnicallysegregatedneighborhoodswhereasubstantialshareofNewYork’s
blackpopulationlived.17
BlackDemocraticPartyleadershavebeenslowtoembracethegrowingranksofAfro-Caribbeanswhohave
arrivedinthepost-1965waveofimmigration,eventhoughmosthavesettledinmanyofthesamehistoricallyblack
Page 7 of 12
PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2015. All Rights
Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in Oxford
Handbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy).
Subscriber: Ohio State University; date: 03 December 2015
Machine Bosses, Reformers, and the Politics of Ethnic and Minority Incorporation
neighborhoodsintheouterboroughs.AlthoughAfricanAmericansandCaribbeanimmigrantssharemanyofthe
samepoliticalpriorities,includingconcernsaboutcontinueddiscriminationandpoliceabuse,andhaveboth
supportedDemocratsinnationalelections,thetwogroupshavefailedtoformaunifiedpoliticalfront.
Duringthe1980s,Caribbeanpoliticalorganizations—ledbygenerallymoreconservativeleadersthantheoverall
immigrantpopulation—brokerankswithotherblackgroupsinseveralhigh-profilecontests.Inthemid-1980s,a
groupof150prominentCaribbeanleaderssupportedthere-electionofMayorEdKoch—aconservativeDemocrat
whohadalienatedmanyintheAfricanAmericancommunity—inthehopeofincreasingtheiraccesstothemayor,
whowasexpectedtowinanotherterm.BlackleadersalsoresentedCaribbeansupportwonbyotherlocalwhite
candidateswhowerefacingstronginsurgentchallengesfromAfricanAmericanopponents.In1984,forexample,
leadersoftheAfricanAmericancommunityattemptedtounseatBrooklynstatesenatorMartyMarkowitzbybacking
astrongchallengertohimfortheDemocraticnomination.Althoughrepresentinganincreasinglyblackdistrict,
MarkowitzsuccessfullyretainedhisseatbyvigorouslycourtingtheAfro-Caribbeanvote.18
Inaddition,leaderswithintheDemocraticboroughorganizationshavedonelittletospeedthepolitical
incorporationofethnicCaribbeans.Despiteverylowlevelsofnaturalization,particularlyamongmorerecent
arrivals,andevenlowerratesofvoterregistrationandparticipation,thedominantDemocraticPartyhasnot
organizedacampaigntoencourageimmigrantstobecomecitizensorvoters.Accordingtopoliticalscience
scholarReuelRogers,theparty’sapproachhasbeenmarkedby“benignneglect”:
AlthoughhundredsofthousandsofAfro-CaribbeanshavebeenmigratingtoNewYorksincethe1960s,the
city’spartieshaveplayedalmostnoproactiveroleinencouragingtheirpoliticalparticipation.NewYork’s
DemocraticPartyhasbeenmoreinclinedtoignoreAfro-Caribbeannewcomers,eveninthefaceoftheir
growingnumbers,expandingresidentialenclaves,andobviouspotentialforelectoralinfluence,in
boroughssuchasBrooklynandQueens.Partyelitesmostlyhaveturnedablindeyetotheimmigrants,and
sometimesevenblockedtheirentryintothepoliticalsystem.19
InthefaceofpoliticalmobilizationwithintheAfro-Caribbeancommunity,partyleadershavefollowedtwo
strategies.First,theyhaveusedtheirinfluencetosupportincumbentswhohavefacedCaribbeanchallengers.For
example,theelectionofUnaClarketoCityCouncilin1991,becomingthefirstCaribbean-bornpersontobeelected
toNewYork’sCityCouncil,wasinitiallychallengedincourtbytheparty-supportedcandidate.Whensuchefforts
haveprovedunsuccessful,partyleadershavefollowedtheChicagoandTammanymodelbyselectively
incorporatinghandpickedCaribbeanleadersintothepartyorganization,withoutaddressingtheneedsor
representationalaspirationsofthebroaderimmigrantcommunity.
ReassessingBossesandReformersasEthnicIntegrators
ThroughoutAmericanpoliticalhistory,municipalgovernmentsandtheirelectedleadershaveplayedacentralrole
inincorporatingnewcomersintothepoliticalprocess.Inthenineteenthcentury,politicalbossesandtheir
machinesassistedmanyimmigrants,primarilyIrishandGerman,inlayingdownrootsandprovidedthemaccessto
jobsandcriticalsocialservices.Althoughmanymachinesweremarkedbypatronageandcorruption,itis
importanttorecognizethatpoliticalpartiesduringthisperiodservedacriticalredistributivefunction,channelinga
significantshareofgovernmentalresourcestoneedyurbanpopulations.
Overthelongterm,however,politicalbossesdidnotprovetobeunwaveringalliesofimmigrantsandminority
groups.Althoughpartyorganizationsreachedouttonewgroupswhentheyfacedcompetitionfrompolitical
opponents,bythetwentiethcentury,entrenchedmachineslargelyneglectedmorerecentwavesofimmigrants
and,attimes,discouragedparticipationfromnewvoterswhothreatenedtodestabilizetheirelectoralhegemony.In
somecitiesduringthisperiod,itwaspoliticalreformers,longconsideredopponentsofimmigrantinterests,who
reachedouttogroupsmarginalizedbythepoliticalmachine.InNewYork,reformmayorFiorelloLaGuardiahelped
openlocalgovernmenttoItalianandJewishimmigrants.Inlateryears,anotherreformistleader,MayorJohnLindsay
(1966–1973),similarlycreatednewopportunitiesinthecityforAfricanAmericans.
Indeed,thehistoricalrecordsuggeststhatthelevelofelectoralcompetition—ratherthantheidentityor
partisanshipofpoliticalincumbents—hashadthemostimportantimpactontheextentofpoliticalempowermentof
immigrantandminoritygroups.Politicalpartieshavereachedouttoandmobilizedexcludedgroupswhenthey
Page 8 of 12
PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2015. All Rights
Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in Oxford
Handbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy).
Subscriber: Ohio State University; date: 03 December 2015
Machine Bosses, Reformers, and the Politics of Ethnic and Minority Incorporation
havefacedstrongthelikelihoodoflosingelectionstotheirpoliticalopponents.Undertheseconditions,party
leadershavecourtedpotentiallypivotalandunattachedvoterstostrengthentheirelectoralbase.Bycontrast,
entrenchedparties—facingonlyweakopponentsandaconsistentrecordofelectionvictorieswithlargemargins—
havebeenfreetopursueamorenarrowdistributionofpublicbenefits,rewardingtheircoresupporters.New
groupsthatarrivedaftertheformationofthegoverningcoalition,likeJewsandItaliansundertheTammany
machine,didnotshareequallyinthefruitsofvictory.
OutsideofmajorimmigrationdestinationsintheNorth,whichhavebeenthefocusofthecasestudiesexaminedin
thischapter,thepoliticsofraceandnationalitytendedtofollowadifferenthistoricaltrajectory.Insmallersuburban
cities,likethoseintheSouthwest,strongpartyorganizationsdidnotemerge.Instead,reformerswonearlypolitical
victoriesandusedtheircontroloflocalgovernmenttoadoptelectoralinstitutions—off-yearelections,at-large
districts,council-managerformsofgovernment—thateffectivelydepressedparticipationamongminoritygroups
andlower-income,poorlyeducatedvoters.20 Inthisregion,reformersdidindeedfittheconventionalwisdom
academicaccountsofnativeleaders’oppositiontominorityincorporation,althoughtheyappearedtobemotivated
primarilybythelogicofelectoralsurvivalratherthanadeeplyrootedAnglo-SaxonProtestant“ethos.”
Althoughindividualpoliticalleaders,suchasspecificpoliticalbossesandreformers,madeimportantpersonal
contributionstothehistoryofethnicandimmigrantpoliticsinAmerica,theirmostimportantandlong-lastingimpact
mayhavebeeninthedesignofpoliticalinstitutions.Inmanycases,theseinstitutionssurvivedtheadministrations
ofindividualleadersandcontinuedtoshapethepatternofpoliticalparticipationlongafterward.IntheSouthwest,
forexample,reforminstitutionslikeat-largeelectionsprovedeffectiveindilutingthevoicesofgeographically
concentratedminoritypopulations,especiallyLatinos,formanydecades.Thesegroupsdidnotattainrecognition
orrepresentationuntiltheVotingRightsActledtotheestablishmentofdistrict(ward)elections.Inmanycities,the
adoptionofcivilservicereformshavegreatlylimitedpoliticaldiscretioninpublicemployment,withmixedeffectson
historicallyunderrepresentedminoritygroups.
Whileurbangovernmenthasattractedmuchoftheattentionfromscholarsinterestedinunderstandingthepolitics
ofethnicandminorityincorporation,itisimportanttonotethatmanyissuescriticaltodeterminingthenatureof
accessandpoliticalparticipationhavehistoricallyfallenunderthepurviewofhigherlevelsofgovernment.The
pathtoincorporationfornewcomershasbeenshapedmostcriticallybylawsregulatingimmigration,naturalization,
andvoting,whichinmostcaseshavefallenoutsideofdirectlocalgovernmentcontrol.Duringthelatenineteenth
century,forexample,statelegislaturesthroughoutthecountryeliminatedvotingbynoncitizens,acommon
practiceinmanystatesduringthepreviousera,andadoptedliteracyteststhatdisproportionatelyhurtimmigrant
voters.Suchdevelopmentsgreatlylimitedthevoicesofimmigrantsandalsocreatedopportunitiesforpolitical
entrepreneurslikeBossTweedwhowereintentonbuildingnewpoliticalcoalitionsbyhelpingnaturalizepotential
politicalallies.Inthe1970s,bycontrast,thefederalVotingRightsActprovedpivotalinprovidingnewlegaltoolsto
groupspreviouslyexcludedfromlocalgovernment.
Broaderissuesofimmigrantandminorityaccessandpoliticalparticipationthatweresosalientinthenineteenth
andtwentiethcenturiescontinuetoattractsubstantialattention,particularlyamongscholarsofelectionlaw.
Currentpoliticaldebatesaboutwhatsomeseeasthediscriminatoryimpactoflawsthatrequirevoterstopresent
photoidentification,voterregistrationrequirements,andeffortstolimitpublicservicesforundocumented
immigrantstapintothesamepoliticalundercurrentsandgrievancesthatanimatedtheconflictsbetween
newcomersandtheirmoreestablishedneighborsinearlierperiodsofAmericanhistory.Althoughtoday’s
immigrantscomeprimarilyfromLatinAmericaandAsia,theexperiencesofnorthern,southern,andeastern
Europeanscanhelpinformourunderstandingofthestrugglesfacingthesegroupsandidentifythepoliticalbarriers
andempowermentstrategiesneededtoensuretheirfullparticipationintheAmericanpoliticalprocess.
Itisalsolikelythatimmigrationfromdevelopingcountries—agrowingphenomenoninglobalgatewaycitiesbutone
thatisalsoincreasinglypresentinotherAmericanregionsthathavenothistoricallyattractedalargenumbersof
foreigners—willchallengeexistingclient-patronpoliticalrelationshipsandleadtorealignmentoftraditionalpolitical
alliances.SomescholarshavepredictedthatthegrowingnumberofLatinoandHispanicmigrants,bothfrom
MexicoandotherpartsofLatinAmerica,willnotfollowthetraditionalpathsofpolitical,economic,andsocial
integrationandassimilationthathavecharacterizedtheexperienceofEuropeanimmigrantsinthenineteenthand
twentiethcenturies.21
Page 9 of 12
PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2015. All Rights
Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in Oxford
Handbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy).
Subscriber: Ohio State University; date: 03 December 2015
Machine Bosses, Reformers, and the Politics of Ethnic and Minority Incorporation
Emergingscholarshipthatexaminesthepoliticaldynamicsamongnewimmigrantcommunitiessuggeststhatthese
predictionswillprovetobetoopessimistic.Giventherealitythatmanynewimmigrantscontinuetosettleinareas
withlargepopulationsofnativeminorities—inmanymajorcities,Latinocentershavedevelopedinhistorically
AfricaAmericanneighborhoods—itislikely,however,thatnewimmigrantflowswillleadtorivalryandpolitical
conflictamongethniccommunities.Thesechangesmayalsocreateconditionsripefortheemergenceofnew
ethnicpoliticalbosseswhocansuccessfullymobilizenewcomersandbuildlastingorganizationsgroundedintheir
ownco-ethnicbasesofpoliticalsupport.Itremainstobeseenwhethertheseleaderswilladoptthesamepolitical
strategiesofpatronagepoliticsandmachinerulethatmarkedtheeraoftheIrishboss,orwhethertheethnic
bossesofthetwenty-firstcenturywillcreatenewpoliticalmodelsbasedontheuniquesocialandcultural
institutionsofthesecommunities.
Bibliography
Ackerman,KennethD.BossTweed:TheRiseandFalloftheCorruptPolWhoConceivedtheSoulofModernNew
York.NewYork:Carroll&Graf,2005.
Banfield,EdwardC.,andJamesQ.WilsonCityPolitics.Cambridge:HarvardUniversityPress,1963.
Bayor,RonaldH.FiorelloLaGuardia:EthnicityandReform.ArlingtonHeights,IL:HarlandDavidson,Inc.,1993.
Biles,Roger.RichardJ.Daley:Politics,Race,andtheGoverningofChicago.DeKalb:NorthernIllinoisUniversity
Press,1995.
Bridges,Amy.MorningGlories:MunicipalReformintheSouthwest.Princeton:PrincetonUniversityPress,1997.
Browning,RufusP.,DaleRodgersMarshall,andDavidH.Tabb.ProtestisNotEnough.Berkeley:Universityof
CaliforniaPress,1984.
Cohen,Adam,andElizabethTaylor.AmericanPharaoh:MayorRichardJ.Daley—HisBattleforChicagoandthe
Nation.Boston:Little,Brown,2000.
Erie,StevenP.Rainbow’sEnd:Irish-AmericansandtheDilemmasofUrbanMachinePolitics,1840–1985.
Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress,1988.
Grimshaw,William.BitterFruit:BlackPoliticsandtheChicagoMachine,1931–1991.Chicago:Universityof
ChicagoPress,1995.
Henderson,ThomasM.TammanyHallandtheNewImmigrants.NewYork:ArnoPress,1976.
Hofstadter,Richard.TheAgeofReform.NewYork:RandomHouse,1955.
Huntington,SamuelP.WhoAreWe:TheChallengestoAmerica’sNationalIdentity.NewYork:Simon&Schuster,
2004.
Jones-Correa,Michael.BetweenTwoNations:ThePoliticalPredicamentofLatinosinNewYorkCity.Ithaca:
CornellUniversityPress,1998.
Kasinitz,Philip.CaribbeanNewYork:BlackImmigrantsandthePoliticsofRace.Ithaca:CornellUniversityPress,
1992.
Keiser,RichardA.SubordinationorEmpowerment?African-AmericanLeadershipandtheStruggleforUrban
PoliticalPower.NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress,1997.
Kim,ClaireJean.BitterFruit:ThePoliticsofBlack-KoreanConflictinNewYorkCity.NewHaven:YaleUniversity
Press,2003.
Mandelbaum,SeymourJ.BossTweed’sNewYork.NewYork:JohnWiley&Sons,1965.
McNickle,Chris.ToBeMayorofNewYork:EthnicPoliticsintheCity.NewYork:ColumbiaUniversityPress,1993.
Page 10 of 12
PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2015. All Rights
Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in Oxford
Handbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy).
Subscriber: Ohio State University; date: 03 December 2015
Machine Bosses, Reformers, and the Politics of Ethnic and Minority Incorporation
Moynihan,DanielPatrick.“TheIrish.”InBeyondtheMeltingPot,editedbyNathanGlazerandDanielPatrick
Moynihan,217–287.Cambridge:MITPress,1964.
Myers,Gustavus.TheHistoryofTammanyHall.NewYork:BoniandLiveright,1917.
Pinderhughes,DianneM.RaceandEthnicityinChicagoPolitics:AReexaminationofPluralistTheory.Urbana:
UniversityofIllinoisPress,1987.
Rogers,ReuelR.Afro-CaribbeanImmigrantsandthePoliticsofIncorporation:Ethnicity,Exception,orExit.New
York:CambridgeUniversityPress,2005.
Royko,Mike.Boss:RichardJ.DaleyofChicago.NewYork:Signet,1971.
Shefter,Martin.“TheEmergenceofthePoliticalMachine:AnAlternativeView.”InTheoreticalPerspectiveson
UrbanPolitics,editedbyWillisD.Hawleyetal.,14–44.EnglewoodCliffs,NJ:Prentice-Hall.
Waldinger,RogerDavid.StillthePromisedCity?African-AmericansandNewImmigrantsinPostindustrialNew
York.Cambridge:HarvardUniversityPress,1996.
Notes:
(1)SeymourJ.Mandelbaum,BossTweed’sNewYork(NewYork:JohnWiley&Sons,1965).
(2 )StevenP.Erie,Rainbow’sEnd:Irish-AmericansandtheDilemmasofUrbanMachinePolitics,1840–1985
(Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress,1988),25–26.
(3 )DanielPatrickMoynihan,“TheIrish,”inBeyondtheMeltingPot,eds.NathanGlazerandDanielPatrick
Moynihan(Cambridge:MITPress,1964),217–287.
(4 )MartinShefter,“TheEmergenceofthePoliticalMachine:AnAlternativeView,”inTheoreticalPerspectiveson
UrbanPolitics,eds.WillisD.Hawleyetal,(EnglewoodCliffs,NJ:Prentice-Hall,1976),14–44.
(5)Erie,Rainbow’sEnd,53.
(6 )ChrisMcNickle,ToBeMayorofNewYork:EthnicPoliticsintheCity(NewYork:ColumbiaUniversityPress,
1993).
(7 )RonaldH.Bayor,FiorelloLaGuardia:EthnicityandReform(ArlingtonHeights,IL:HarlandDavidson,Inc.,1993).
(8 )EdwardC.BanfieldandJamesQ.Wilson,CityPolitics(Cambridge:HarvardUniversityPress,1963).
(9 )RichardHofstadter,TheAgeofReform(NewYork:RandomHouse,1995).
(10 )Bayor,FiorelloLaGuardia,143–144,158–159.
(11)RogerDavidWaldinger,StillthePromisedCity?African-AmericansandNewImmigrantsinPostindustrial
NewYork(Cambridge:HarvardUniversityPress,1996),chap.7.
(12 )RichardA.Keiser,SubordinationorEmpowerment?African-AmericanLeadershipandtheStruggleforUrban
PoliticalPower(NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress,1977).
(13 )WilliamGrimshaw,BitterFruit:BlackPoliticsandtheChicagoMachine,1931–1991(Chicago:Universityof
ChicagoPress,1995).
(14 )Erie,Rainbow’sEnd,166–169.
(15)ClaireJeanKim,BitterFruit:ThePoliticsofBlack-KoreanConflictinNewYorkCity(NewHaven:Yale
UniversityPress,2003);MichaelJones-Correa,BetweenTwoNations:ThePoliticalPredicamentofLatinosinNew
YorkCity(Ithaca:CornellUniversityPress,1998).
16
Page 11 of 12
PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2015. All Rights
Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in Oxford
Handbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy).
Subscriber: Ohio State University; date: 03 December 2015
Machine Bosses, Reformers, and the Politics of Ethnic and Minority Incorporation
(16 )ReuelR.Rogers,Afro-CaribbeanImmigrantsandthePoliticsofIncorporation:Ethnicity,Exception,orExit
(NewYork:CambridgeUniversityPress,2005),44.
(17 )PhilipKasinitz,CaribbeanNewYork:BlackImmigrantsandthePoliticsofRace(Ithaca:CornellUniversity
Press,1992).
(18 )Ibid.,228–230.
(19 )Rogers,Afro-CaribbeanImmigrantsandthePoliticsofIncorporation,83.
(20 )AmyBridges,MorningGlories:MunicipalReformintheSouthwest(Princeton:PrincetonUniversityPress,
1997).
(21)SamuelP.Huntington,WhoAreWe:TheChallengestoAmerica’sNationalIdentity(NewYork:Simon&
Schuster,2004).
StevenP.Erie
StevenP.Erie,UniversityofCalifornia,SanDiego.
VladimirKogan
VladimirKogan,UniversityofCalifornia,SanDiego.
Page 12 of 12
PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2015. All Rights
Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in Oxford
Handbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy).
Subscriber: Ohio State University; date: 03 December 2015