NewsTaco

By Scott Keyes, Think Progress

Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-KS) took issue with his party’s attempt to win over Latino voters after the drubbing it took in the 2012 election.

“[It's] very discouraging,” Huelskamp told conservative radio host Steve Deace on Tuesday, that Republicans are trying “to win votes from the so-called ‘Hispanic voter.’” The conservative congressman argued that trying to persuade Latino voters to become Republicans was “very distracting” because their policy preferences are too disparate. He then conceded that Democrats had done far better winning their votes…

Click on the picture to read the full story.

[Photo by hbimedialibrary]

Have you read an article you’d like to suggest for the NewsTaco community? Let us know at: tips@newstaco.com

By Robert R. Preuhs, Latino Decisions

The 2012 election underscored the power of the Latino vote, particularly in battleground states like Colorado, Florida and Nevada.  Recent blogs here at Latino Decisions highlight the wide range of potential issues important to Latinos that federal and state elected officials now must include in their electoral and policymaking calculus, fromimmigration reform to environmental protection to taxation and spending.  Electoral calculus hinges on potential future votes, however, and the degree to which either party’s politicians respond to Latino preferences is not only a function of base mobilization but also appealing to moveable voters.  Among Latinos, and consistent with general patterns of partisanship and voting preferences, independents constitute the likely moveable voters in future elections.  Focusing on the issues and preferences important to unaffiliated Latinos would thus be a wise strategy for politicians seeking electoral success in the upcoming elections.

The impreMedia/Latino Decisions election eve poll highlights the association between partisan attachment and vote choice among Latinos in 2012.   Over 95% of Latino Democrats voted for Obama or the Democratic House candidate, while about 90% of Latino Republicans voted for Romney or their party’s candidate for the U.S. House.  These rather normal partisan affects are the reason for representing the policy preferences of the base.  Not much room exists for moving voters among Latino partisans.  Unaffiliated Latinos, on the other hand, may be the best bet for parties seeking to move voters.  Contrasted with the numbers above, Latino independents split their vote for Obama and Romney by 60/34, and the Democratic vs. Republican House candidate split was 60/40.  Democrats still hold a strong advantage, but if the Republican Party is interested in attracting Latino voters, independents are their best bet.  So, what do Latino independents want?  What follows is a discussion of the results for the sample of Latino independent/unaffiliated voters from the impreMedia/Latino Decisions election eve poll (question wording and full results are available here).

Immigration

Nationally 33% of Latino independents indicated that immigration was one of the top two most important issues facing the Latino community that politicians should address.  The role of immigration in unaffiliated voters’ choices reflects the broader theme of a push away from Republican positions, specifically Romney’s in the 2012 election, and a more tepid enthusiasm for the Obama Administration’s mid-campaign decision to defer deportation through the DHS directive.  While Latino independents were split between reporting more enthusiasm and no impact of the DHS directive, 57% reported being less enthusiastic for Romney given his positions on immigration (Figure 1). The 2012 Republican campaign rhetoric clearly will not move Latino independents, but as Figure 2 suggests, Republicans may make inroads, as 40% report being more likely to vote for the GOP if the GOP endorses some form of comprehensive immigration reform.

Taxation and Spending

With the fiscal cliff quickly approaching, Latino independents’ take on a solution to the federal budget deficit and a general orientation to tax or spend politics is another aspect of policy preferences that politicians ought to pay attention to over the next several years (if not weeks or days).  Latino independents tend to a combination of spending cuts and increased taxation on the wealthy as a solution, as 49% support such an approach (see Figure 3).  Opinion tilts a bit toward taxing the wealthy, however, and with only 15% supporting a “spending cuts only” approach, moving unaffiliated Latinos is not likely with a cuts only policy position.

Health Care

Latino independents tend toward a government approach to ensuring access to health insurance and slightly favor retaining “ObamaCare”.  As figure 4 shows, 48% of unaffiliated Latinos favor leaving ObamaCare in place compared to 39% supporting repeal.  This is only a slight edge, so perhaps positions on ObamaCare may not move Latino independents to a great extent.  However, an inclination to maintain partisan positions is offset by the 55% of unaffiliated Latinos who support a government role for ensuring health care access (Figure 4).

Where does all this lead in terms of policies that may move Latino independents?  Immigration seems the most straightforward.  Unaffiliated Latinos will respond positively to parties that support comprehensive immigration reform.  If Democrats want to retain Latino support, and Republicans want to pry some support away from the Democrats, moving forward with comprehensive immigration reform is a no-brainer.  Latino independents also support some combination of spending cuts and taxing the wealthy as a solution to the fiscal policy crisis.  While the exact nature of the combination is hard to derive from the data, a hard cuts-only position is certainly a losing strategy for moving Latino independents toward one’s party.  Finally, health care policy preferences of the unaffiliated suggest that while there is some room for both GOP and Democratic positions as they stand, the tendency toward support for ObamaCare and a governmental role in ensuring health care access means limited government arguments may not play too well among Latino independents.

While Latino independents not surprisingly fall between Latino Republicans and Latino Democrats on most positions, the reality is that their 60/40 split favoring Democrats means the GOP faces a tough road ahead if they are to move the unaffiliated to vote for their party’s candidates.  Changes in immigration policy are possible, but retaining their base may not allow for the fiscal and health care policy shifts that would move Latino independents in substantial numbers.  But perhaps the most striking obstacle for the GOP is that Latinos just do not believe the party is looking out for their community’s interests.  Using the 2012 presidential candidates as proxies for their parties, a sense of the problem emerges.  When asked if Obama/Romney care about the Latino community, 57% of Latino independents responded that Obama truly cares about Latinos compared to only 16% indicating Romney cares about Latinos.  More striking, only 4% of unaffiliated Latinos indicated that Obama does not care about Latinos, while 53% said the same about Romney.  These numbers would not matter if not for the fact that Latino independents vote to support their community more than either party.  When asked the reason that best reflects their rationale for voting in 2012, 47% responded that, “I’m voting in 2012 because I wanted to support and represent the Latino community,” (the modal category and 25% more than the second place response of supporting the Democrats).  All this suggests that if the parties want to retain or attract unaffiliated Latino voters, they would be wise to recognize the unique policy preferences and motivations of Latino independents.  Elections determined at the margins may depend on it.

This article was first published in Latino Decisions.

 Robert R. Preuhs is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Metropolitan State University of Denver. He has published numerous articles on state politics and minority representation. His new book, “Black-Latino Relations in U.S. National Politics,” co-authored with Rodney E. Hero, will be released by Cambridge University Press in January, 2013

[Photo by NewsTaco]

By Latino Decisions

Latino support for President Obama was huge, with a record-breaking 75% of Latino voters nationwide (see below) casting their ballot for the President- the previous high for Latino voters was the 72% for Bill Clinton in 1996. Romney’s share of 23% was nowhere near the 38% his team identified as his “magic number” for Latinos nationally.

The Latino vote share numbers across key states were even more pronounced, with Latinos exceeding the national average of 75% in most of the battleground states, including a remarkable 87% in Colorado and 80% in Nevada. The 66% of Latinos who voted for Obama in Virginia, 58% in Florida, and 82% in Ohio were also critical to the overall outcome of the race. At the end of the day, we estimate that the Latino vote led to a net margin gain for President Obama of +5.4%, and a +2.3% bump in the national popular vote. Consequently, if Latinos had split their vote evenly (50/50) in this election, President Obama would have lost the national popular vote. For the first time in American history, the Latino electorate has a legitimate claim of being nationally decisive!

What explains the huge numbers for Obama? As detailed in the webinar slides, Romney suffered from both an outreach problem to Latino voters as well as a policy agenda that just did not resonate with the Latino electorate. A robust 56% of Latino voters nationally did not feel that Romney “cares much” about the Latino community, with another 18% feeling as though the Romney campaign was “hostile” toward the Latino community. Conversely, 66% of Latinos indicated that President Obama “cares about” the Latino community. The same general pattern held across the state specific polls.

As we have been consistently reporting throughout the campaign, immigration policy was the key policy that likely explains the significant gap in vote choice for Latinos in 2012. Overall, 35% of Latino voters indicated that immigration policy was one of the two most important issues to the Latino community in 2012, with greater percentages across several key battleground states. As depicted below, Romney’s policy stance on immigration led nearly 60% of Latino voters to feel less enthusiastic about him, while President Obama benefited from a 58% increase in enthusiasm for his deferred action policy.

In what we view will be a watershed moment in American political history, Latino voters delivered in a major way for President Obama and the Democratic Party in 2012. Stay tuned for more in-depth analysis from Latino Decisions over the next few weeks, including a series of blogs focused on the nuances within several key states that decided the 2012 race.

This article was first published in Latino Decisions.

[Photo By bradleygee]

By Rob Preuhs, Latino Decisions

The Latino vote will help determine the presidential election.  If one is not convinced, playing around with the Latino Decisions’ Latino Vote Map for a few of the battleground states with a sizeable Latino population ought to change your mind.  The basic equation for each state is quite simple: the marginal (dis)advantage for one of the candidates among Latino voters multiplied by the Latino proportion of the electorate equals the net effect of the Latino vote.  The Latino effect thus comes down to two variables—marginal group preferences and relative turnout.   If one approaches zero, the Latino effect approaches zero.  And in a state like Colorado, now one of the closest battleground states with a sizeable Latino population, how this equation plays out quite possibly determines who passes the 270 point in the Electoral College.

This should not be a groundbreaking insight as the narrative of Colorado electoral politics has included a prominent role for Latino voters for quite some time.  Yet this year’s storyline has focused less on the preference portion of the equation and more on the potential for low turnout.  Indeed, this author answered more than one request for a comment on the Latino voter effect by noting low levels of enthusiasm among Latinos in Colorado and thus anticipating a smaller effect in 2012 than in 2008.  Lack of movement in immigration reform, the disproportionate effect of the economic downturn on Latinos, and a reversion to the mean all seem (or seemed like) plausible explanations for such an expectation.

Yet, new polling data from America’s Voice/Latino Decisions’ September/October 2012 Colorado Latino Voter Survey might just change this narrative leading up to election.  The changing narrative is not, however, about preference margins.  As Figure 1 shows, Obama holds a solid advantage over Romney, with 74% of respondents leaning, likely or certain to vote for Obama and this number has not changed much since the June Battleground poll.  The first variable in the Latino Effect equation is a rather stable 40-45% net marginal preference for Obama (conservatively estimated and accounting for the margin of error).

Preferences are only half the equation.  What about enthusiasm and the potential for high (or low) Latino turnout?  Well, contrary to the narrative of a disappointed or disillusioned Colorado Latino electorate, the Sept./Oct. 2012 data suggest a reasonably high level of enthusiasm for the election and perhaps more important, a majority of Latino voters who are even more enthusiastic for this election than they were for the 2008 election.  When asked, “Thinking ahead to the November 2012 presidential election, how enthusiastic are you about voting in the election next year?,” 69% said they were “very enthusiastic,” 23% were “somewhat enthusiastic,” and 4 and 3 percent were “not too” or “not at all” enthusiastic, respectively.  With almost 70% of respondents very enthusiastic, it is hard to construct a narrative of an apathetic Latino electorate.  Another question gauged enthusiasm relative to the 2008 election with similar results.[1]  54% of respondent said they were more enthusiastic in 2012 compared to 2008, and another 22% said their level of enthusiasm was the same as the 2008 election which was characterized by one of the largest surges in Latino voter turnout and enthusiasm of any recent presidential election (that’s quite a high bar).   In short, enthusiasm is quite high among Colorado Latinos.   And, as Figure 2 shows, enthusiasm increased from the June Battleground Poll—by almost 10 percent for the most enthusiastic responses in each question.

We can also look more closely at enthusiasm among Presidential preference categories and partisan orientations to see if one segment of the Latino electorate and their preference margins are driving enthusiasm.  Figure 3 presents the overall enthusiasm responses for those reporting to be certain to vote for Obama or Romney, as well as party identifies, and independents.

Figure 4 does the same for the responses to the question measuring enthusiasm relative to 2008.  Overall enthusiasm (Figure 3) is consistent across these groups, with the exception of independents who are generally less enthusiastic about elections (one of those consistent patterns of voter behavior identified by political scientists).  There is nothing here to really suggest a startling lack (or disproportionately high) level of enthusiasm for any segment.  Relative enthusiasm shows some variation, however, with Latino Republicans and Romney supporters demonstrating a higher level of 2012 vs. 2008 enthusiasm compared to Democrats and Obama supports.  This may be the enthusiasm gap, but given that adding the “same/no different” responses for Democrats and Obama supporters roughly equals the Republican and Romney relative enthusiasm totals, respectively, perhaps this is only an aberration resulting from the hyper-enthusiasm levels of 2008.  If Latinos are as or more enthusiastic about 2012 than 2008, it’s hard to point to a drop in enthusiasm.  (And combined, the June poll revealed 70% of respondents reported enthusiasm at the same or higher levels than in 2012).

At least in Colorado, the September/October data undercuts the narrative of a disillusioned and unenthusiastic Latino electorate.  Overall enthusiasm seems high, among most groups, and majorities of Obama and Romney supporters are more enthusiastic than in 2008.  Moreover, three-fourths of Latinos report similar or greater levels of enthusiasm in 2012—a pretty remarkable level of enthusiasm given the high bar set in 2008.  So, what explains the traction of the low enthusiasm narrative?  National numbers do support such a story.  But in battleground states, higher enthusiasm and participation rates are expected among the overall electorate as competitive elections generally lead to both, and Latinos do not seem to be an exception.  All voters, including Latinos, are quite simply cued to the importance of their electoral context and are appropriately responsive to such a context.  Other factors, such as Obama’s DHS directive and Romney’s reply, and simply temporal proximity, add to list of potential enthusiasm boosters.

In the end, the simple Latino voter effect equation should look a lot like 2008 in Colorado if enthusiasm levels are a reasonable proxy for November turnout.  And, while other factors may still dampen turnout among Latinos a bit, the Latino impact on Colorado’s presidential election should be of a similar magnitude as in 2008.  Perhaps it’s time for a new narrative of Latino voter impact in Colorado.

The commentary of this article reflects the views of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Latino Decisions. Latino Decisions and Pacific Market Research, LLC make no representations about the accuracy of the content of the article.

This article was first published in Latino Decisions.

Robert R. Preuhs is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Metropolitan State University of Denver. He has published numerous articles on state politics and minority representation. His most recent article, co-authored with Eric Gonzalez Juenke,“Irreplaceable Legislators? Rethinking Minority Representatives in the New Century” appears in The American Journal of Political Science.

[Photo by stock.xchng]

PRESS RELEASE

A Record 24 Million Latinos Are Eligible to Vote, But Turnout Rate Has Lagged That of  Whites, Blacks

A record 24 million Latinos are eligible to vote in the 2012 presidential election, according to ananalysis of Census Bureau data by the Pew Hispanic Center, a project of the Pew Research Center. This is up by more than 4 million, or 22%, since 2008, when 19.5 million Latinos were eligible to vote.

Latinos are the nation’s largest minority group. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, in 2011 there were 51.9 million Latinos in the U.S., making up 16.7% of the nation’s population. Latinos today comprise a greater share of the nation’s 215 million eligible voters than they did just a few years ago—-11.0% this year, up from 9.5% in 2008 and 8.2% in 2004.

However, the turnout rate of eligible Latino voters historically lags that of whites and blacks by substantial margins. In 2008, for example, 50% of eligible Latino voters cast ballots, compared with 65% of blacks and 66% of whites. Also, despite ongoing Latino population growth, the number of Latinos who said they are registered to vote fell by about 600,000 between 2008 and 2010, according to Census Bureau data. This was the only significant decline in the number of Latino registered voters in the past two decades.

There is not yet any nationwide data on Latino voter registration levels so far in 2012. In the only four states that report such records by ethnicity—-Alabama, Florida, Georgia and North Carolina—-the 2012 registration levels of Hispanics have already surpassed the 2008 levels. However, these states are not necessarily representative of the nation as a whole; more so than most other states, they haveexperienced very rapid growth in their Hispanic population in recent years.

This report explores electoral participation trends among Hispanics in recent presidential election cycles. It also provides a snapshot of the geography and demography of the Hispanic vote in 2012, with a special focus on the so-called “battleground states.” Accompanying this report are state profiles of Latino eligible voters in 41 states and the District of Columbia, each based on data from the 2010 American Community Survey. Also accompanying this report is an interactive map showing key characteristics of Latino voters in all 50 states and the District of Columbia.

The report, “A Record 24 Million Latinos Are Eligible to Vote, But Turnout Rate Has Lagged That of Whites, Blacks,” authored by Mark Hugo Lopez, Associate Director, Pew Hispanic Center, Seth Motel, Research Assistant, Pew Hispanic Center and Eileen Patten, Research Assistant, Pew Hispanic Center, is available at the Pew Hispanic Center’s website, www.pewhispanic.org.

Wednesday September 26, 2012

The Candidates Face Hispanic Voters (The New York Times): Mitt Romney and President Obama made direct appeals to Latino voters this week, appearing on successive days at a candidate forum sponsored by Univision, the national Spanish-language television network. The discussion ranged widely, touching on subjects as varied as the Middle East and student loans. But it focused heavily on immigration, a difficult subject providing rich opportunities for evasion and disappointment.

 Voter ID Laws, Purges Threaten Latino Americans’ Voting Rights (U.S. News & World Report): Across the country, Latinos are feeling the blow of a new round of voting laws. Take Veronica Figoli. She came to the United States from Venezuela in 1999 as a student, and has since built a successful career in Colorado. She became a U.S. citizen in 2011 and registered to vote—but this past summer she received a letter saying that she needed to prove her citizenship in order to vote in November.

Robert De Posada Tells Latino Voters: Vote For Third Party Or Don’t Vote At All (Huffington Post): “Don’t vote for those who have betrayed you,” was a little long. It was a reference to immigration reform and the failure of members of both parties to advance it or even support it, as de Posada saw it. So the line became: “Don’t vote.”

 Voter ID Laws, Purges May Deter 10 Million Latinos from Polls, Study Says (Fox News Latino): Latino voters are considered pivotal to the presidential election this year – if they turn out in large numbers in key battleground states. But a new report, from civil right activists, warns the combined effects of voter roll purges, demands for proof of citizenship and photo identification requirements in several states may hinder at least 10 million Hispanic citizens who seek to vote this fall.

Activists use education to overcome new voting laws (USA Today): At Jackson State University and Tougaloo College in Mississippi, students are setting up voter registration tables at football games and at Friday “hot spots” where classmates gather for music and fun.

Over 10 million Latinos may not vote. Why? (Catholic Online): New laws in several U.S. states that require photo identification prior to casting ballots could hinder at least 10 million Hispanics in 23 states, activists say. Statistics say that Latinos eligible to vote who might be blocked from voting this year is equal to the margin of victory in a number of states, according to civil rights group the Advancement Project.

Texas Seeks to Unblock Purge of Deceased From Voter Rolls (Bloomberg): Texas asked a state judge to dissolve a temporary court order blocking a purge of as many as 77,000 “possibly dead” people from voter rosters in one of several courtroom battles leading up to the Nov. 6 election.

Hispanics Certain To Back Obama, But In What Numbers? (NPR): There appears to be no question that President Obama will win the lion’s share of Hispanic support. But there are still very big questions to be answered about how many votes such support will translate into.

Characteristics of the 60 Largest Hispanic Metropolitan Areas, Pew Study (Kansas City InfoZine): Nearly half (45%) of the nation’s Hispanic population lives in just 10 metropolitan areas and more than three-in-four (76%) live in 60 of the largest Hispanic metropolitan areas, according to an analysis of 2010 American Community Survey (ACS) data by the Pew Hispanic Center, a project of the Pew Research Center.

 Mexican-Origin Hispanics Are the Largest US Hispanic Group (Hispanic Business): Mexican-origin Hispanics make up 65 percent of the total Hispanic population in the U.S., according to the Pew Hispanic Center’s analysis of 2010 American Community Survey (ACS) data released earlier this week.

Latino Groups Call Out Kennedy Center’s Neglect to Honor Latino Artists (Hispanically Speaking): In letters to Kennedy Center executives, Caroline Kennedy, President Obama, and members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, the National Hispanic Foundation for the Arts (NHFA) and the National Hispanic Leadership Agenda (NHLA) are calling for major changes in the process by which Kennedy Center Honorees are selected and asking why there is a constant pattern of exclusion of Latinos. The groups’ demands follow the recent announcement of the 2012 Honorees, none of whom are Latino artists.

Lalo Alcaraz digs into the Kennedy Center Honors controversy (NBC Latino): Latinos can go “blank” themselves! This is what Kennedy Center director Michael Kaiser must have been thinking when he screamed, “Go F___ yourself!” into the telephone when confronted by Felix Sanchez, director of the National Hispanic Foundation for the Arts (NHFA) on the continuing Latino Lockout at the Kennedy Center honors. Since 1978, the Kennedy Center Honor has gone to only artists of Latino descent, Chita Rivera and Placido Domingo. I spoke to him about this disturbing incident, and the even more disturbing third of a century long diss against Latino artists in the United States.

Democrats kill House GOP immigrant visa plan after GOP eliminates diversity lottery (Houston Chronicle): A House bill to increase visas for immigrants with American degrees in the science, technology, engineering and medicine fields was shot down Thursday. At 257-158, it failed to get the necessary two-thirds majority to pass. A cry to bring the “best and the brightest” immigrants to the U.S. rang out from both sides of the House, but in the end screams of “yea” and “nay” drowned out chances of unison.

Alabama Immigration Law Causes Labor Shortage, Forces Importation Of Immigrants (Huffington Post): The Mexican government is reviewing a labor union’s complaint that Alabama’s crackdown on illegal immigrants violates an international trade agreement. An official with Mexico’s labor department confirmed the review in a letter released Thursday by the group that filed the complaint, the Service Employees International Union.

Report: Undocumented immigrants arrested and deported in 2011 hit record highs (Mimai Herald/Kansas City Star): Samuel Soto, an undocumented Honduran, is free after having been detained for more than three months in a detention center for immigrants in Broward County. Yet, Soto is still in danger of being deported. His freedom could be revoked any time and he could be placed on a plane to Honduras.

Romney Promises Not to ‘Round Up’ Undocumented Immigrants (ABC News): The candidate emphasized that he would expand legal immigration and said that he wouldn’t aggressively pursue undocumented immigrants living in the United States. ”I am not going to be going around the country and rounding them up,” he said.

Texas Immigration Solution’ is a sensible policy, proponents say (Texas Tribune/KVUE): In June the Republican Party of Texas adopted what conservative proponents of immigration reform called a sensible policy on the issue, one that called for a national guest-worker program. That plank of the party’s platform was championed by the “Texas Immigration Solution,” a Houston-based nonprofit that also calls for a secure border and alternatives to mass deportation.

3 views on how US should combat illegal immigration (Christian Science Monitor): 1. Tighten up: Eliminate incentives for illegal immigration. Improve detection and removal.

Jose Antonio Vargas Challenges NYT and AP To Drop ‘Illegal Immigrant’ (ABC News/Univision): Starting today, a non-profit founded by Jose Antonio Vargas, a journalist, activist, and undocumented immigrant, will begin monitoring the use of the phrase “illegal immigrant” in the media, with the goal of shifting the conversation around the issue.

Is ‘Illegal Immigrant’ the Right Description? (The New York Times): Jose Antonio Vargas is a man on a mission. The journalist turned immigration activist wants news organizations to stop using the term “illegal immigrants,” which he finds disparaging and inaccurate. He’s particularly focusing on The Times and The Associated Press to change their policies.

By Latinovations

As of 2011, 17 states have passed various forms of voter suppression measures, which are likely to affect the outcome of the 2012 Presidential election.

Additionally, the 2012 Republic National Convention committee has already adopted language supporting states that have passed voter ID and proof of citizenship laws.

“Voter suppression unfairly aims at a short-term gain for one party and endangers the democratic process,” says Frank Hagler, in How Voter Suppression Endangers our Democratic Process. “Without laws forbidding unfair voter restrictions, there will be a reduction in the amount of voters in the upcoming election.”

15 of these states are primarily Republican, and several states have used measures that included requiring a government-issued photo ID to vote, cutting back on early voting, and eliminating Election Day registration.

As previously reported in La Plaza, these setbacks can prevent a rise of Latino voters or disengage voter education.

“Texas and Florida, two states that have passed voter reform laws, have the second and sixth highest percentage of Hispanic Americans by population,” says Hagler.

“The impact will fall most heavily on young, minority, and low-income voters, as well as on voters with disabilities,” claims NYU’s Brennan Center for Justice’s report, Voting Law Changes in 2012.

This article was first published in Latinovations.

Friday, April 27, 2012

Robert Reich: The GOP’s Death Wish (Market Playground): What are the three demographic groups whose electoral impact is growing fastest? Hispanics, women, and young people. Who are Republicans pissing off the most? Latinos, women, and young people.

Debunking what media call ‘crucial’ Hispanic vote bloc (Daily World): After reading dozens of mainstream media newspaper and national magazine stories about the so-called “crucial” Latino November vote, I have sadly concluded that my journalism colleagues either can’t do simple math or have decided to forego fundamental research.

Arizona’s immigration law: Where’s the Christian compassion? (The Washington Post): …this week, the community of Clarksdale, Arizona will “celebrate the state’s Centennial and Hispanic culture” with an event they are calling the “Grande Fiesta.” Celebrating Hispanics the same week that the U.S. Supreme Court reviews Arizona laws that clearly target this same group is but one of the many ironies that shape this state.

An Immigrant-Friendly Republican Dares To Dream (Wall Street Pit): Rubio’s newly proposed version of the bill, which he plans to unveil in the next few weeks, would eliminate the specific path to citizenship for these young people outlined in former versions. But it would still grant them non-immigrant visas, allowing them to live, study and work in the United States while following existing routes toward naturalization.

Is Marco Rubio’s DREAM Act Dead on Arrival? (Fox News Latino):  Democrat leaders from the Congressional Hispanic Caucus who met with Rubio, a Florida Republican, over the plan on Wednesday said they were concerned about the lack of details about the senator’s plan, and the odds against it being passed in Congress.

New map of Arizona legislative districts clears US review for Voting Rights Act compliance (The Republic):  A map of new legislative districts for Arizona to use in elections in the coming decade has cleared a federal review for compliance with the Voting Rights Act. A Justice Department official’s letter sent Thursday to lawyers for the state’s redistricting commission says the department does not have any objections to the map.

Poll: Ariz. immigration law hurts Romney in key states (Politico):  Public Policy Polling and Project New America are out with a new poll of Hispanic voters in Nevada, Florida and New Mexico, finding that Mitt Romney’s immigration stance isn’t doing him any favors in those states.

Is the Supreme Court About to Mobilize Latino Voters? (Mother Jones):  Almost two years ago to the day, activists in Arizona assembled in front of the state capitol in Phoenix to protest SB 1070, the harsh immigration law that the Supreme Court heard oral arguments about on Wednesday. The activists’ 100-day vigil signaled a growing political awakening of Arizona’s Latino residents—a shift that could affect the outcome of this year’s election and many more to come. If the Supreme Court allows the Arizona law to stand, activists say, it could trigger an even greater shift in Latinos’ attitudes.

Study: Latinos More Likely To Favor Strict Gun Control (Huffington Post):  Latinos are more likely than both whites and African Americans to favor strict gun control laws, according to a report released by the Pew Research Center on Wednesday.

NFL Draft Lacks Latinos (Fox News Latino):  Expect Andrew Luck to go No. 1. Expect Robert Griffin III to go No. 2. Expect to be inundated with analysis as experts go for days, breaking down every pick. And expect to see few – if any – Latino players called during the three-day player selection.

San Antonio, Texas — We recently had the privilege of sitting down with San Antonio Mayor Julián Castro and chatting about a few different things. Castro is one of President Barack Obama’s campaign co-chairs, and has been very active in working to bring prosperity to San Antonio, a city that is 63% Latino. We spoke to him about his role with the campaign, thoughts on the 2012 election and Latino vote, the work he’s done in San Antonio to bring prosperity to this largely Latino city, and his future plans.

NT: Why do you support President Obama and why would you want to take on the role to encourage others to do so as one of his campaign co-chairs?

JC: I know, particularly with Republicans, there’s been a big push of this narrative that President Obama somehow the failed Latino community by not passing comprehensive immigration reform. Comprehensive immigration reform has not passed, but I do believe that the president has pushed the agenda to try to get it passed — particularly with the DREAM Act, which did get through one chamber of Congress.

I believe that it makes sense for Latinos to be supportive of the president because you have to look at the entirety of the issues. You have to look at probably the most important issue, which is investment in education. You have a Republican Party that would just as soon do away with the federal Department of Education that has helped ensure a certain quality level of education, that has invested in minority and low income minorities, that has helped colleges and universities offer opportunities to low-income students.

So to the people I wonder, why would you support the president over a Republican? First and foremost, when you look at the entirety of issues, there is no doubt in my mind that, not just based on history of what he and the Democrats have already done, but what they are working on and what they are proposing, if their worldview, if their investments were to pass, that is much better for the Latino community.

And then secondly, it is clever, but it is not accurate for the Republican Party to suggest that President Obama has not tried on immigration, or that he is somehow betrayed Latino community. The fact is that, in the Democratic Party had basically 80 or 90% of the Democratic representatives willing to support comprehensive immigration reform and the DREAM Act, and on the Republican side you have probably 97% of the representatives or maybe 100%, unwilling to support even the DREAM Act, much less comprehensive immigration reform.

NT: How will immigration play a role in this election? What are your thoughts on the “Latino vote”?

JC: I believe that immigration will play a role — especially in states like Arizona and Nevada — we’ve already seen it in the 2010 cycle, fueled more activity within the Latino community. And I’m confident that’ll be the case again.

I also believe that just generally that, if Latinos, if our community, does not see the necessity of coming out to vote after the few year that we’ve had — what’s happened in Arizona, what’s happened here in Texas, what’s happened in Nevada — how much bad legislation, how many insults, how many conversations about electrified fences and books that you can’t read is it going to take before you are motivated to go vote?

And at some level, with our community, it is coming to the point where — perhaps it’s best described if that it is already — we already have it within our power to change these numbers, to elect more people to Congress and all along the line. And socioeconomics of course play a role, but our performance at the polls is not what it should be, even by those standards.

So, my hope is that, with everything that has happened in the last couple of years, that Latinos will come to the polls in 2012 at unprecedented levels and be motivated by President Obama, but also by congressional candidates, by mayoral candidates, by school board candidates, to get out and vote.

My fear is that if our community does not, if you go through this 2012 election cycle and it is just a blip on the radar screen, what does that say to folks that are running next time? Basically you can insult people, you can put in place policies that try and disenfranchise like voter ID, you can call for study of community history “dangerous to the Republic” and it’s not going to matter, because people aren’t going to come out to vote. That would be the worst position to be in by 2013, 2014.

NT: What are your thoughts on Latinos in technology fields and what are you doing in San Antonio to encourage them entering the field?

JC: I do think that San Antonio can become, just because of its history, its demographics, a lot like Atlanta — in terms of the large segment of African American professionals and a very successful middle class. Whether it’s in the tech field, or in the legal field, or in advertising — whatever is is — we can have that here. You have that in Miami, to a great extent.

Some of the things that we are doing to help make that possible are that we are taking a look at our small business incentives and our contracting ordinances to see how we can better incentives the big companies to work with smaller companies and help them grow. And also, in an appropriate way, where the city can extend opportunities to small businesses, minority businesses, so that they can grow and so this can be a city of 21st century entrepreneurialism the way that it was in the 20th century.

That’s been the insufficiency. A community like San Francisco or Austin, in the 21st century sectors — whether it’s in media or cyber or anything else — they had more of the startups, more of the entrepreneurialism whereas San Antonio, a lot of its wealth and businesses, were centered around 20th century industries, like real estate, oil and gas. One exception is in the biosciences and healthcare, where we do see that ecosystem. We want to create that ecosystem in these other sectors as well so we’ve been working on sustainability, renewable energy, cybersecurity, as well as aerospace and many others.

But Latinos, absolutely, have to be a part of that equation because they are 63% of the city. We want folks to have an opportunity to do well here and to stay here and to be entrepreneurial.

NT: Are you going to be the next Senator or Governor of Texas?

JC: I’ll be here if the voters will have me through 2017. And hopefully the state will change from something that is blood-red to something that is, at least, a majestic purple.

[Photo By City of San Antonio]

I started thinking recently about what our country would look like in the future if Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) were to be declared unconstitutional. This is the part of the law that requires states to check with the Justice Department that boundaries do not disenfranchise voters before being approved. This is not an unlikely possibility, because currently the Texas Attorney General Gregg Abbott has appealed the Justice Department’s (DOJ) failure to pre-clear the Texas Voter ID law. He’s arguing that Section 5 would not dilute the power of Latino voters, and that it is basically no longer necessary.

If Section 5 fell, then any jurisdiction in Texas could modify any of their election laws without worrying about having to ask permission of DOJ or the Washington D.C. District Court. This means that any jurisdiction could close any polling place where they felt there was low voter turnout. So, for instance they could combine several precincts that had low voter turnout, and then rotate the polling place around every election, just to save money. This happened to me once when I lived in a relatively rural area of San Antonio and I missed voting half the time because I couldn’t find the polling place!

If Section 5 fell, then any jurisdiction in Texas could alter the early voting times, number of days and so forth, minimizing the convenience of going to the polls and thereby diluting the vote. The state could impose stricter voter identification laws then they are currently proposing — maybe Texas would only allow those that had a photo concealed weapons identity card to vote. Governor Rick Perry once proposed that Texas secede from the union, so it is possible that even if one held a passport issued by the United States government, it would not be accepted as proof of citizenship for voting purposes.

This would also eliminate all students, soldiers or retired veterans.

If Section 5 fell, then lengthier residency requirements where you had to prove land ownership would be required before one were allowed to even register to vote. This would eliminate all renters or students who don’t happen to own their dormitories. The State of Texas could reinstate the poll tax, which in today’s dollars, would probably be valued at more than $100. So if one did not have $100 in discretionary monies available when it was time to pay your voting taxes, then you simply could not vote. God forbid if you lost your receipt and could not prove you had paid the tax.

If Section 5 fell (am I getting poetic here), then Texas could reinstitute the literacy test as part of being allowed to register to vote. So one would have to prove they could read, recite the Constitution of the United States (if Texas dared to recognize that country’s existence) or recite the Constitution of the State of Texas, which is so long no one could memorize it anyway. This would eliminate almost everyone, given the level of educational attainment in the state.

If Section 5 fell, then any redistricting would be completely unsupervised by the federal government and minority communities could be split up in any number of ways, effectively ending all possibilities of having Latinos, African or Asian Americans elected to any of our august state’s legislative bodies.

If Section 5 fell — well you get by drift. If Section 5 fell, the State of Texas’ election system would return to what it looked like in 1876, and before. Latinos and blacks would cease to have a voice in Texas state government. Section 5, as far as Texas is concerned, is one of the few bulwarks underrepresented people have in their attempts at having their voices heard. Without Section 5 of the VRA, Latinos and blacks would become politically invisible and subject to the dictates of the numerical minority.

[Photo By nathangibbs]

The National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials (NALEO) Educational Fund (link to site) projects that due to an estimated 50,000 Latinos turning 18 each month, 12.2 million Latinos will be voting in the upcoming Presidential election.

“While the Latino vote continues to increase with each Presidential election, much work needs to be done to fully engage Latinos in our country’s electoral process,” said NALEO Executive Director Arturo Vargas. “In 2008, 19.5 million Latinos were eligible to vote, but half did not cast ballots, because they were not registered or did not turn out. The Latino electorate must make faster progress if America’s democracy is to thrive.”

Mr. Vargas believes that the Latino vote will increase 26% from 2008, where 9.7 million votes were casted. According to NALEO, this is due to an estimated 50,000 Latinos turning 18 each month.

At least one out of five voters will be Latino in key states such as California, New Mexico, and Texas.
“Both presidential candidates and political parties must actively work to engage Latino voters and address the issues they care about,” said Mr. Vargas. “This electorate has shown that it cannot be taken for granted by either party. Campaigns must enhance their strategies to reach all Latino voters, both native-born and naturalized. Latinos played a key role in the 2008 election; they will determine who is sworn in on January 20, 2013.”

[Photo By kristin_a]

Dr. Raul Ruiz says that he is an emergency room physician first, and his foray into politics as  the Democratic candidate for the 36th Congressional District is but another way he can serve his patients. Ruiz’s allegorical American Dream story — the son of farmworkers who became the first Latino to receive three graduate degrees from Harvard and then an emergency room physician in his hometown — is paired with changes in redistricting that make it a possibility that the hometown hero could oust Republican Congresswoman Mary Bono-Mack, who will be seeking her eighth term.

The district changed in the most recent round of redistricting, is now 47% Latino, and runs from Hemet to Blythe, including Palm Springs and Ruiz’s Coachella Valley home. Before redistricting Republicans had a 6% registration advantage over Democrats, he told NewsTaco; now it’s just 1.7%. And while only 27% of registered voters in the district are Latino, there are 40,000 eligible Latinos and a large bloc of independent voters that Ruiz’s campaign is eyeing. That’s not even to mention that President Barack Obama won the district in 2008 by 3%, before the current more Democrat-friendly redistricting.

When Ruiz was considering a run, he took into account not only this Latino voting bloc, but also the LGBT-friendly community of Palm Springs, and the professional community he has inhabited since he returned from Harvard with an M.D., Master’s in Public Health and Master’s in Public Policy. He may be the first Latino congressional candidate in the district, but whether it’s the migrant community or the affluent class of the district, Ruiz told NewsTaco that his dream is to help the people from his home live in a better world.

“I am not a career politician, I love medicine. Congress will give me the toolbox to problem solve and create solutions within the district,” he told us, likening his work as a physician to helping on a micro scale, while from Congress he could work on a macro scale.

Ruiz says his platform “consists of the pillars of the American Dream,” more specifically that means economic development/jobs, education and healthcare. All three are interrelated, he told us, and particularly salient in a district that — at once — has a 50-60% high school dropout rate and where half of the population is 55 and older. Ruiz notes by way of what he would do differently if elected, that Bono-Mack’s vote for the Paul Ryan budget that would’ve eliminated Medicare came at a time when a local study found that 3,000 seniors went without food to pay for medicine.

Ultimately, Ruiz told us he wants to make the biggest difference possible for his community. As a Latino who understands the value of healthcare and education, who values the LGBT community and strives for excellence, he’s hoping to take the American Dream to the next level.

“My American Dream is not only to achieve for myself, but for the entire community,” he told us. ”In that sense, Latino politics are mainstream politics”

Texas’ inability to design decent redistricting plans for the two chambers that are supposed to represent the people is more than disappointing — it’s appalling, disgusting, hypocritical, and distasteful. It is disappointing because I’m an idealist. I want to think that those individuals who serve in our governments would want to place at the foremost of what they do the voices and wishes of the people. Yes, public servants are responsible for running the government. Yes, public servants are responsible for insuring the public trust.

But, public servants are just that — public! They are supposed to do the will of the people.

One of the principle ways of doing the will of the people is to ensure that the congressional and house districts used to elect their representatives are designed to allow them to elect individuals who will represent them. What has crept into the redistricting process instead are a bunch of politicians intent on drawing districts that will elect individuals just like themselves.

The late, great Congressman Henry B. Gonzalez once told me: the problem with our form of government is that it is very susceptible to being taken over by a bunch of demagogues or individuals set on pursuing their own narrow interests and totally disregarding the interests of the people. One way of doing that is to rig the redistricting process so that the people have little chance of electing candidates of their choice.

This is what has happened in the current round of redistricting and this is exactly what is being uncovered in the District Court in Washington in Texas v. U.S.A. The attorneys of MALDEF are peeling the Texas redistricting process back layer by layer for the federal judiciary, and what is being uncovered is embarrassing. If you think Gov. Rick Perry embarrassed the state, you ought to see what the state attorney general’s minions have done.

The evidence so far as revealed that the map drawers, the work done by technicians directed by attorneys, intentionally created districts by manipulating the Latino population in such a way as to create districts that were a majority Hispanic but that had very low voter turnout. The redistricters did this to the new Congressional District 23 by hunting and pecking and looking for precincts that resulted in a district that even Canseco couldn’t win. That’s right, they didn’t just want Latino Democrats to not have a chance — they didn’t want any Latino to have a chance at getting elected.

This strategy was revealed in a series of emails that date the strategy to before the legislative session began. The operatives actually constructed a “metric” that allowed them to go across the entire state to construct these discriminatory districts. I think ultimately the court is going to make Texas redistrict all over again after the forthcoming elections.

Am I disappointed? Yes. Am I disgusted? Yes. And so should you be, because if these districts are allowed to stand, then we will continue to get government not of, by and for the people — but government of, by, and for a few good ol’ boys!

[Photo By AndyRobertsPhotos]

In 2012 Latino voters are going to be critical to races across the country, yet it seems that even as candidates woo these voters with their targeted messages, the actual policies and rhetoric have not changed. Which is to say, many Latino voters are frustrated by the double-talk from politicos who at once say they have Latinos’ best interests in mind, yet have no intention of guarding against nasty verbiage or legislation that says the contrary.

Enter an entirely different sort of double-talk: Mexican Mitt Romney.

Since his debut two weeks ago, @MexicanMitt — a Twitter feed that mocks Romney’s Latino pandering and policies — has grown to almost 3,000 followers and dozens of media outlets have covered the sensation. With declarations such as, “I AM THE JUAN PERCENT” or “I AM A YOB CREATOR,” @MexicanMitt is at once lampooning Romney as a politician, but giving this satire a particular flavor — one aimed squarely at the stereotypical ways in which politicos often court the Latino electorate (from either side of the aisle).

NewsTaco nabbed the first interview, and NBC Latino followed suit recently — but there’s more.

ABC wrote a piece about @MexicanMitt, noting that his emergence came right after Romney tried to use his father’s Mexican heritage (he was born there) to woo Latino voters. However, Romney’s attempts to engage Latinos with his Mexican heritage fall flat against his economic, educational and immigration positions that brusquely clash with what Latino voters have said is important to them.

In another piece, Esther J. Cepeda wrote that @MexicanMitt as a “stereotype-spewing lampoon” has hit an important note with folks precisely because politicos have failed to authentically engage with Latino voters. Just by talking to folks, or reading Facebook or Twitter comments, you hear that no one is buying the sudden interest in speaking Spanish, or the unexpected pitch about “common values” or the too-late wakeup call that many politicians are making to Latino voters.

The fact is that, whoever @MexicanMitt is, s/he understands that 2012 is going to be a pivotal year for the power of Latino voters. And because this is so, it’s of the utmost importance that politicians like Romney cut back on the traditional doublespeak and get real with voters.

You can’t say you identify with Latinos, hardest hit in the recession, when you say that your $370,000-plus speaking fees was “not very much.” Why release an ad in Spanish that includes Latino lawmakers speaking Spanish if you think the country should only speak English? How can you say you will veto the DREAM Act no matter what, when you don’t really understand the complexity of the immigration system?

If Romney himself doesn’t have the answer to the questions, no doubt @MexicanMitt can come up with something.