Winner of the 2019 Don T. Nakanishi Award for Distinguished Scholarship and Service from the Western Political Science Association Committee on the Status of Asian Pacific Americans

“Immigrants are not necessarily liberals, and religion is a large factor in predicting immigrant conservatism. These points are often overlooked by scholars and policymakers alike, and Janelle Wong’s path-breaking work shines much needed light on the ways in which religion—particularly evangelical Christianity—shapes immigrants’ politics, with considerable implications for the future of American party coalitions.”

—Michael Jones-Correa, professor of political science, University of Pennsylvania

“This is the perfect time for this important book. With evangelicals again in the bright political spotlight over their role in electing Donald Trump, it is essential to understand Janelle Wong’s exploration of evangelical religion, interests, and identities. Evangelical is clearly not a synonym for white Republican. But the steady diversification of evangelicalism will not necessarily entail a moderation of white evangelical politics either. There is fascinating work to be done on how people wrestle with competing racial and religious identities and Wong’s Immigrants, Evangelicals, and Politics in an Era of Demographic Change paves the way.”

—Paul A. Djupe, associate professor of political science, Denison University

As immigration from Asia and Latin America reshapes the demographic composition of the U.S., some analysts have anticipated the decline of conservative white evangelicals’ influence in politics. Yet, Donald Trump captured a larger share of the white evangelical vote in the 2016 election than any candidate in the previous four presidential elections. Why has the political clout of white evangelicals persisted at a time of increased racial and ethnic diversity? In Immigrants, Evangelicals, and Politics in an Era of Demographic Change, political scientist Janelle Wong examines a new generation of Asian American and Latino evangelicals and offers an account of why demographic change has not contributed to a political realignment.

Asian Americans and Latinos currently constitute more than one in every seven evangelicals, and their churches are among the largest, fastest growing organizations in their communities. While evangelical identity is associated with conservative politics, Wong draws from national surveys and interviews to show that non-white evangelicals express political attitudes that are significantly less conservative than those of their white counterparts. Black, Asian American, and Latino evangelicals are much more likely to support policies such as expanded immigration rights, increased taxation of the wealthy, and government interventions to slow climate change. As Wong argues, non-white evangelicals’ experiences as members of racial or ethnic minority groups often lead them to adopt more progressive political views compared to their white counterparts.

However, despite their growth in numbers, non-white evangelicals—particularly Asian Americans and Latinos—are concentrated outside of swing states, have lower levels of political participation than white evangelicals, and are less likely to be targeted by political campaigns. As a result, white evangelicals dominate the evangelical policy agenda and are overrepresented at the polls. Also, many white evangelicals have adopted even more conservative political views in response to rapid demographic change, perceiving, for example, that discrimination against Christians now rivals discrimination against racial and ethnic minorities.

Wong demonstrates that immigrant evangelicals are neither “natural” Republicans nor “natural” Democrats. By examining the changing demographics of the evangelical movement, Immigrants, Evangelicals, and Politics in an Era of Demographic Change sheds light on an understudied constituency that has yet to find its political home.

JANELLE S. WONG is professor of American Studies at the University of Maryland.

Winner of the 2019 Alexander George Book Award from the International Society of Political Psychology (ISPP)

"Why do so many Americans both depend on public programs and express distrust and opposition to the federal government that provides them? Suzanne Mettler, one of the most original political scientists working today, offers crucial answers to this puzzle. Her important new book, The Government-Citizen Disconnect, will engage citizens and scholars alike at a juncture of crisis, controversy, and revitalization for American democracy."

—Theda Skocpol, director, Scholars Strategy Network, and Victor S. Thomas Professor of Government and Sociology, Harvard University

"Americans hate government. They also depend on it more and more. In this compelling and deeply researched book, Suzanne Mettler shows that this paradox is at the heart of our current political crisis. Anyone who cares about the future of the country should read The Government-Citizen Disconnect."

—Jacob S. Hacker, Stanley B. Resor Professor of Political Science, Yale University

Americans’ relationship to the federal government is paradoxical. Polls show that public opinion regarding the government has plummeted to all-time lows, with only one in five saying they trust the government or believe that it operates in their interest. Yet, at the same time, more Americans than ever benefit from some form of government social provision. Political scientist Suzanne Mettler calls this growing gulf between people’s perceptions of government and the actual role it plays in their lives the "government-citizen disconnect." In The Government-Citizen Disconnect, she explores the rise of this phenomenon and its implications for policymaking and politics.

Drawing from original survey data which probed Americans’ experiences of 21 federal social policies -- such as food stamps, Social Security, Medicaid, and the home mortgage interest deduction -- Mettler shows that 96 percent of adults have received benefits from at least one of them, and that the average person has utilized five. Overall usage rates transcend social, economic, and political divisions, and most Americans report positive experiences of their policy experiences. However, the fact that they have benefited from these policies bears little positive effect on people’s attitudes towards government. Mettler finds that shared identities and group affiliations are more powerful and consistent influences. In particular, those who oppose welfare tend to extrapolate their unfavorable views of it to government in general. Deep antipathy toward the government has emerged as a conservative movement waged a war on social welfare policies for over forty years, even as economic inequality and benefit use increased.

Mettler finds that patterns of political participation exacerbate the government-citizen disconnect, as those holding positive views of federal programs and supporting expanded benefits have lower rates of involvement than those holding more hostile views of the government. As a result, the loudest political voice belongs to those who have benefited from policies but who give government little credit for their economic well-being, seeing their success more as a matter of their own deservingness. This contributes to the election of politicians who advocate cutting federal social programs. According to Mettler, the government-citizen disconnect frays the bonds of representative government and democracy.

The Government-Citizen Disconnect illuminates a paradox that increasingly shapes American politics. Mettler's examination of hostility toward government at a time when most Americans will at some point rely on the social benefits it provides helps us better understand the roots of today's fractious political climate.

SUZANNE METTLER is the Clinton Rossiter Chair of American Institutions at Cornell University.

Winner of the 2019 Outstanding Book Award from the Inequality, Poverty, and Mobility Section of the American Sociological Association

2018 Choice Outstanding Academic Title 

“Bruce Western, our foremost authority on mass incarceration, has filled in a yawning gap in the research on one of the great banes of our era. Homeward is a thorough and deeply illuminating study on the end-point of mass incarceration—the effort to reintegrate ex-offenders into our society. The challenges outlined in the book should not simply inform our reentry efforts, but should also make us question the American policy of handing down sentences, which, in some profound way, never really end.”

—Ta-Nehisi Coates, National Correspondent, The Atlantic

“In Homeward, Bruce Western probes in rich detail the lives of ex-prisoners in their first year of life back on the streets of Boston. He looks unflinchingly at the correlated web of adversities that men and women face in the transition out of prison, especially how violence, drug and alcohol addiction, mental illness, and family chaos exacerbate the stigma of a prison record in the reentry to society.  Beautifully written and deeply researched, this book provides an important framework on social and criminal justice.  The implications for policy are profound.”

—Robert J.  Sampson, Henry Ford II Professor of the Social Sciences, Harvard University

In the era of mass incarceration, over 600,000 people are released from federal or state prison each year, with many returning to chaotic living environments rife with violence. In these circumstances, how do former prisoners navigate reentering society? In Homeward, sociologist Bruce Western examines the tumultuous first year after release from prison. Drawing from in-depth interviews with over one hundred individuals, he describes the lives of the formerly incarcerated and demonstrates how poverty, racial inequality, and failures of social support trap many in a cycle of vulnerability despite their efforts to rejoin society.

Western and his research team conducted comprehensive interviews with men and women released from the Massachusetts state prison system who returned to neighborhoods around Boston. Western finds that for most, leaving prison is associated with acute material hardship. In the first year after prison, most respondents could not afford their own housing and relied on family support and government programs, with half living in deep poverty. Many struggled with chronic pain, mental illnesses, or addiction—the most important predictor of recidivism. Most respondents were also unemployed. Some older white men found union jobs in the construction industry through their social networks, but many others, particularly those who were black or Latino, were unable to obtain full-time work due to few social connections to good jobs, discrimination, and lack of credentials. Violence was common in their lives, and often preceded their incarceration. In contrast to the stereotype of tough criminals preying upon helpless citizens, Western shows that many former prisoners were themselves subject to lifetimes of violence and abuse and encountered more violence after leaving prison, blurring the line between victims and perpetrators.

Western concludes that boosting the social integration of former prisoners is key to both ameliorating deep disadvantage and strengthening public safety. He advocates policies that increase assistance to those in their first year after prison, including guaranteed housing and health care, drug treatment, and transitional employment. By foregrounding the stories of people struggling against the odds to exit the criminal justice system, Homeward shows how overhauling the process of prisoner reentry and rethinking the foundations of justice policy could address the harms of mass incarceration.

BRUCE WESTERN is the Daniel and Florence Guggenheim Professor of Criminal Justice Policy and Professor of Sociology at Harvard University, and Co-Director of the Justice Lab at Columbia University.

A paper presented at the fifty-first congress of the American Prison Association in 1921, surveying the conditions of 30 of the 52 county jails in Florida at the time.

BERT C. RILEY was director of the General Extension Division of the University of Florida.

A 1908 pamphlet from the Department of Child Hygiene of the Russell Sage Foundation, campaigning for an end to the unsafe and noisy Independence Day celebrations that had been popular around the country at the time.

JULIA HYNEMAN BARNETT RICE, Department of Child Hygiene, Russell Sage Foundation

A 1910 pamphlet on the essential characteristics of vacation schools open for the summer, based on reports of school authorities and voluntary organizations, including teacher salaries and descriptions of class activities.

CLARENCE ARTHUR PERRY, Department of Child Hygiene, Russell Sage Foundation

A review of the development of the community center as a distinct institution and government agency, ten years after such a proposal was made to reformers the 1911 First National Conference on Civic and Social Center Development. The article first appeared in 1921 in the New York Evening Post and reprinted in the September-October 1921 number of the Community Center.

CLARENCE ARTHUR PERRY, Department of Child Hygiene, Russell Sage Foundation

This 1909 paper argues that the great increase of child labor at the time led to a sharp increase in children giving up the opportunity for an education as well as for proper physical development through recreation spaces and playgrounds.

E. W. LORD, Playground Extension Committee, Russell Sage Foundation

A 1910 report of the Fairview Garden School Association of Yonkers, N.Y., detailing the origin and growth of the school garden, including costs and plans for maintenance.

A. L. LIVERMORE was chairman of the Executive Committee of the Fairview Garden School Association.

Reprinted from the Independent of August 20, 1908, this paper, written by the originator of the whole juvenile court system of the United States, calls for the establishment of playgrounds and juvenile courts around the country in order to combat the increase in crime among youth at the time.

BEN B. LINDSEY presided over the Juvenile Court of Denver, Col.