The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that:• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.Please consult the full DRO policy for further details.

How significant of a factor is race in minority candidate evaluation? I present theory of race and minority candidate evaluation which argues that candidate race acts as an informational heuristic that affects perceptions of a candidate's ideological leaning and competence but that this effect is dependent on contextual factors, including the racial group and candidate partisanship. Using the 2010 and 2012 Cooperative Congressional Elections Study, I provide an observational look at Latino and Asian candidates in addition to black candidates for the first time, as well as minority candidates of both partisan stripes. I examine voter perceptions about candidates that might drive their vote choice, namely ideological assessments and competence assessments. I find that white voters are less likely to support Latino and black Democrats because they are viewed as less competent and more ideologically extreme. I find that Asian candidates and minority Republicans are largely unaffected by these biases.

Party support has a strong influence on candidate success in the primary. What remains unexplored is whether party actions during the primary are biased along racial and gender lines. Using candidate demographic data at the congressional level and measures of party support for primary candidates, we test whether parties discriminate against women and minority candidates in congressional primaries and also whether parties are strategic in their support of minority candidates in certain primaries. Our findings show parties are not biased against minority candidates and also that white women candidates receive more support from the Democratic Party than do other types of candidates. Our findings also suggest that parties do not appear to strategically support minority candidates in districts with larger populations of minorities. Lastly, we also find no significant differences in the effects of party support on the likelihood of success in the primary by candidate race or gender.

How do elected representatives respond to the needs of immigrant constituents? We report the results of a field experiment on U.S. state legislators in which the nativity, likelihood of voting, and race/ethnicity of a hypothetical constituent are independently manipulated. The experimental design allows us to contribute new insights by isolating the various elements that may impede the connection between immigrants and elected representatives. Moreover, we explore racial/ethnic identities beyond black and white, by including Latino and Asian aliases. Contrary to expectations, nativity and voting status do not affect responsiveness. Instead, legislator behavior appears to be driven by racial/ethnic bias. Whites benefit from the highest degree of responsiveness, with blacks, Hispanics, and Asians all receiving lower response rates, respectively. This bias follows a partisan logic. Hispanic constituents receive lower responsiveness primarily from Republican legislators, while Asians experience discrimination from representatives of both parties. We argue that this difference may result from Hispanic identity sending a stronger signal about partisan affiliation, or from a prejudicial view of Asians as outsiders. In this interpretation, rather than the model minority, Asians become the excluded minority.