Prior to the election, the Texas Observer ran article which stated that “a Democrat can’t win a statewide race in Texas without carrying Harris County.” Something interesting did occur in this election, Obama did win Harris County (51/49). he won the state’s other largest cities Bexar County (San Antonio, 52/47), Dallas County (57/42), and Travis County (Austin, 64/35).

Yet, Obama still didn’t win Texas. If Harris County was considered the vanguard of the Democratic effort to turn the state blue, then we are forced to ask, what happened? The answer is simple, the devil is in the details.

The Latino Sleeping Giant
The Associated Press reported that about two-thirds of Latino voters chose Obama over John McCain and among new Latino/a voters 76% backed Obama compared to 23% for McCain. The 2008 election will go down in history as the election in which Latino voters emerged as a political force. After years of being viewed as the “sleeping giant”, it finally woke up. According to the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials (NALEO) roughly 9.6 million to 11 million Latinas/os voted in the election, up from 7.8 million in the 2004 presidential contest. The Wall Street Journal reported the Latinos turned out in record numbers to vote for now President-elect Barack Obama. There is no doubt these are extraordinary numbers, worthy of celebration.

One would think it would catch on here in Texas, but it didn’t. The Latino vote simply didn’t come through. Sure, a large majority of Latinos that voted for Obama, but the turnout was low. In mostly Hispanic counties, election turnout ranged between 34 to 47 percent:

Texas Counties – Presidential Election 08

Presidio – 33.66%; 84.36% of the population is Latino
Starr – 35.47%; 97.54% Latino
Frio – 38.58%; 73.76% Latino
Culberson – 39.65%; 72.24% Latino
Zapata – 39.65%; 84.78% Latino
Maverick – 40.43%; 95.01% Latino
Hidalgo – 42.73%; 88.35% Latino
La Salle – 43.03%; 77.12% Latino
Cameron – 43.31%; 84.34% Latino
Willacy – 43.42%; 85.69% Latino
Jim Wells – 43.65%; 75.71% Latino
Webb – 44.37%; 94.28% Latino
Val Verde – 44.84%; 75.46% Latino
San Patricio – 45.57%; 49.42% Latino
Hale – 46.52%; 47.90% Latino
Jim Hogg – 46.57%; 89.98% Latino
Duval – 47.18%; 87.99% Latino
El Paso – 47.44%; 78.23% Latino
Reeves – 47.49%; 73.38% Latino
Zavala – 47.71%; 91.22% Latino
Dimmit – 47.90%; 84.97% Latino

Sources: Texas Secretary of State and USA Today

So what went wrong?

Support in Texas
There is an old Texas saying that the smart move is to “dance with the one who brung ya.” The growth in the Latino electorate in strategically important states places Latino voters in more advantaged positions to influence the outcome of this election than ever before. However, in Texas, Latinos not only didn’t “dance with the one who brung ‘em,” they simply were not invited.

Latino leadership coalitions have spent millions in an unprecedented grass-roots effort to mobilize the Latino vote in as many as 13 states. Spanish-language publisher ImpreMedia, inserted 990,500 voter registration forms into its publications in Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, New York and Texas. Media giants Univision and Entravision also are running television and radio spots. The Obama campaign pledged to spend $20 million to court the Hispanic vote.

However, the focus has always been on four of those states – Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada and Florida. There is no doubt in my mind those efforts provided a dramatic increase in Latino voter turnout which greatly benefited Obama and the Democrats. So what occurred in Texas is really not surprising.

According to the Southwest Voter Registration Education Project, the Democratic Party could have won Texas, but didn’t because they simply did not “commit more voter registration and ‘get out the vote’ resources to Texas.” I would have to agree with this assessment. In fact, prior to the election, Juan Sepulveda, Texas State Director of Barack Obama’s presidential campaign, periodically sent out e-mails asking for volunteers to help Obama in other states, other than Texas. This has been blogged about before, here and here.

Despite the fact that the Houston Chronicle had already reported Barack Obama had a seven point lead in Harris County, Juan Sepulveda made a last minute push recruit volunteers to go to New Mexico and Ohio. From the email I received seven days remaining until the national election:

This weekend, Texans from all over the state will be coming together to board campaign buses and head into battleground states like New Mexico and Ohio — not just to reach out to swing voters and get folks to the polls, but to help bring change to all of America.

Its not surprising that some will disagree with this assessment. Instead of taking the responsibility, Harris County Democratic Chair, Gerald Birnberg, defended the local Democratic Party’s effort and put the blame on “former supporters of Hillary Rodham Clinton.”

Local Democratic Chairman Gerald Birnberg said his party struggled to get former supporters of Hillary Rodham Clinton’s presidential primary candidacy to return to the polls and vote for Obama and the rest of the party’s slate. Clinton was immensely popular among Hispanic voters in Texas.

“The head wind was the demoralization of many of the Hispanic Hillary Clinton supporters and that was a reality we faced throughout the election,” Birnberg said.

If this was true, then the Democratic Party did nothing to try to change their minds. During this campaign season the candidates practically ignored Spanish-language TV. Both local Spanish-language TV stations KXLN (Univision) and KTMD (Telemundo) received less than $75,000 in ad buys from Republican US Senator John Cornyn and Harris County Sheriff Democratic challenger Adrian Garcia.

If there was a lack of resources, then why should people be surprise the Latino vote fell short in overall turnout. Political consultant Marc Campos points out the devil is in the details. While Harris County had a 62% voter turnout, however, this was not true in mostly Hispanic state House districts.

Harris County had a 62% turnout this past Tuesday. However in HD 143 (Ana Hernandez) we had a 40% turnout, HD 145 (Carol Alvarado) a 45% turnout, HD 140 (Armando Walle) a 41% turnout as compared to HD 142 (Harold Dutton) a 58% turnout, HD 147 (Garnet Coleman) a 59% turnout, and HD 134 (Ellen Cohen) a 74% turnout.

Harris County is just one example. Texas Monthly’s Paul Burka also wrote about the lack of Latino turnout in Nueces County.

Latino leaders, nowhere to be found
Throughout Obama’s campaign, he acknowledged, he would not take the Latino vote for granted. Therefore, not all of the blame should go to the Democratic Party, some of the responsibility also goes to the inactivity of many Hispanic leaders and politicians. So, despite the proclamation that the Hispanic vote should not be taken for granted, that is exactly what occurred. Since many of our local Latina/o politicians were already enjoying a comfortable lead with Latino voters and they were already being counted in the win column for them, they took the Hispanic vote for granted, offering little if nothing in return.

Put bluntly, a large majority of them were nowhere to be found and therefore there were no outreach appeals from either of them. By doing this, this allowed the McCain/Palin campaign to define the issues with the support of the corporate media. With regard to Latinos, the right-wing strategy was not to win over the Latino vote, but to neutralize the Latino vote by inciting ignorant, racist, and nationalist stereotypes to whip up a “fear and distrust of the Negrito.”

This is not the first time Republicans have used this tactic. Investigators from the US Senate’s Watergate Committee had uncovered an elaborate scheme to influence how Hispanics voted in the 1972 presidential election. The goal was quite simple: [It] “will be our job to try to crystallize” [that segment] “toward La Raza [Unida], toward the Republican party, or staying at home.” To accomplish this, the Republican inner circle would provided incentives for Hispanic leaders to either turn Republican or to allow the Republican incumbent to win by going passive. The campaign encouraged undecided voters to not vote at all by satisfying them with information about Republican accomplishments and creating an ambivalent attitude. The thought was their divided loyalties would make them stay home. The strategy worked.

There’s an old saying, “Those who don’t learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” If we don’t take the time to look back and learn from history and past, we will repeat them.

Recently, the Los Angles Times reported that the Democratic Party are setting it’s sights on Texas. They decided to go after the large and growing Latino population there remains untapped in Texas. There plans for turning Texas blue can be seen taking shape.

For the Democratic Party win the Latino vote in Texas, they must become more familiar to Latinos again. It is obvious that Obama understands how important it is to win the hearts and minds of the Latino community. It is evident the Obama Administration is transcending the cultural stereotypes that has created the black and brown divide.

Right after the election, Barack Obama began tearing down those stereotypes by immediately appointing two South Texas to his transition team, Juliet Garcia and Espiridion “Al” Borrego. Several prominent Latinos are mentioned for several Cabinet positions.

For labor secretary Linda Chavez-Thompson, a longtime AFL-CIO leader; Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa; and CA Rep. Xavier Becerra have been mentioned. Two Latinas are being considered as education secretary: University of Texas-Pan American President Dr. Blandina Cárdenas and Susan Castillo, Oregon’s superintendent of public instruction.

Contenders to lead the Department of Housing and Urban Development are Miami Mayor Manny Diaz (also considered for secretary of homeland security) and Saul Ramirez Jr., a deputy HUD secretary under Clinton. This is just the tip of the iceberg. There many more Latinos being considered for Cabinet positions.

The DNC should also consider developing appeals that focus on values and issues, also with an emotional approach. It is imperative that connections be made with Latino youth – “new voters.” Most importantly, the Party must stop going to the same old Latino political well that has remained stagnant for years and instead develop young Latinos as party leaders. This has allowed to Republican Party to advantage and flipping demoralized potential leaders to their side.

Complacency has settled within the Latino leadership on all – community, state and national – levels. It is this complacency that has maintained the status quo, rather than cultivate new leadership. In Houston, power in the Latino community is concentrated into too few hands. Like a cancer, greed and vanity has allowed them to keep a tight reign on their elected positions. Challenges to the power base has divided to community and created apathy among the Latino electorate.

My challenge to DNC, NDN, state and local party, will they repeat the past mistakes or are they willing to take chance and develop a new crop of Latinos to be the future of the Democratic Party?

Like clockwork, they roll out the red carpet and wine and dine every Hispanic leader from California to Texas, Miami to New York, and throughout the Midwest. While they do this, they will gather up all the little people and throw out a few Spanish catch phrases, such as “Si Se Puede,” to win their vote; but after the election, in the blink of an eye, they disappear and forget about the Latino community for three years, until the cycle begins again.

I am not going to kid anybody but some Latina/o bloggers are beginning to feel that the Obama campaign is taking the Latino vote for granted, since the xenophobic wing of the GOP has virtually chased away their Latino electorate with their nativist stance on immigration. If the Obama campaign continues to go down this path, history will likely repeat itself.

In the early 1970s, Chicanos/as throughout the Southwest began flexing their political muscle by forming a political third party, La Raza Unida Party (RUP), because of the unresponsiveness to the needs of the Mexican-American community by the two controlling parties. Although the RUP does not exist anymore, there were history-making years because thousands of Mexican-Americans repudiated the Democratic Party’s dictatorship. During those four years, the RUP accomplished more what many third parties never achieved – enough political clout to shake up the power structure of the Democratic Party in Texas.

That was then and this is now. Although often considered to be homogeneous, the Latino community contains many culturally diverse groups than it did in the 1970s. However, there is still a hunger, a starvation, for our community to begin asserting ourselves again at the polls and dispel the old stereotype that we do not vote. When it comes to politics, you will always find those who will be loyal to there party no matter how unresponsive they are to the Latino community, however, make no mistake, if the Latino vote continues to feel that the Obama campaign taking their vote for granted, he could lose the more moderate Latino vote to John McCain. This is exactly what McCain is trying to capitalize during his recent secret meeting with Hispanic leaders.

Recently, many of us within the Latino/a blogosphere have decided to grade the bull by the horns and start to flex our own political muscle. This all started during Obama’s conference call about McCain’s closed-door meeting. During that conference call, three Latina bloggers – Liza Sabater of culturekitchen.com and The Daily Gotham, Marisa Treviño of Latina Lista, and Kety Esquivel of CrossLeft.org – took the Obama campaign to the woodshed over their poor efforts to reach out to the Latino community.

Soon after the conference call, a group of us Latino/a bloggers (CrossLeft, Culture Kitchen, Citizen Orange,Latino Politico, The Unapologetic Mexican, Migra Matters, Para Justicia y Libertad, Mamita Mala and Zuky) from The Sanctuary, a web base grassroots community of pro-migrant, human-rights, and civil-rights bloggers and online activists dedicated to the enactment of meaningful immigration reform, decided to draft a no holds barred survey on specific immigration issues for the presidential candidates to fill out.

I must admit it was very exciting to take part in this group project. I really learned a lot. However, I feel most of the credit should go to Kety for taking the lead and carrying the project through. None of this would have occurred if she had not shared her idea of developing a candidate survey with us. Considering we all spread throughout the US, she made sure nobody was excluded from this project.

As one of the founding members of The Sanctuary, my hope is that this site will not only address immigration issues, but can be a virtual settlement house similar to Jane Addams’ Hull House. In 1889, Jane Addams along with Ellen Gates Starr founded the social settlement Hull-House in Chicago, IL. Addams created a community center where people – of any age, race, gender, and ethnicity – not only contributed to the community as a whole, but also were allowed to develop and share their skills with anybody who was willing to learn.

During the 1920s, Hull House had expanded to expanded to include thirteen buildings to provide “kindergarten and day care facilities for the children of working mothers; an employment bureau; an art gallery; libraries; English and citizenship classes; and theater, music and art classes.” Hull-House also provided activities such as a Labor Museum, the Jane Club for single working girls, meeting places for trade union groups, and a wide array of cultural events. While The Sanctuary is not be able to provide direct social services like Addams’ Hull-House, however, we can function as a networking hub in order to connect people to these services in their area.

What made Hull-House special, the settlement house also advocated for legislative reforms at the municipal, state and federal levels, addressing issues such as child labor, women’s suffrage, and immigration policy. Hull House influenced legislation on child labor laws, occupational safety and health provisions, compulsory education, immigrant rights, and pension laws. My vision for The Sanctuary is that this site can also function as an advocacy center.

Jane Addams was a true visionary and one of the main reasons I became a social worker. Ms. Addams promoted the idea that access to opportunity was the key to successful participation in a democratic, self-governing society. She foresaw a compassionate, interdependent world revolving around the principles of social justice, fairness, tolerance, respect, equal opportunity, civic responsibility and hope for every individual, family and community. It is these principles I try to emulate as an activist.

But I digress. The survey we created to get real answer to the tough questions surrounding immigration, such as free trade, foreign policy, abuse of power by ICE and among other political issues not covered by the media or the candidates. It is time these politicians stop the rhetoric, worrying if their answer will be spun as proof of flip-flopping. We are in a crisis and it is time they provide us with a straight answer. This is why the survey was developed.

It has been about three weeks since we sent out our survey to John McCain and Barack Obama, only one candidate has acknowledge our survey, but has yet filled it out. According to Maegan at VivirLatino, “the Obama camp says a response is forthcoming.” However, we had no choice but to take extreme measures to force them to respond. We published the survey on a list-serv which includes influential people within the Hispanic community. While some saw this move unnecessary, we were able to get a reply from Vince Casillas, Obama’s Hispanic Outreach Coordinator:

Just so you know we haven’t forgot this survey. As you can imagine we recieve hundreds and hundreds of these which is no excuse just a reality. I’ll follow up with the status and hopefully have an update this afternoon. Thanks.

Vince Casillas

In Casillas’ attempt to reassure us that our survey is not being ignored; still leaves us to wonder if they are taking us seriously. Senor Casillas, what happened to our update? I know you mentioned that you are a one man team, but if I recall, you said that the higher ups were going to allocate some people to help you. If so, couldn’t you have gotten someone to assist you by sending us a quick message to let us know what transpired when you followed-up? Do we need to advocate for you so that your higher up provide you with the resources to make sure you are not overwhelmed? Talk to us. Communication is a two way street.

As for McCain, not a single word. I wouldn’t be surprised if our survey fell into the hands of some nativist or so corporatist elite.

This is my message to Barack Obama and John McCain. I am not surprised we have not heard from you. In fact, it wouldn’t shock me if you thought our survey was probably a bit complex, which means you would have to assign some flunky from your campaign or some Congressional aide to do some heavy research. But I doubt that is the reason. The obvious reason for either the delay or refusal to acknowledge our existence, the survey was purposely controversial, while at the same not leaving you a way out. There is a reason why we left out a “no comment” option.

We no longer want to take part in this viscous political “Christopher Columbus Syndrome” ploy. We are tired of getting the short end of the stick once the elections are over. Unlike other organizations who prefer to be force-fed the collective illusions on the wall of Plato’s Cave. Some of us are learning how to filter out the rhetoric. Our eyes are opening up. And in the spirit of competition, we don’t have to limit ourselves because there are other options to choice from. See, some people have been brain washed to think people are only allowed to run as a Republican or a Democrat. It is this reason people pick the unthinkable third option by not voting. But what if they were given a 3rd or a 4th, shouldn’t they have the right know? Shouldn’t they have the right to choose who will represent them?

Thomas Jefferson once said, “When governments fear the people there is liberty. When the people fear the government there is tyranny.”

This is why we chose to send our survey to the Green Party candidate Cynthia McKinney and from what I have seen, I am sure she and her running mate Rosa Clemente are more likely to fill it out without giving us the run around. While I may not have the luxury to vote for her this November here in Texas, I am sure Ms. McKinney will be able to pick up a good number of Latino voters in other states with the right outreach coordinator by her side.

While she may not be on the November ballot in Texas, I am pretty sure if former Georgia congresswoman Cynthia McKinney and Rosa Clemente had an effective Latino outreach coordinator who understood the complexity of the Latina/o community, she could give both McCain and Obama a run for their money.

It is time to stop the rhetoric and step up to the political plate. You may think you can give us the round around and hope we will go away quietly, think again. As Marisa Treviño pointed out, given that both candidates are appearing at the National Council of La Raza conference this weekend, it would be wise if they get back to use quickly before this story gets national attention now that some members of the news media, such as Alicia Stewart with CNN, caught wind of it. Momentum is already picking up around the blogosphere.

The ball is in your court and we are waiting for your reply.

Other Sanctuary Members’ Writing in Solidarity:
The Sanctuary
Latina Lista
Zuky
Latino Politico
Problem Chylde
Vivir Latino
The Unapologetic Mexican
CrossLeft
Citizen Orange

Read the entire questionnaire

CANDIDATE QUESTIONNAIRE

Name:
Party Affiliation:
Address:
Home Phone:
Campaign Phone Office:
Office Sought/Opponents in:
If you are a State candidate, please indicate your State Registration Number:

The Sanctuary is a multi-issue organization working in the service of human rights, human reasoning and progressive discussion. Therefore it is critical for us to understand your position on the following issues. Please give specific answers to the questions and answer them as thoroughly as possible. Please type your answers. Use additional sheets as necessary.

1. Could you please articulate what you think are the most pressing issues for the U.S. immigrant community, at home AND abroad, and how you would hope to address those issues as President?

2. Do you support comprehensive immigration reform?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

3. What policy conditions would comprehensive immigration reform have to meet in order for you to support it? Please be specific?

4. Do you support the establishment of an expanded guest worker program?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

5. Do you support the expansion and construction of a virtual border along the U.S./Mexico border?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

6. Do you support the switch from family based immigration standards to the merit based system put forth in the last round of Senate CIR?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

7. Do you support the “touchback” requirements of previous comprehensive immigration reform (CIR) legislation that would require undocumented immigrants to return to their countries of origin in order to normalize their status?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

8. Would you support the addition of funding for stricter enforcement of general labor standards such as wage and hour or safety regulations as
part of CIR legislation?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

9. Would you support an increase in the cap of low-skilled
employment-based green cards issued each year from it’s current level of
5000?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

10. Would you favor raising the 65,000 cap on high-skilled H-1B temporary work visas, in light of the fact that in the last two years, H-1B visas were quickly filled in a matter of days?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

11a. If so, would you also favor limiting the number of H-1B professionals a company can hire?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

11b. If so, would you also favor limiting the number of H-1B professionals employment brokers are allowed to recruit?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

11 c. If so, would you favor including meaningful prevailing wage requirements keyed to the Service Contract Act and Davis-Bacon Act?

Yes No

Please explain

12. Do you have a position on providing materials concerning health care and public benefits programs in languages other than English?
Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

13. Do you support lifetime eligibility for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) for disabled and/or elderly refugees and asylees who are eligible for SSI except for a lack of U.S. citizenship?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position

14. What are your feelings on immigrant detention?

15. Do you support family detention centers?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

16. Do you support private companies profiting of of immigrant detention?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

17. Do you support the Detainee Basic Medical Care Act, the bill that would require the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to develop procedures to ensure adequate medical care for all detainees held by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

18. Do you support the United American Families Act, the bill that would amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to allow permanent partners of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents, including same-sex partners, to obtain permanent residency?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

19. Do you support the community service requirement of previous DREAM Act legislation that would grant provisional (conditional) legal residency to immigrant graduates who perform 910 hours of volunteer community service?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

20. Would you support an immediate moratorium on community and work site raids by ICE?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

21. Do you approve of ICE’s use of excessive force to conduct immigration raids as seen recently in Postiville, Iowa?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

22. Do you support the Families First Immigration Enforcement Act, the bill that would provide for safe and humane policies and procedures pertaining to the arrest, detention, and processing of aliens in immigration enforcement operations?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

23. Would you support the incorporation of requirements that would tie both future economic aid and trade agreements to substantive benchmarks in sender nations that would alleviate some of the economic and humanitarian conditions that foster continued migration?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

24. Would you renegotiate the NAFTA last phase that just went into effect that lifts restrictions on more US agricultural products, particularly poultry, imported into Mexico?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

25. Do you support cancelling or renegotiating NAFTA?”

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

26. Do you support providing subsidies for corn-based ethanol?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

27. Do you support the farm bill, more specifically the agricultural subsidies it contains?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

28. Do you support a restructuring of trade-distorting US farm subsidies?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

29. Do you support a significant shift in subsidies to help farmers adopt conservation and renewable energy practices on farms?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

30. Do you support Plan Colombia (the Plan that was meant to combat the principal threat to the nation’s political and economic elite: the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC)) even though after closer examination of Plan Colombia, it has been revealed that the Plan states that public companies and banks are to be privatized leading to massive layoffs and further increasing unemployment at a time when cutbacks in government spending has removed any vestiges of providing a social safety net for those affected?
Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

31. Do you support Plan Mexico, which has been considered to be a duplicated of Plan Colombia, which has entrenched violence and corruption in Colombia while failing to reduce drug flow?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

32.Do you support canceling or renegotiating Plan Mexico?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

33. What would you do to address the racist and nativist rhetoric that is becoming mainstreamed and that is tied to a rising crime wave fueled by the same sentiment?

34. What are you going to do to take a more global approach to the
issue of migration?

35. What would you do to provide opportunities in the countries that
migrants are fleeing from?

36. How do you address the overwhelming amount of money the U.S. federal government spends on defense and military expenditures, at home and abroad, and would you see to it that less money is spent on
militarization and more money is spent on social programs?

37. What leadership have you taken on immigration issues, including but not limited to the issues addressed in this questionnaire?

38. On what immigration issues will you take leadership?

According to a new study conducted this year by the New Democrat Network, the Hispanic electorate preferred the Democratic Party to the GOP by 70 percent to 30 percent. The million-dollar question going into the 2008 election is can the Republicans, because of their nativist stance on immigration, make up their lost Hispanic votes?

Historical Preceptive
Things began eroding for the Republican Party soon after Bush’s re-election. However, things started to unravel when the debate over immigration reform divided the Republican Party. When the House passed the “Sensenbrenner Bill,” which criminalized all undocumented immigrants. The bill sparked an immigration movement that led to the huge marches in the Spring of 2006. These marches were considered to one of largest civic demonstrations in the US in more than a generation. In some states and cities, one of the largest civic demonstrations in the state’s and city’s history. Soon after these marches, in GOP led states, many ads began appearing, comparing Mexican immigrants to Islamic terrorists.

Key Republican strategists began voicing their concern that the GOP was alienating their Hispanic base on the immigration issue. In August 2007, top Hispanic Republicans in Texas began voicing their distrust of both the state and national Republican Party. One of Texas’ biggest Latino Republican backers, Latino Republican Massey Villarreal, Hispanic vice chair of the Bush/Cheney campaign and deputy vice chair of the Republican National Convention, announced he would be supporting Democrat Rick Noriega instead of Senator Cornyn in the 2008 elections. Reggie Gonzales, President of the Texas National Hispanic Republican Assembly, urged his fellow Republicans to “vote independently” this election year to send the Republican Party a message. Moreover, if they are still unwilling to listen, then they should consider starting their “own party,” reminiscent of the La Raza Unida Party of the late 1970s.

In a run up to the 2006, general election, a Pew Hispanic Center survey revealed that Hispanics in general had felt “significantly discontented” with both national political parties, but more so with the Republican Party. Many expressed there was an increase in discrimination as a result of the immigration debate. Later that year, the Republican Party paid the price in the November 2006 general election.

In wake of their defeat, which led to a Democrat control congress, Florida Senator Mel Martinez, a first-generation Cuban American, was appointed Chair of the Republican National Committee, hoping to smooth things over with their Hispanic base. However, Latino fears were confirmed as some conservatives objected to Martinez’s selection due to his positions on immigration. One year later, following the resignation of another top Latino official, former Atty. Gen. Alberto Gonzales, Martinez resigned from his position after he had expressed his frustration over the hard-line stands his party had on immigration. Robert de Posada, president of the Republican-leaning Latino Coalition, was quoted in the Los Angeles Times as saying, “The message that it sends is Latinos are not welcome. The radical conservative base has a temporary victory right now.”

It’s all about the Veep
This leads back to our starting question: can the Republicans, because of their nativist stance on immigration, make up their lost Hispanic votes? Many would argue that it would take a political miracle to win back the Latino vote; however, there are a few Republican diehards that do have faith that the new Republican presidential nominee, John McCain, can bring them back.

The system of selecting a vice president can assist a party win an election. The vice presidential choice often is made to balance the ticket. Sometimes the vice presidential candidate is chosen because the person is thought to appeal to a large bloc of voters. Now that John McCain won the Republican nomination, whom would he choose as his running mate?

Recently, McCain was asked if he was willing to consider sharing the ticket with Senator John Kerry, since Kerry had approached McCain about being his running mate in 2004. McCain quickly said no.

“He is, as he describes himself, a liberal Democrat,” Mr. McCain said, adding that he meant no offense by the term. “I am a conservative Republican. So when I was approached, when we had that conversation back in 2004, that’s why I never even considered such a thing.”

As many Americans seem eager to rally behind the President, due partly to the dramatic shifts in the public mood triggered by the latest crisis in the credit markets, high unemployment, a housing bubble that has burst, and a likely recession.

Republicans have a history of throwing a curve balls when choosing their running mates. This dates back to Ronald Reagan’s selection of George Herbert Walker Bush. With the advise of Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, everybody expected the creation of a “dream ticket” with former president Gerald Ford running as Ronald Reagan’s vice president, however, Reagan did a 180 and selected his primary opponent, George H W Bush instead.

There are times selecting a vice present does not necessarily produce the person best qualified to serve as vice president. When George H W Bush selected Indiana Senator Dan Quayle as Bush’s running mate, he totally caught the media and political pundits off guard. Like his father, the younger Bush also surprised everybody with his Vice President selection. When political pundits figured it would be Missouri Senator John Danforth who would get the nod, like his father, Dubya also did a 180 and selected Dick Cheney, the man responsible of Bush’s selection process for Vice President.

Will John McCain pick be a surprise too? It is possible. In 2005, the Washington Post ran an article about the possibility of a McCain/Jeb Bush ticket. The article laid out a series of events (scenarios) that would need to occur for this to happen.

Scenario 1: Iraq shows will have to show no sign of turning around quickly. Bush would like to hand over power to a president committed to his Iraq policy. — From the time the article was written, the situation in Iraq has worsen. In an interview with NBC News, President George W Bush stated that the US “could easily” stay in Iraq for ten or more years. As for seeking a successor who is willing to continue his Iraq policy, it seems John McCain has decided to step up to the plate. In January, McCain was quoted as saying the US could stay in Iraq for “maybe a hundred years” and that “would be fine with me.”

Scenario 2: Income growth for the Middle-class will continue to be sluggish, – McCain has shown he is not a total Bush clone. He has been vocal on Bush’s tax policies. Before Mitt Romney dropped out of the race, Romney criticized McCain for opposing President Bush’s tax cuts. However, he is considered to be the most fiscally conservative members of the Senate.

Scenario 3: Bush would well come to see McCain as the only Republican with a chance to push a Republican era forward. McCain, in turn, knows that his only way around the Republican right is to run with either Bush’s blessing and/or endorsement. — Last month, the whole Bush family had welcomed John McCain with open arms. The first Bush to publicly endorsed McCain was former Gov Jeb Bush. Soon after, Former President George H.W. Bush, the Republican political dynasty’s patriarch, publicly endorsed Sen. John McCain for president. Finally, President Bush endorsed Sen. John McCain for president saying that McCain has the “character, courage and perseverance” to lead the country.

From the look of things, all three scenario have actually occurred.

What does Bush bring to the table
Jeb Bush was considered one of the most sought-after endorsements ahead the presidential primary season, now that John McCain has received Bush’s blessing, this could be considered as a way winning over George W. Although Jeb Bush has indicated he has no intentions in running for president in 2008, however, he still has not ruled “in or out” if would consider running for vice president in 2008. It is no secret that the elder Bush has been planting seeds for a possible Jeb campaign.

Last year, after his last public event speech, Jeb Bush, was asked by Spanish-speaking reporters what were his plans for the future. His response “Yo no tengo futuro.” He retracted a week later, saying he “misunderstood” the reporter’s question, according to the New York Times.

As the campaign season kicks into gear, one would think the Republican Party would try to distance themselves from the Bush name, especially when voters have plenty to take out on Republican candidates – financial crisis, rising gas prices, and Bush’s unpopular war. Even though the American people may be experiencing “Bush fatigue,” Republican insiders would most likely have no problems running Jeb Bush, who had a 60% approval rating when he left office. Strategically, running Jeb Bush now could be seen as a win-win situation for him. If McCain won, once McCain leaves office, Jeb would have made a name for himself allowing him to run either in 2012 or 2016. If McCain lost, Jeb would still have enhanced national recognition for him to run in 2012.

The Republican Party knows they will not be able to win without the Latino vote. If a John McCain/Jeb Bush ticket were to come into fruition, their secret weapon in their fight for the Latino electorate would be Jeb Bush’s is his 31-year-old son, George P. Bush or just “P.,” as his family calls him. The son of Florida governor Jeb Bush and his wife, Columba Bush, a native of Guanajuanto, Mexico, George P is one of the grandchildren President Bush referred to as the “little brown ones” during his presidency.

During his uncle’s 2000 campaign, P. was everywhere and was considered to be on his way to becoming the family’s biggest star. It is true politicians have used their children for such ends, but P. has a WOW factor. With a John McCain/Jeb Bush ticket, George P. Bush would once again be utilized as a symbol of diversity to court young and Latino voters.

P. will obviously have factor in his favor: He’s eye candy. During the 2000 campaign, the media would lob him softball questions. Even more valuable is his performance: P.’s is a natural on the stump, and this was seen during the GOP’s national convention. Before his uncle accepted the Republican nomination P. delivered a bilingual speech about inclusion and diversity.

“I am an American,” Bush said to a delighted crowd, “but like many, I come from a diverse background. And I’m really proud of it, and I respect leaders who respect my heritage.”

He also spoke of the commitment both he and his uncle have to education. “My uncle and I share emails,” George P. said, “and they’re not about the Florida Marlins or the Texas Rangers. They’re about education. It’s an interest that I share with my uncle and my dad.”

George P. called George W., “a good man, un hombre de grande sentimientos, who loves his family and his country.”

As he concluded his brief remarks, he exhorted the cheering delegates with a message that combined family and country: “Now is the time to restore a sense of honor and decency to the White House. We can do that by electing my uncle the next president of the United States. Que viva W! Que viva Bush! Que viva los Estados Unidos.“

Before George P. Bush married his law school classmate, Amanda “Mandi” Williams, P. was No. 4 on People magazine’s list of the “Top 100 Eligible Bachelors.”

During Dubya’s re-election campaign, George P. was barely seen on the campaign trail. This was done on purpose because the then 28-year-old would have been asked why George P. wasn’t serving in Iraq if he so much of a patriot. No doubt, these were legitimate questions. However, he has answered his anti-war critics. Last year, Politico reported that George P. Bush joined the Naval Reserve. He also called the death of Pat Tillman, the NFL player and Army Ranger who was killed in a friendly fire incident in Afghanistan in 2004, “a wake-up call.”

What will make P attractive to Latino voters is his pride in his Latino heritage and the fact he is the grandson of a Mexican migrant worker, Jose Maria Garnica, who separated from his wife and still lives in Mexico. If played right, he will once again serve as a new face for the GOP. Another reason why Hispanics may be willing to vote for a McCain/Bush ticket, he is also very outspoken about the immigration issue, actually sounding more like a Democrat than a Republican does.

In a four-day swing through Mexico in 2004, P criticized the Border Patrol’s use of guns which fire plastic pellets packed with chili powder.

“If there has been American approval for this policy, that is reprehensible,” Mr Bush said. “It’s kind of barbarous.” He blamed the use of the guns on “some local INS [immigration service] guy who’s trying to be tough, act macho.” In fact, the use of the guns is federal policy.

There is not doubt that the Hispanic population is booming and is considered to be a swing vote this election season. Using the Texas Democratic Primary as a barometer, the Latino vote proved to be a significant voting bloc. Both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama can equally claim that the Latino vote were factors in their electoral gains. The Texas border region was the determinant factor in Hillary Clinton’s victory in the Texas primary. Whereas, “Urban Latinos” helped Obama “push the margin of difference between him and Clinton to just three points.”

While it is being reported that Republican insiders are are urging McCain to choose a female running mate as a way to counter a possible Democratic Dream Ticket, history has shown these are just tactics to distract the public and media alike. I would not be surprised if John McCain were to surprise everybody and pick Jeb Bush and neither would James Carville.

If McCain were to ask Jeb Bush to be his running mate and if he were to accept, the Democratic Party will surely have a battle to win the hearts and minds of the Latino electorate. If the only way to counter this, I would recommend that either Clinton or Obama find some way to utilize New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson to the fullest extent.

In an effort to confront the “immigration problem,” both parties have been walking a very thin rope, which could bring monumental, long-term damage to both Democratic and Republican Parties. These effects have already been felt. During last years, Congressional election, when Democrats swept control of Congress, it is widely believed that the current Republican tone toward immigrants widely cost the GOP the Latino vote. Things can get worse for the Republican Party during the 2008 elections. According to Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, 12 million new immigrant voters will now be able to participate in the 2008 elections.

In 2007, times seem to have gotten nastier. When the subject of immigrants and their children comes up, Republican Presidential candidates are more interested in building walls and deporting undocumented workers then creating a pathway to citizenship. It is safe to say the Republican candidates will be lukewarm this election cycle when it comes to courting Latinos. But where did this xenophobic rhetoric originate.

Some feel, like Roberto Lovato, this sentiment originally began with California’s Proposition 187, the 1994 ballot initiative that would deny social services, health care, and public education to undocumented children. True, most Republican candidates historically ignored the broad Latino voting community. Sadly, 1994 was a prime example where the Republican Party used Latino and immigration issues as wedge issues to gain support of white conservatives. It was a dark year for the state of California, because the electorate consciously decided that it would be the only state in the Union to roll back the welcome mat for the “tired,” the “poor,” and the “huddled masses.”

One would have assumed the Republican Party had learned its lesson after the Prop 187 debacle, since President George W. Bush was able to capture about 40% of the Latino vote in his presidential bin in 2000. In order for him to accomplish this task, Bush, while Governor of Texas, had to work hard to create a favorable Hispanic image prior to the 2000 election campaign.

In a strategic move, in 1994, Bush proclaimed that he was against CA’s Proposition 187. It would be this move; Hispanics began to see Bush in a different light. Throughout his governorship, Bush slowly gained more recognition and trust from the Latina/o community. Last year, the Los Angeles Times explained how Bush challenged Pat Buchanan in the 1996 Presidential race to avoid anti-immigration attacks. All this would later aid Bush in the 2000 presidential election.

During Bush’s presidential bid, Lionel Sosa, GOP political and advertising consultant, would create an image that emphasized Bush’s openness, respect and acceptance towards the Hispanic community. According to the LA Times, Sosa created several “emotion-laden” campaign videos to woo the Latino vote. One video included Bush waving a Mexican flag during a Mexican Independence Day parade in San Antonio in 1998, when was running for reelection as governor.

It would seem the Republican Party finally realized the importance of the Latino vote. They were able to tap into the emerging Latino voting community successfully then they stop using wedge issues that were perceived as hostile and antagonistic by most of the Latino community. So why aren’t they continue this formula? More importantly, where and how did this current xenophobic rhetoric arise within the Republican Party?

This xenophobic view has arisen with the belief that Latinos/as do not have the values that the Americans see as central to the entire political system such as Patriotism and economic self reliance. These sweeping generalizations were popularized by influential political scientist Samuel Huntington, where politicians such as Colorado’s Rep. Tom Tancredo are now expressing similar views. Huntington’s simplistic and politically-motivated conceptualization distorts the reality on the ground. Huntington wrote:

The persistent inflow of Hispanic immigrants threatens to divide the United States into two people, two cultures, two languages. Unlike past immigrant groups Mexicans and other Latinos have not assimilated into mainstream US culture forming instead their own linguistic enclaves- from Los Angeles to Miami- and rejecting the Anglo protestant values that build the American dream. The United States ignores this challenge at its perils.

It is this statement captures the essence of the fear that exists in the US. Using an anti-immigration position in the past has been used by many Republican politicians, such as former Gov Pete Wilson, to gain votes from Anglo Conservatives.

For the most part, Democratic strategists have done little to challenge latest change in Latino voting behavior. Instead of countering it, the Democratic leadership would rather take advantage of the political fallout as a result of the actions of antagonistic Republicans that would push conservative and independent Hispanic voters back into the Democratic Party. Truthfully, this is what is occurring. In a recent poll, the Pew Hispanic Center found that “Hispanics returning to Democratic Party.”

Although, they may appear to be returning to the Democratic Party, in reality, they really nothing more but DINOS – Democrats in Name Only – whose only interest is in tugging the party to the right for cold cash and to punish the Republican Party for their betrayal. Once they have settled into their new home, it should be expected these newly converted Democrats to start whispering in the ears of prominent Democrats, advising them to contort themselves to fit a centrist view, so they will be better accepted by the US mainstream.

What if there are some Democrats who are getting advice from people who wish them no good, advising them to say whatever they believe will help them win political currency. For example, Lionel Sosa, after a lifetime serving as a Hispanic outreach consultant for the GOP, is now supporting Democratic candidate New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson’s presidential bid. Sosa’s reason for supporting Bill Richardson is the same reason many latino civil rights organizations supported Alberto Gonzales for Attorney General, but in this case, as Sosa put it, “Blood is thicker than party.” Although this may seem logical because this would help Democrats win back a major segment of conservative and independent Hispanic, one must, however, be aware that Sosa continues to be a “Bush backer and a Republican” according to Cox News Service.

Because of the current Latino backlash, other pro-Republican organization, such the Latino Coalition, are adamant at sending their Party a message by supporting Democrats in competitive races. The coalition is chaired by Hector Barreto, the former administrator of the Small Business Administration under Bush and former strategist for the Republican National Committee.

Another blow to the Republican Party is the recent defection of Rev. Luis Cortes, a Republican who founded the annual National Hispanic Prayer Breakfast that has featured Bush every year since. While close to Bush, Rev. Cortes latest move proves he is more than willing to prostitute himself out to the highest bidder. Recently, Cortes met with Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean to discuss how the Republican presidential candidates are using immigration as a wedge issue and scapegoating immigrants.

What is more troubling; the Democratic leadership is willing to overlook Rev. Luis Cortes close ties with the Bush Administration and other conservative Republicans. According to the National Council on Responsive Philanthropy (NCRP), Cortes was awarded a $2.5 million grant in the first round of President Bush’s Compassion Capital Fund grants for faith-based organizations in 2002 ; and $2.76 million as the first installment of $11 million over three years from the Bush Administration’s Department of Labor in 2004. It was already found that these funds are spent with little or no oversight, and unfortunately, with the latest Supreme Court ruling, no possible avenue to challenge them.

In 2005, Associated Press revealed that former Senator Bill Frist’s AIDS charity, World of Hope Inc, paid nearly a half-million dollars in consulting fees to members of his political inner circle, which included Cortes.

World of Hope gave $3 million it raised to charitable AIDS causes, such as Africare and evangelical Christian groups with ties to Republicans — Franklin Graham’s Samaritan Purse and the Rev. Luis Cortes’ Esperanza USA, for example.

It is no surprise the Baptist minister has long sought to build a national network of Hispanic churches, one that would bring new power to an emerging minority. Operating in North Philadelphia, Cortes’ organization, Nueva Esperanza Inc, has one of the largest contracts of the 44 groups chosen to provide the training to smaller organizations and distribute the federal cash. Cortes is one of the most prominent Hispanic evangelicals in politics. One does have to wonder if Rev. Luis Cortes will say or do to insure his faith-based organization is not cut from future funding.

What makes a person like Rev Cortes, loyalty is thrown out the window at the drop of a dime. In 2005, Pensacola’s Independent News reveals Rev Cortes true colors when it comes to partisan loyalties.

“This is what I tell politicians,” he adds. “You want an endorsement? Give us a check, and you can take a picture of us accepting it. Because then you’ve done something for brown.”

Even as Mr. Dean criticizes Republicans, many Democrats in Congress have adopted the same enforcement-only approach Republicans advocate. The Democrats’ silence on the brutal raids on immigrant workers shows how much they intend to do about it.

Realizing they cannot win without a large Latino/a turn-out, Democrats tend fail to understand the impact DINOS like these have on the Latina/o community. Right now there is a large infusion of Republican Latinos/as into the Democratic Party, but be forewarned, they will change when the immigration debate dies down. And once immigration debate dies down, as history shows, it was the Democrats’ assumption of Latino support that provided the Republicans the opportunity to attract significant levels of Latino voters around the nation.