About Me

My photo
Beverly Hills, California, United States
Eli Kantor is a labor, employment and immigration law attorney. He has been practicing labor, employment and immigration law for more than 36 years. He has been featured in articles about labor, employment and immigration law in the L.A. Times, Business Week.com and Daily Variety. He is a regular columnist for the Daily Journal. Telephone (310)274-8216; eli@elikantorlaw.com. For more information, visit beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com and and beverlyhillsemploymentlaw.com

Translate

Tuesday, November 11, 2014

Democrats Must Embrace Latinos and Immigration, Not Run Away

New York Times (Room for Debate- Opinion)
By Gary Segura
November 9, 2014

The president and his advisers bet against Latinos in this last election — and they lost. Whatever the claims to the contrary, the administration delayed executive action on immigration to protect Democratic Senate candidates in red states. The decision to delay executive action on immigration was premised on two erroneous assumptions. First, that a meaningful population of voters would regard executive action on immigration as a deal-breaker. Second, the calculus in the White House was that Latino voters would dutifully turn out for Democrats anyway, accepting the bad over the worse. The interests of candidates like Mark Udall, Charlie Crist, Pete Gallego and Joe Garcia were set aside for those of Kay Hagan and Mark Pryor.
 
Democrats spent little on Spanish-language outreach and voter mobilization, and avoided immigration, despite broad support for reform.
 
As we now know, the Democrats bet wrong. Latino Decisions polling this summer suggested that another broken promise would have negative effects on enthusiasm — 57 percent of Latino voters said a delay would make them less enthusiastic to vote Democrat in 2014, and that is exactly what came to pass. Our Election Eve Poll reflects significant decline in the Latino vote share going for Democrats. Latino support for Hagan, who lost by 1.7 points, was the lowest among all Democrats at 63 percent and 9 points lower than 2012 when Obama won 72 percent of the North Carolina Latino vote. In 2012, Obama’s "deferred action for childhood arrivals" was the single driving force behind Latino turnout and support for Democrats. Meanwhile, declines in Latino enthusiasm — and likely share of the electorate — significantly undermined the chances of folks running in Latino-heavy constituencies whose losses could have been reversed with better Latino numbers.
 
Bad electioneering to Latino voters continues, with low expenditure on Spanish-language outreach and voter registration/mobilization by the Democrats, and a bizarre unwillingness to talk about immigration, despite national polls suggesting broad-based support for comprehensive immigration reform, severely undermining Latino turnout and enthusiasm. Latino Decisions' Election Eve Poll in Colorado, for example, found a majority of Latino voters did not know Udall’s and Gardner’s positions on immigration reform. Udall’s campaign did not advertise on the issue. It is beyond unforgivable that, because of a messaging failure, Latino voters in a state with a sizable and influential Latino electorate had no idea where these candidates stood.
 
News reports suggest that Democrats are wringing their hands about white voters, but the exit polls suggest Democrats’ share of the white vote was stable – or actually up 1 point – comparing 2010 and 2014. The "missing" Democratic vote was overwhelmingly racial and ethnic minority voters and young people, and it is here where Democratic investment, and willingness to embrace Democratic principles, must grow.
 

Latinos represent the fastest growing demographic in the electorate and the best opportunity Democrats have for building an overwhelming electoral coalition that could reliably defeat G.O.P. monetary and turnout advantages. But Democrats are not entitled to Latino votes. Like voters of all racial and ethnic groups, Latinos have the right to ask that candidates address their concerns directly. And like other new segments of the electorate in American history, Latino incorporation requires the active engagement of political parties rather than merely a reliance on population growth and crossed fingers.

For more information, go to:  www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com

No comments: