New People & New Map

Executive Summary

This report uses exit poll data provided by the National Election Pool (NEP) from the 2010 and 2006 election cycles to provide a comparison and analyses for the electoral participation of Hispanic voters. This data was selected to provide an apples-to-apples comparison of the two election cycles. The NEP does not provide data on Hispanic voter participation for all states, so only states with data available were selected.

The most immediate observation is that Hispanics increased their share of participation in every statewide contest with the exception of the race for Governor in Illinois. In addition, Hispanics maintained their national share of 8% as they did in 2006. The 2006 election cycle was covered as one is which Hispanics would make their voice heard, and received positive attention. The national narrative in 2010 was much different and most media and pundits speculated that Hispanics would not be as active this election cycle. A review of the exit poll data shows that their speculation was wrong, and that Hispanic voters were extremely engaged in the 2010 election cycle.

There were several races in which Hispanic voters proved pivotal, but the race that provides the most clear indication of the role that Hispanic voters played in the 2010 election cycle was the contest for the US Senate seat held by US Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. This match-up provided a clear contrast between a candidate courting the Hispanic vote, and a candidate alienating the Hispanic vote. US Senate Majority Leader Reid won decisively among Hispanic voters and his support among Hispanic voters provided him the margin of victory.

The data shows that Hispanic voters have demonstrated a commitment to electoral participation over the past few election cycles. This commitment to electoral participation is important as it will ensure that candidates continue to court them, and will ensure that their issues gain increased attention from candidates.

Click HERE for the full report:

I am working on an extensive report of the Latino turnout performance in the 2010 elections. I will publish a more extensive report soon, but wanted to share some brief preliminary findings.

In every statewide contest where there is Exit Poll data available for comparison, Latinos increased their share of the electorate in each except in a single one. This increase is significant as it continues a trend of increased participation in each election cycle. Latino voters are becoming an increasing and permanent share of the overall electorate which will continue to demand that Candidates and Parties calculate the Latino vote into their electoral plans.

The data also suggests that despite media reports of Latino apathy and attempts by some to discourage Latinos from participating, Latinos were very engaged in the 2010 election cycle. This bodes well for Latinos and those working to advocate on behalf of the Latinos. Stay tuned for the complete report.

That the American population is changing is beyond doubt. But what about the candidates we choose to run for higher office? The clear majority of Congressional and gubernatorial candidates are white men, but white men are a clear minority within the United States. To see if (and how) this pattern is changing, we researched how many minorities, women, and Millennials are candidates for Congress or governor in 2010 and then broke down these results by party, incumbency, and district. Our report is here.

The results are predictable in some ways and surprising in others. It shouldn’t shock anyone to find out that nearly 70 percent of all woman, minority, and Millennial candidates are Democrats. Among incumbents running for reelection, the Democrats have an even stronger advantage (100 percent of African-American incumbents are Democrats, for example). Republicans, on the other hand, are running more minority, woman, and Millennial challengers than incumbents. This points the way towards a more diverse party that we can’t see when looking just at the current Republican caucus.

The GOP has made particular strides among woman and Hispanic candidates. Forty-three percent of all female challengers are Republicans, while only 22 percent of all female incumbents are Republicans.

And while Democrats are running far more Hispanic incumbents, Republicans have an outright majority among all Hispanic challengers running for office in 2010. Some Hispanic Republican challengers are in high-profile races, such as the Florida Senate race in which Marco Rubio is the GOP candidate, but others are simply running for Congressional seats in the Southwest.

Simon and Kristian have written about the potential for a Latino backlash against the Republican Party after Arizona’s SB1070 immigration law and the more recent calls among national politicians to revise the 14th Amendment. Can that backlash coexist with more Hispanic Republican candidates? It’s unclear for now—although the Congressional elections in two years will occur in redrawn districts based on the information from the 2010 Census. New districts based on new demographic realities will probably provide us with a better idea of where American politics will go in the next decade.

In the meantime, even though primary season isn’t over yet, this report should provide a good overview of who is running for office this year. The news is mostly good for both parties—Democrats maintain their lead and Republicans are running a more diverse slate of candidates—but the numbers also indicate that we’ve got a ways to go before we eliminate the gap between woman, minority, and Millennial candidates and citizens.

Again, look at the full report here. Thanks for reading.

Yesterday, an Arizona judge ruled that the most controversial portions of Arizona's immigration law SB 1070 were unconstitutional. The controversy isn't going anywhere, though. Alicia went on Fox News this morning to talk about what might come next from Arizona and the Obama administration.

Once again Ruben Navarette has gotten it wrong…  Read his full article here or better yet don’t, I will summarize it in a single sentence: both Democrats and Republicans are undeserving of the Hispanic vote, because they have taken this voting block for granted.

This is nothing short of nonsense. It has been a difficult year for Democrats, who continue to have to make tough decisions on big issues such as the economy and health care, but there is no ambiguity about which Party has been advocating for the interests of Hispanics.

President Obama and Congressional Leadership remain committed to passing comprehensive immigration reform. It is very likely that if not for the BP oil spill and the totality of the White House’s attention to stopping the flow of oil into the Gulf Coast, there would have been more significant progress on this issue. It is still entirely possible that there will be movement on immigration reform in Congress this summer.

As the administration and Congress have taken some politically difficult steps to rescue the country from a potential second Great Depression, rebuild the economy for the long term and pass health care legislation, they have also worked tirelessly to improve the lives of Hispanics in this country.

In fact, the legislative triumphs on both the economy and health care have been tremendously important not only for the country but for Hispanics in particular.

This Administration and Congress, have extended unemployment and modified eligibility in a way that dramatically effects Hispanics, expanded health insurance for children, which for the first time ever allows states to cover legal immigrant children, signed the Lilly Ledbetter act which ensures that women, including Latinas, receive equal pay, invested heavily in education (which is especially important to Hispanics who are the fastest-growing segment of the public school population and make up nearly one in five public school students), and passed a health care plan which overwhelmingly benefits Hispanics.

People often forget that Hispanics have the highest percentage of uninsured people in the country. There are as many as 9 million, that do not possess health insurance. Under the new health reform measure, Hispanics are eligible for coverage, this includes subsidies for low income families and tax credits so that small businesses can expand health coverage to their employees.

On the subject of Immigration Mr. Navarette, notes that, “Latinos have the right to be disillusioned by the failure of both parties to address the immigration issue.”

This is a common misunderstanding.  Democratic Leaders have put forth a plan, it may not be the plan that Mr. Naverette likes, but certainly it is better than no plan at all, which is what the Republican leadership has proposed. By focusing on enforcement measures, the White House is addressing many of the objections that Republicans have raised before they will come to the negotiating table on immigration.  And yet, Republicans continue to refuse to deal with comprehensive immigration reform.

Comprehensive immigration legislation will require many different types of reform, spanning several different agencies and branches of government. Taking the time to position all of the relevant pieces before engaging in what will be a long difficult process, seems not only to be intelligent but necessary to ensure the passage of legislation that truly addresses all of the problems facing our nation’s broken immigration system.

Finally, while immigration is important to Hispanics it is in no way the only important issue for this diverse population of Americans. A recent poll of Hispanics shows that the weak economy, wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, low quality of public schools and the lack of access to health care all poll as important issues to Hispanics.  What Mr. Navarette does not seem to understand is that the Hispanic community is not a one issue voting bloc, that they are diverse and passionate about the well being of their country as a whole.

It would seem that any President and Congress, Democrat or Republican, that focuses on the economy, health care and education would be doing what is best for both the country and the Hispanic community. Imagine that.

Please join us Today, June 25, at 12:15pm for a presentation of "Dawn of a New Politics" by Simon Rosenberg.

This engaging presentation makes a big argument on how politics is changing in America today, and offers ideas and strategies for how progressives can replicate our 20th century success in this new and dynamic century.

Simon has recently updated the presentation with new arguments and slides, including an analysis of the bottom-up democratic uprising we're seeing today in Iran. Even if you've seen the presentation before, this new version will be fresh and engaging!

Simon has delivered his presentation "Dawn of a New Politics" all across the country over the past several years: At the DNC in Denver, twice for the House Democratic Caucus, on the Google campus, and recently before members and staff of the DSCC and DAGA, among many other gatherings.

We cordially invite you to join us-- either here in our event space, or via Web cast-- to watch and engage with this revamped presentation.

If you plan on coming to the presentation, please RSVP here.

Follow this link to watch the Web cast.

Note: This essay is the first in a new series that I will be contrubuting to NDN. The essays will examine important and interesting data from available public surveys and surveys commissioned by NDN and its affiliates. Themes and analysis will include attitudes toward race and ethnicity, the economy, foreign affairs and the Millennial Generation, but will not be limited to those topics. 

In a recent posting on his fivethirtyeight.com Web site, Nate Silver raised the possibility that the Republican Party could more effectively compete in the 2012 and 2016 elections by turning its back on Hispanics and attempting to maximize the support of white voters in enough 2008 Midwestern and Southern blue states to flip them red. This would involve positioning the GOP as the non-Latino party by "pursuing an anti-immigrant, anti-NAFTA, 'American First' sort of platform.'" The Republican Party rode similar exclusionary strategies to dominance of U.S. politics during most of the past four decades.

But America has entered a new era. Propelled by the election of its first African-American president, an increasingly non-white and more heavily Latino population, and the emergence of a new, significantly more tolerant generation, the Millennials, America is not the same country, demographically and attitudinally, that it was in the 1960s or even the 1990s. These changes have altered the electoral environment and lessened the usefulness of divisive strategies that were once effective, but may no longer be so.

Superficially, a non-Latino strategy might seem more plausible than anything else the GOP has attempted since the election of Barack Obama. After offering significant support to George W. Bush in 2000 and 2004, Hispanics have recently become a solidly Democratic group. Republicans may have little to lose in not courting them in the next election or two. Nationally, Hispanics voted for Barack Obama over John McCain by more than 2:1 (67% vs. 31%). They supported Democratic House candidates last year by an even greater margin (68% vs. 29%). Pew surveys indicate that four times as many Hispanics identify as Democrats than Republicans (62% vs. 15%).

Adopting a non-Hispanic strategy would certainly be compatible with strategies the GOP has been utilizing for decades. From the "Southern strategy" of Richard Nixon and Kevin Phillips in the late 1960s, through the "wedge issues" used by Lee Atwater in the 1980s, to Karl Rove's "base politics" in this decade, the Republicans effectively took advantage of white middle and working class fears of the "other" -- African-Americans, gays, feminists -- who could be positioned as being outside the American mainstream. Applying this approach to Latinos would only be doing what came naturally for the GOP during the past 40 years.

But, while ethnically exclusionary strategies may offer the possibility of short-term relief, they do little to resolve the deep difficulties now facing the Republican Party. The ethnic composition of the United States is far different now than it was in the 1960s when the GOP began to separate white southerners (and like-minded white working class voters in other regions) from their long attachment to the Democratic Party. Four decades ago, 90 percent of Americans were white, and virtually all of the remainder were African-American. Hispanics were a negligible factor within the population and the electorate. Since then, the percentage of non-Hispanic whites in America has fallen to two-thirds. Hispanics now comprise about 15 percent of the population and just under 10 percent of the electorate. Moreover, Hispanics are a relatively young demographic. Even if no additional Latinos migrate to the United States, their importance will continue to increase as older whites pass from the scene.

It is this rise in the Hispanic population that prompted Silver to offer his suggested non-Latino strategy to the Republicans in the first place. But Silver's plan, which he facetiously calls "Operation Gringo," would require the GOP to pull off a rare political balancing act or "thread the needle" to use his term. In order to compensate for expected losses in the increasingly Latino Southwestern states of Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico and, without John McCain on their ticket, Arizona, Republicans would have to win states like Pennsylvania and Michigan that they have not carried in decades. They would have to do this while not, at the same time, losing Florida and possibly Texas with their own large Hispanic electorates.

Moreover, while it is true that Hispanics are not distributed evenly across the country, Silver concedes "there are Hispanics everywhere now." Latinos were decisive in Obama's wins in closely divided "gringo territories" such as Indiana, North Carolina, and Nebraska's second congressional district and the growth rate of Hispanics is greatest in "nontraditional" areas like the South and Prairie states. This means that "America first" campaigning may ultimately have the effect of hurting Republicans even in some of the "white" states where it was intended to help.

However, the biggest barrier in running against Hispanics is that American attitudes on ethnicity have changed significantly over the past four decades. A new Pew survey indicates that Americans have become less hostile toward immigrants and more positive about policies designed to incorporate immigrants, even undocumented immigrants, into American society.

The number favoring a policy that would allow illegal immigrants (Pew's term) currently in the country to gain citizenship if they pass background checks, pay fines and have jobs has increased from 58 percent to 63 percent since 2007. While 73 percent do agree that America should restrict and control people coming to live in here more than we do now, that number is down from 80 percent in 2002 and 82 percent in 1994. Finally, support for free trade agreements like NAFTA has risen from 34 percent in 2003 and 40 percent in 2007 to 44 percent now.

The Pew findings are confirmed by the findings of a survey recently released by Pete Brodnitz of the Benenson Strategy Group. That study indicated that, across party lines, virtually all Americans (86%) favor the passage by Congress of comprehensive immigration reform when they are given full details of that plan.

Leading the way in these increasingly tolerant attitudes is the Millennial Generation (Americans born 1982-2003). Only a third of Millennials (35% vs. 55% for older generations) believe that the growing number of immigrants threatens traditional American values. Just 58 percent of Millennials (compared with 77% of older generations) agrees that the United States should increase restrictions on those coming to live in America. A large majority of Millennials (71% in contrast to 62% of older Americans) favors a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants. And, 61-percent of Millennials favor free trade agreements such as NAFTA in contrast to just 40 percent of older generations.

To date America has only seen the tip of the Millennial iceberg. In 2008, just 41 percent of them were eligible to vote and they comprised only 17 percent of the electorate. By 2012, more than 60 percent of Millennials will be of voting age and they will be a quarter of the electorate. In 2020, when the youngest Millennials will be able to vote, they will make up more than a third of the electorate. Over the next decade, this will make the ethnically tolerant attitudes of the Millennial Generation the rule rather than the exception in American politics.

At this early point in the Millennial era, Republicans remain most open to the intolerance and immigrant bashing of ethnically exclusionary strategies. Pew indicates the number of Democrats and independents who favor a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants is up 11 points and 3 points respectively since 2007. By contrast, the number of Republicans who favor that policy is down by six points. In the end, a non-Hispanic approach by Republicans would amount to a continuation of Karl Rove's base strategy. As the Republican base continues to diminish in the Millennial Era, that strategy will be a recipe for disaster for the GOP, certainly in the long term, and very likely in the short run as well.