NewsTaco

By Timothy Spangler, The Guardian

Mayoral elections in Los Angeles are typically quite parochial affairs, and this year’s outing is something of an exception. As Angelenos go to the polls today under hazy May skies, everything from jobs to deteriorating schools to the dire condition of LA’s roads has dominated the campaign between Eric Garcetti and Wendy Greuel, both Democrats and city hall insiders who made it through March’s open primary.

For those who don’t count themselves among LA’s four million inhabitants, this election is an interesting case study in how the Latino vote may (or may not) impact the 2016 presidential.

Click HERE or on the picture to read the full story.

[Photo by Korean Resource Center]

By Michael Martinez, CNN

Los Angeles (CNN) – Voters in the nation’s second-largest city will elect a new mayor Tuesday in a race that will make history and offer a possible indicator on public sentiment toward unions representing municipal employees during a budget crisis.

Incumbent Antonio Villaraigosa, the first Latino mayor here in more than 130 years, is stepping down after eight years because of term limits.

Tuesday’s faceoff is between City Councilman Eric Garcetti and City Controller Wendy Greuel. Both are longtime political players in Los Angeles.

Click HERE or on the picture to read the full story.

[Photo by theocean]

By Arthur C. Brooks, Wall Street Journal

Half the Hispanics eligible to vote don’t. They are the ones most likely to call themselves ‘political conservatives.’

Before Washington was rocked in recent days by an assortment of brewing scandals, immigration reform was at center stage. And immigration reform will surely return shortly to the heart of Washington debates as Congress considers legislation proposed by Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio and his bipartisan “Gang of 8″ colleagues.

Their bill would normalize the status of millions of illegal, mostly Hispanic immigrants. This has stimulated a vigorous debate among conservatives over the cost of reform, mostly in the form of public services for those with low skills and high needs.

Click HERE or on the picture to read the full story.

[Photo by valentinapowers]

By Sandra Lilley, NBCLatino

A group of Texas Democrats say the state could turn blue sooner than many think, since the voters are already there, and they are mostly Latinos – the issue is no one is paying attention to them.

“The biggest problem is we are not asking them for their vote,” said Dr. Julie Martinez Ortega, vice president of  policy and advocacy for PowerPac, a progressive political action committee.  Ortega conducted a poll of over 2,600 randomly selected Hispanic registered voters.  According to the poll, 57 percent of Latino registered voters said Democrats best represent their views on social issues like same-sex marriage, religion and abortion, and 57 percent say Democrats best represent their views on jobs, economy and immigration.

And though Texas is considered a “red” state, only 23 percent of Latinos said they generally vote Republican, whereas 52 percent said they generally vote Democrat and 16 percent say they vote Independent.

One of the reasons why Republicans are still winning elections by about a million votes is that there are over 3 million Latinos “sitting on the sidelines,” according to Democratic state representative Trey Martinez Fischer and founder of One Texas PAC.   There are over 2 million Latinos in Texas not registered to vote, he says, and another million mostly Hispanic registered voters who are not voting.

Yet one of the poll’s findings was that only 54 percent of Latinos recall being contacted by a campaign in the last presidential election. “When pretty much half of Latinos didn’t even get a piece of mail, we have a problem,” said Martinez Ortega.  She added that while a third of Texas Latinos who voted for Obama also voted for conservative Republican Senator Ted Cruz, about a third of Latinos who voted for Senator Cruz did not know he was a Republican, according to the poll’s findings.  ”Here in Texas we didn’t make a concerted effort to educate Latinos on who Ted Cruz really is,” said Martinez Ortega.

Texas Republican Joshua Treviño takes issue with the Democrats’ contention that more Latino voters would turn Texas blue. “This is the old trope that gets trotted out, that demographic change in the state will go Democrat, and you hear this a lot these days from them,” says Treviño, who was a speechwriter for George W. Bush and is currently vice president of communications at the Texas Public Policy Foundation. “While there are partisan tendencies among groups, the fact is that as affluence and social integration occurs, political pluralism increases,” he says.

Treviño adds it is not a “safe assumption” that more Latino voters will translate to increased Democratic numbers and Democratic elected officials, though he does say current Hispanic voter participation does not represent the proportion of Latinos in Texas.

But Texas Democrats say a focus on 6 key counties in the state where the majority of Latinos reside can make a big difference in increased voter registration, turnout – and future Democratic victories.

“Some look at my district and think it should be functioning as a Republican district,” says Senator Wendy Davis, who represents an area that is 29 percent Latino, 19 percent African American and 47.6 percent non-Hispanic white.  ”But we’ve demonstrated that by talking and connecting with these voters – it will happen,” Davis said.  She adds that while many areas have been redistricted as “purely Democrat” or “purely Republican,” the strategy is to take a district approach and apply it statewide – “focus on places where you have the biggest potential gain,” says Davis.

Democrat Martinez Fischer stated he is not concerned whether Texas turns blue in 2016 or 2020 – “the key is not to be fast, but to be right,” he said.

This article was first published in NBCLatino.

Sandra Lilley loves being an active part of our “national conversation”, on everything from politics, education and the economy to the latest books and people in the news. Sandra started out in Telemundo-NY as a general assignment reporter and later News Director. She was also a Dayside Managing Editor at MSNBC and a Planning Editor for the NBC Domestic Desk. Born and raised in Puerto Rico, Sandra studied history at Brown University, and currently lives in New Jersey with her family. Sandra hopes our site inspires and informs Latinos as they work toward their family’s “American Dream.”

[Photo by deege@fermentarium.com]

By Matt Barreto And Sylvia Manzano, Latino Decisions

New data from the November 2012 U.S. Census Current Population Survey (CPS) reveals a major shift in the U.S. voting population, with the number of White, non-Hispanic voters declining by more than 2 million from 2008 to 2012.  In contrast, the number of Latino, African American and Asian American voters increased by a combined 3.7 million in just 4 years.  During the run up to the 2012 election many notable pollsters and pundits failed to observe the changing demographics of the American electorate, with some such as Gallup forecasting as many as 80% of all voters would be White, after which noted Political Scientist Alan Abromowitz predicted that, “Gallup’s likely voter sample appears to be substantially under-representing non-white voters,” two weeks before election day. Building on the analysis by Abramowitz, Latino Decisions posted a lengthy report in October 2012 about how most polls were missing the growing Latino electorate.

Now that the Census has released its official estimates the data are clear: the Latino, Black and Asian vote are growing at a historic pace, and for the first time in history the raw number of White votes declined from one election to the next.  These changes are not unique to 2012, but part of a larger and irreversible trend in American politics in which the electorate is becoming increasingly diverse.

From 2008 to 2012 the total number of votes cast among White, non-Hispanics changed from 100,042,000 to 98,041,000, a net drop of 2 million votes.  In contrast the number of Latino voters increased from 9,745,000 in 2008 to 11,188,000 in 2012, a net increase of 1.4 million and African American votes increased even more by nearly 1.7 million.  Asian American voters, which received considerable notice in 2012 for the first time grew by over half a million from 3,357,000 to 3,904,000.  In total, nearly 3.7 million more minority votes were cast in 2012, while White votes dropped by 2 million.

The changes are even more dramatic comparing 2004 to 2012.  Although White votes increased slightly from 2004 to 2008, across eight years from 2004 to 2012, the number of Whites voting declined by 1.5 million. However the number of Black voters grew by almost 3.8 million in eight years, while the number of Latino voters grew by 3.6 million.  Asian Americans added 1.1 million voters, and combined, there were a staggering 8.5 million more minority voters in 2012 than in 2004.  While White voters are declining – a group Republicans won in both 2008 and 2012 by an average 57-41 in both years – Minority voters are growing by over 8 million – a group that Obama won in both 2008 and 2012 by an average 81-19 in both years.

Beyond 2012

The trends identified in the November 2012 U.S. Census CPS will continue for some time to come.  Because of the comparatively young age of Latinos, Blacks, and Asians the minority population will only continue to increase as part of the eligible, and voting population.  On the other hand, White, non-Hispanics are much older, and are aging out of the electorate.  As of 2012, the median age of the White, non-Hispanic population was 42.3, while the media age for Asian Americans was about 9 years younger at 33.2, Blacks were over 11 years younger than Whites at 30.9, and Latinos were about 15 years younger at a median age at 27.6.  What’s more, the Census reported in 2012 that for the first time ever, a majority of all babies born in the U.S. were non-White.

The population dynamics are sure to change the American electorate beyond 2012 as the number of Latino, Black, and Asian voters continues to grow at a pace much faster than for Whites, who are likely to continue facing declines in their voting eligible population for years to come.

This article was first published in Latino Decisions.

Dr. Matt A. Barreto is an Associate Professor in political science at the University of Washington, Seattle and the director of the Washington Institute for the Study of Ethnicity and Race. Barreto is a founding principal of Latino Decisions. He received his Ph.D. in political science from the University of California, Irvine in 2005.

Sylvia Manzano is a senior analyst at Latino Decisions.

[Photo By Barack Obama]

By Hunter Walker, Talking Points Memo

New York City could soon become the first major city in the country to give non-citizens the right to vote. The proposal, which would allow certain non-citizens to vote in local elections, appears to have a veto-proof majority in the New York City Council — enough to overcome opposition by Mayor Michael Bloomberg. As hearings on the proposal get underway Thursday, supporters are optimistic it will become law by the end of the year and believe it will have an impact beyond the five boroughs.

Click HERE or on the picture to read the full story.

[Photo by xbettyx]

By Victor Landa, NewsTaco

At first glance, yeah, Latino voters are “punching below their weight,” as a Pew press release succinctly put it. The Latino voter turn-out rate in the past presidential election was a paltry 48% – to quote Pew again – ,”far below that of whites (64.1%) or blacks (66.2%).”

And if that were the simple malady then the logical prescription would be more gym time and a change of diet to add some bulk. But there’s more to it than that.

Lets switch metaphors, abruptly, and reach for the proverbial glass to see if it’s half-empty or half-full.

First, turn away from percentages and look at real numbers. A record 11.2 million Latinos voted in 2012, an increase of 1.2 million over the 2008 presidential election.

Now, get a little closer to the glass and look at this: every month, according to Voto Latino, 50 thousand Latinos turn 18 years of age. Do the math, that’s 2.4 million new eligible Latino voters between 2008 and 2012. Hold that thought, and consider this:

• According to Census Bureau data the number of eligible Latinos who chose not to vote in 2012 was 2.3 million.
• 24% of the U.S. population under 18 years of age is Latino.
• According to the Census Bureau report, the turnout rate among 18- to 24-year-olds fell to 41.2% in 2012 from 48.5% in 2008.

Now step back and look at the glass again.

The problem isn’t that it’s half-anything. The problem is that the glass is the wrong size. The Latinos that didn’t bother to vote are young, so they belong in two bins and their voter behavior responds more to their youth than to their ethnicity. With time, as the 50 thousand a month accumulate birthdays, and jobs and families they’ll see the value in casting a vote and the 1.2 million voter participation increase that we saw between 2008 and 2012 will increase even more and astonish people.

It’s going to take a while – time at the gym, carbo-loading. And when it happens the headlines will yell about the incredible jump in voters. But between you and me, we know they’ve been here all along. And we know it’ll take work to get them all registered and plugged-in.

The first wave should be primed and ready by 2016…

[Photo by whatatravisty]

PRESS RELEASE

The report from the Census Bureau on the diversifying American electorate in 2012 confirms an historic turnout milestone first noted last December by the Pew Research Center, but undercuts a number of other widely-reported demographic analyses of last year’s presidential vote.

Here are the six most important take-aways from Census Bureau data:

1. For the first time ever, the black voter turnout rate in a presidential election exceeded the white voter turnout rate–66.2% versus 64.1%. While the presence of Barack Obama on the ballot in 2008 and 2012 no doubt contributed to the narrowing and reversal of what had been a longstanding black-white turnout gap, the rise in the black turnout rate pre-dates his candidacies.
2. Hispanics continue to punch below their weight. Much was made right after the November election about the clout of the Hispanic vote (by, among others, the Pew Research Center). But the new Census Bureau data show that Hispanics’ turnout rate–just 48%–was far below that of whites (64.1%) or blacks (66.2%). It also fell nearly two percentage points below the Hispanic turnout rate in 2008, which was 49.9%. Because of population growth, the number of Latinos who voted for president increased by about 1.4 million from 2008 to 2012, to a record 11.2 million, but the number of  Latinos who were eligible but chose not to vote increased even more–by 2.3 million–from 9.8 million in 2008 to 12.1 million in 2012.
3. Youth voter turnout rates also declined from 2008 to 2012, contrary to initial reports based on the national Election Day exit polls, which had shown the youth voter turnout rate holding steady. According to the Census Bureau report, the turnout rate among 18- to 24-year-olds fell to 41.2% in 2012 from 48.5% in 2008. (Most of the post-election analysis of the youth vote focused on 18- to 29-year-olds and showed no change in voter turnout rates between 2008 and 2012; the Census Bureau report only provides an analysis for those ages 18 to 24 years.) The turnout rates of adults ages 65 and older rose–to 71.9% in 2012 from 70.3% in 2008, according to the Census Bureau report.
4. Despite the low turnout rates for Hispanics, their high share of the under 18 population of the U.S. means that, by dint of generational replacement, they will become a more important voting bloc in future elections. Hispanics are 17% of the total U.S. population, but 24% of the under 18 population. Each year, an estimated 800,000 Latino youths turn 18. The overwhelming share is U.S-born citizens, and thus automatically eligible to vote once they enter adulthood.
5. Likewise, the so-called Millennial generation (adults, born after 1980, who are now ages 18 to 33) is certain to become a growing share of the electorate. Today they are 25.5% of the age-eligible electorate. By 2020, they will be 36.5%. If history is a guide, this cohort of voters will increase its voter participation levels as it grows older.
6. Non-whites were 26.3% of all voters in the 2012 election, a record high share. But they compose an even higher share of all U.S. adults age 18 and older–33.9%. By 2020 this share will rise to 37.2%, and by 2060 it will be 54.8%, according to Census Bureau projections. If the racial voting patterns from the 2012 election persist, the electoral playing field for future Republican presidential candidates will become increasingly difficult. (GOP candidate Mitt Romney received just 17% of the non-white vote.)

 Lastly, a methodological note:

The gap between the voter turnout reported by the Census Bureau and the actual national vote tallied by election officials widened in 2012. According to the Census Bureau’s 2012 Current Population Survey November Supplement on Voting and Registration, an estimated 133 million U.S. citizens voted in 2012. That estimate is higher–by 4 million votes–than the national tally of 129 million votes cast for president. The gap in reported votes and the actual vote tally is the widest since 2000 (when the gap was 5.4 million votes) and marks the first widening of the gap since 1984. The Census Bureau’s November supplement to the CPS is the most comprehensive data source available for examining the demographic composition of the electorate in federal elections, but it relies on a post-election self-reporting by survey respondents. Because of what is sometimes described as “social desirability bias” some survey respondents may say they voted when in fact they did not.

The blog post, ”Six Take-Aways from the Census Bureau’s Voting Report,” authored by Paul Taylor, executive vice president of Pew Research Center, and Mark Hugo Lopez, associate director of Pew Hispanic Center, is available at the Pew Hispanic Center’s website, www.pewhispanic.org.

Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan source of data and analysis. It does not take advocacy positions. Its Hispanic Center, founded in 2001, seeks to improve understanding of the U.S. Hispanic population and to chronicle Latinos’ growing impact on the nation.

# # #

[Photo by NewsTaco]

By Maeve Reston, Los Angeles Times

The two candidates vying to be mayor of Los Angeles courted Latino voters Saturday, promising to do more to help those who are seeking citizenship and to make greater efforts to clean up and enhance Latino neighborhoods such as Boyle Heights and Pacoima.

By Ari Berman, The Nation

In 2011 and 2012, 180 new voting restrictions were introduced in forty-one states. Ultimately, twenty-five laws and two executive actions were passed in nineteen states following the 2010 election to make it harder to vote. In many cases, these laws backfired on their Republican sponsors. The courts blocked ten of them, and young and minority voters—the prime target of the restrictions—formed a larger share of the electorate in 2012 than in 2008.

Despite the GOP’s avowal to reach out to new constituencies following the 2012 election, Republican state legislators have continued to support new voting restrictions in 2013. According to a report by Project Vote, fifty-five new voting restrictions have been introduced in thirty states so far this year.

Click on picture to read full story.

[Photo by valentinapowers]

By Sahil Kapur, Talking Points Memo

Voting rights advocates are sounding the warning sirens as the Supreme Court hears oral arguments Monday on a low-profile but important case on whether states may require people to submit proof of citizenship when registering to vote.

At issue is whether the Arizona law, known as Proposition 200, violates a federal law that requires states to let people register to vote while renewing drivers licenses or applying for social services. The form provided by the National Voter Registration Act requires people to attest that they are U.S. citizens, but not to provide documented proof, like the Arizona law does.

Click on picture top read full story.

[Photo by moonShadows7]

By Marin Cogan, New Republic

Few people in Florida can imagine Rubio running if Bush decided to get into the race. Though he has often been written about as an overnight Tea Party sensation, that narrative belies the methodic arc of Rubio’s career, points out Washington Postreporter Manuel Roig-Franzia in his book, The Rise of Marco Rubio. Duty, loyalty, and honor are considered first principles in his circles. “I have always seen him as a very respectful person,” said Rebeca Sosa, a former West Miami mayor who was tending her garden the day the young Rubio came to ask for her support in his first campaign. “I have no question in my mind that, if one day he needs to sit down with a friend and discuss issues of importance for the nation, … he and Jeb will do it.” Steven Geller, who served as the Democratic minority leader in the state Senate, told me, “I regard Marco as a man of honor, and I don’t think he’d do that to Jeb.”

“If Marco were to run against Jeb, or to run before Jeb has taken himself out, there would be a general feeling that Marco had betrayed his mentor,” Geller continued. “And I think that would hurt Marco.”

Click on picture to read full story.

[Photo by Gage Skidmore]

By Dan Amira, New York Magazine

According to a (caveat: very, very early) Quinnipiac poll, 60 percent of Hispanic voters would support Clinton in 2016, compared to a mere 24 percent for Rubio. Chris Christie, who is not Hispanic, pulled in 23 percent of the Hispanic vote to 62 percent for Clinton.

Click on picture to read full story.

[Photos by  US Embassy New Zealand, Gage Skidmore]

By Dr. Henry Flores, NewsTaco

Last week the Supreme Court listened to the arguments in a case titled Shelby County, AL v Eric Holder and it was a challenge of the constitutionality of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.  In an earlier column I wrote about the necessity of keeping both Section 5 and the entire Voting Rights Act.  I also wrote that I felt the Act needed to be extended to the entire country to protect voters from a lot of the funny stuff that goes on during elections.

After the hearing, though, the mainstream media was quick on the trigger and pretty much wrote obituaries for the VRA citing various comments made by individual judges.  I thought the “boys on the bus” were too uniformly singing the same tune so I decided to read the transcript of the hearing to see if the justices had said what was being reported in the news.

Well, some of what reporters were saying was accurate but there was a great deal that the justices said that was not reported in newspapers and on television.  Frankly, a good, thorough reading of that day’s transcript left me curious about why the “mainstream” media said what they did?

For instance, it appears that Justices Scalia, Sotomayor, Roberts, Kennedy and Kagan all asked questions insinuating that maybe the VRA should have a broader application.  All of these justices discussed examples of illegal, discriminatory, or questionable election behavior that had occurred outside the states covered under Section 5.  It appeared that there was uniform concern that the 1965 criteria used for approving Section 5 originally were outdated and new criteria were needed.

Shelby County argued that times had changed and racism does not exist in the South as it did in 1965.  I agree.  Racism does not exist in the South or anywhere else in the same manner as it did in 1965.  Racism does exist today; it’s just practiced differently than it was before 1965.  Today racism is color-blind or, as discovered during the Texas redistricting trial of 2012, hidden behind closed doors.  A majority of the justices even seemed to indicate that although the 1965 criteria are outdated other forms of discrimination in the election process exist so much so that the 2006 reauthorization vote was overwhelming approved by the Congress.  Additionally, 15,000 pages of findings supported the Senate’s reauthorization vote.

Frankly, Shelby County’s argument sounded more like a “cry baby” whining or some little kid wanting to “take their football and go home” because the other kids don’t want to let them play due to their lack of athleticism.

The Supreme Court has a weighty decision to make here.  It is clear in the transcript that discrimination has played a historical role in vote dilution throughout the states of the old confederacy.  This discrimination is based in the evil history of slavery and its legacy that is seen every day throughout this region.  All one has to do is visit the various cities and countrysides in this region to understand what I am saying.  Without mentioning the states, cities or towns that I have personally visited over the last 40 years I can unequivocally state that racism is alive and well in this region.  My discussions with elected officials, both white and black, indicate clearly that these two races do not have equal voices in the policy processes.  One can still sense the tensions between blacks and whites in almost every social area.  Segregated schools, churches and other social institutions still exist.  Resentment exists where white politicians reign over large black communities and vice-versa.

But, the Shelby County case is much more about the relations between whites and blacks.  America has changed dramatically since the War Between the States.  New demographic and ethnic groups have arrived on the scene changing the political equation at all levels of government and in many states of the union beyond those of the old confederacy.  Since the 1970s incidents of racial discrimination in the electoral process have surfaced in jurisdictions across the United States not covered under Section 5.  On one level, the Shelby County attorneys have a point about being singled out as being guilty of an offense while leaving the remainder of the states overlooked.

I really feel that the Supreme Court will not overturn Section 5.  As a matter of fact I hope the Supreme Court would look at the bigger picture and focus on the discrimination that occurs throughout the country at every level of the electoral process and direct the Congress to craft legislation that will outlaw such behaviors comprehensively.  I feel that we not only need to have a Section 5-like law that covers and protects the voting rights of African Americans but all other groups that are being victimized by those little people who see only electoral gain and control of the policy process as their privilege and not a right belonging to all the people of this great country.