Results from a new study by The Chicago Council on Global Affairs corroborate recent polling by The New York Times, Stanford University, Resources for the Future and others: Hispanics are much more likely than non-Hispanics to consider climate change a critical threat to the United States. The Pew Research Center finds that Latinos are more likely to say that climate change is caused by human activity. Andaccording to Chicago Council Survey results, Latinos are also more likely to agree that the United States isn’t doing enough on the issue and to favor expanding the federal budget for environmental protection.
But climate change is not the only international issue on which Latino opinion differs from other Americans. Perhaps it is no surprise that Latinos feel less threatened by immigration and are thus less likely to prioritize controlling and reducing immigration as a very important foreign policy goal. Latinos are also more positive toward the UN and are more likely to name combating hunger a pressing goal.
While these differences set Latinos apart in their views, a candidate interested in earning the Latino vote must also realize that a Hispanic-American political agenda is essentially an American one—with a distinctly domestic focus. Polling over at least the past decade has shown that like other Americans, Latinos are most concerned about economic well-being. Protecting American jobs was priority No. 1 for both Hispanics and non-Hispanics in the 2014 Chicago Council survey.
Moreover, Chicago Council Survey results demonstrate that Hispanic-Americans share very similar foreign policy views with the mainstream U.S. public. Like other Americans, Latinos favor strong U.S. leadership in the world and consider the United States to be the most influential nation now and in 10 years’ time. Latinos and non-Latinos alike consider terrorism, nuclear proliferation, Iran’s nuclear program and cyber-attacks to be critical threats to U.S. vital interests. Both groups support a foreign policy that relies on multiple means of diplomatic and economic engagement, including alliances, treaties and trade agreements. And finally, majorities of Latinos and non-Latinos support the use of U.S. troops to help prevent a government from committing genocide, to deal with humanitarian crises, to ensure the oil supply, to stop Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons and to combat terrorism.
Latino voters’ concern for community may partially explain the history-making developments in the Chicago mayoral contest, a race increasingly characterized by a split between downtown and neighborhood interests. Chicago candidates will have just a few weeks to make their case to Hispanic voters. Meanwhile, at the federal level, the Obama administration is has put forth proposals addressing both climate change and aid to Central America—which would help stem migration from the region—in recent weeks. Republican leaders might strike these down, and they would have their reasons. But if they want to attract Latino voters in the future, they should propose some alternatives. Continuing to dismiss these issues is missing a key—and growing—electoral target.
The Chicago Council on Global Affairs highlights critical shifts in American public thinking on US foreign policy through public opinion surveys and research conducted under the Lester Crown Center on US Foreign Policy.
The annual Chicago Council Survey, first conducted in 1974, is a valuable resource for policymakers, academics, media, and the general public. The Council also surveys American leaders in government, business, academia, think tanks, and religious organizations biennially to compare trends in their thinking with overall trends. And collaborating with partner organizations, the survey team periodically conducts parallel surveys of public opinion in other regions of the world to compare with US public opinion.
The Running Numbers blog features regular commentary and analysis from the Council’s public opinion and US foreign policy research team, including a series of flash polls of a select group of foreign policy experts to assess their opinions on critical foreign policy topics driving the news.
Ukrainian citizens are cynical about the effectiveness of aid from Western allies in the ongoing war in Donbass. Meanwhile, regional differences in attitude towards Russia remain prominent.
Democratic primary season is well under way, highlighted by recent debates and battleground fundraising by the large field of presidential hopefuls. As candidates deliver their pitch to voters, party supporters are not in lockstep on every issue.
America’s young and old are split on what to do about climate change, presenting a major hurdle for the country’s youth to attain serious and immediate action.
Opinion in Northern Ireland is polarized amid Brexit negotiations.
The United Kingdom remains split on Brexit as Parliament is suspended amid tumultuous backlash.
How are Americans reacting to the US-China trade war?
Mexicans have a far more negative views of Trump than of the United States or the US-Mexico relationship.
Amid the protests and violence in Hong Kong, a recent survey reveals differences in opinions between younger and older age groups as well as between more and less educated people living in Hong Kong.
Mexican attitudes towards Central American migrants are changing as the dispute between the US and Mexico over how to handle the migration issue continues.
Relations between Japan and South Korea are in freefall, with the two key US allies in Asia engaged in a steadily escalating economic conflict.
The United States has long been the tops arms supplier in the world. Yet public opinion data shows that Americans aren’t fans of U.S. arms sales.
Most Americans believe that respect and admiration for the United States are instrumental in achieving US foreign policy goals. But a new poll finds publics in the Middle East and North Africa continue to view the United States unfavorably.
At the June 25-26 Bahrain Peace to Prosperity Workshop, Jared Kushner presented the first component of a U.S. peace plan for the Middle East. But how does this plan sit with the Palestinian public?
Approval rates for Moon Jae-in are sliding, but his North Korea policy is not one of primary drivers.
In early February 2019, the United States withdrew from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty following President Trump’s October 2018 (and the Obama administration’s July 2014) accusations that Russia was failing to comply with the treaty. Russia withdrew from the treaty the next day.
Findings from a February 2019 Chicago Council on Global Affairs general public survey and a December 2018 Teaching, Research, and International Policy (TRIP) survey of International Relations (IR) scholars around the world illustrate how these different populations perceive the collapse of the INF Treaty.