Jump to:

"At the Races" by Gia Fenoglio (a review of the election, Bush, and African Americans)

"Best Intentions - Why black people don't love the Bushes back." by Franklin Foer

"Latino Voters." by Arturo Vargas

"Waiting for 2000." by Nancy E. Roman

"Blacks and Hispanics: A Lock for Democrats?" by Mark Murray

"Strength in numbers.(minority participation in politics and economy)" by Sakina P. Spruell

--------------

>InfoTrac Web: Expanded Academic ASAP.
> Source: National Journal, March 25, 2000 v32 i13 p986.
> Title: At the Races.
> Author: GIA FENOGLIO
> Subjects: African Americans - Political aspects
> Political science research - Evaluation
> People: Bush, George W. - Political activity
> Bush, George W. - Attitudes
>Locations: United States
>Electronic Collection: A61633653
> RN: A61633653
>Full Text COPYRIGHT 2000 National Journal Group, Inc.
>
>A weekly review of Campaign 2000
>
>Campaign Confetti
>
>In the past three decades, Democrats have consistently won large majorities
>of African-American voters. This presidential race, however, Republicans are
>putting up a fight--at least for campaign dollars. A recent study by the
>Citizens' Research Foundation shows that George W. Bush raised more money
>in the fourth quarter in predominantly African-American areas than did Al Gore,
>plus Bush's fund raising outpaced that of both Bill Bradley and John McCain.
>
>What about Hispanics? The study suggests that Bush, who's counting on Latino
>support in the general election, is running closely behind Gore in majority
>Hispanic and mixed Hispanic (at least 25 percent) neighborhoods.
>
>"Bush is more attractive than has been a Republican in the past," says
>political scientist Jon Gould of George Mason University, one of the
>researchers on this study, citing Bush's compassionate conservatism and
>his openness on racial issues as key to enticing minorities. All things
>considered, Gould's findings support the notion that minorities may be
>participating more in the political arena, but money from African-American
>and Hispanic neighborhoods in eight key states accounts for less than 2 percent
>of contributions to the top four presidential wannabes. Here's a look at how
>Bush and Gore compared in the fourth quarter:
>
> Bush TOTAL PERCENT OF ALL
>
>CONTRIBUTIONS CONTRIBUTIONS Majority African-American Neighborhoods
>Number
>81 1.9% Amount $67,750 2.1 Mixed African-American
>Neighborhoods Number 250 5.9% Amount $204,800
>
>6.4 Majority Hispanic Neighborhoods Number 94 2.2%
>Amount $54,680 1.7 Mixed Hispanic Neighborhoods Number
>
>316 7.5% Amount $201,923 6.3
>
>Gore TOTAL PERCENT OF ALL CONTRIBUTIONS
>CONTRIBUTIONS Majority African-American Neighborhoods Number
> 85
>2.9% Amount $46,595 2.5 Mixed African-American Neighborhoods
>Number 250 8.6% Amount $145,665 7.8
>
>Majority Hispanic Neighborhoods Number 94 3.2% Amount
>
>$58,165 3.1 Mixed Hispanic Neighborhoods Number 344
>
>11.9% Amount $206,105 11.0
>
>[Graphic omitted]Dot-coms
>
>With more people logging on to brush up on their political know-how,
>candidates are focusing more resources on their Web sites in an attempt
>to draw traffic. And the winner for capturing the most Net surfers: George
>W. Bush! In a recent Harris Interactive poll, 62 percent of people who had
>visited a presidential candidate's site said they had stopped by Bush's
>Web address, compared with 52 percent for John McCain's, 46 percent for Al Gore's,
>and 34 percent for Bill Bradley's.
>
>But Bush suffered in the "talked about" category, which could hinder him
>in the general election. Only 31 percent said they discussed anything they
>learned from Bush's site--hardly better than Gore's 32 percent, and way
>below Bradley (40 percent), McCain (42 percent), Steve Forbes (48 percent), and
>Alan Keyes (59 percent).
>
>Asked why the front-runners' numbers are so low, Harris Poll Chairman Humphrey
>Taylor says, "It's rather depressing and sort of confirms the feeling that
>neither candidate is doing much to turn us on."
>
>Survey Says
>
>California is known for lots of things--Hollywood, Silicon Valley, surfing
>...
>and ballot measures. In California's March primary, no less than 20 of them
>were oil the ballot (10 placed there by the Legislature and 10 by the voters).
>
>[Graphic omitted]For California, that's par for the course. Over the years,
>various measures have run up astronomical tabs for circulating petitions
>and television advertising, and the issues they've addressed have touched a
>nerve, from taxes to immigration. But do the voters like them? A new survey sponsored
>by the Initiative & Referendum Institute, a Washington-based group that
>supports the initiative process, indicates that Californians are actually
>somewhat ambivalent about them.
>
>The survey of 1,000 likely voters, conducted by Rasmussen Research in March,
>a week after Californians went to the polls, found that a slight majority
>of those surveyed supported restrictions on ballot measures. Specifically,
>47 percent agreed that "there should be some kind of limit on the number of
>ballot measures that make the ballot each year," while 43 percent disagreed
>and 9 percent were unsure.
>
>[Graphic omitted]But, somewhat paradoxically, respondents expressed little
>warmth for the lawmakers who would be charged with setting those limits.
>When asked whether they believe that "the Legislature should leave the initiative
>process alone," 40 percent agreed with the statement and 27 percent disagreed.
>The best news for ballot-measure supporters came when respondents were asked
>their opinion of the following statement: "On the whole, the initiative
>and referendum process is good for California and California voters." A full
>77 percent agreed, and only 20 percent disagreed. "What the poll tells me is
>that there is a little bit of voter fatigue, but that people are willing to accept
>that if the only other option is to get rid of the process," said M. Dane
>Waters, the Initiative & Referendum Institute's president. "They may be
>getting a little tired, but they're skeptical of the Legislature making
>changes."
>
>SHOULD THERE BE A LIMIT ON THE NUMBER OF BALLOT MEASURES THAT MAKE THE BALLOT
>EACH YEAR?
>
>[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]
>
>
> -- End --

______

>InfoTrac Web: Expanded Academic ASAP.
> Source: The New Republic, Oct 2, 2000 p26.
> Title: Best Intentions - Why black people don't love the Bushes back.
> Author: Franklin Foer
> Subjects: Presidential candidates - Political activity
> African Americans - Political aspects
> Governors - Political activity
> People: Bush, George W., Jr. - Political activity
> Bush, Jeb - Political activity
>Locations: United States
>Organizations: Republican Party - Social aspects
>
>
>Electronic Collection: A65514445
> RN: A65514445
>Full Text COPYRIGHT 2000 The New Republic, Inc.
>
>It was january 1999, and a somewhat reluctant political operative had come
>to
>Texas to talk with Governor George W. Bush about joining his presidential
>campaign. The meeting was meant to allow the candidate to size up the
>prospective adviser, but it was the adviser who had the bigger doubts. He
>was
>squeamish about the Republican Party's "Southern Strategy"--its history
>of
>exploiting racial fears to win national elections. The operative didn't
>want
>to be part of that kind of enterprise.
>
>But the governor beat him to the punch. "Let me tell you about myself,"
>Bush
>said, launching unprompted into a monologue. "I've seen a lot of racial
>tension in my lifetime. In living memory, we've had cities burn. We need
>to
>deal with social problems. It's why I want to run." A week later, the
>operative signed up.
>
>Tell that story to most Democrats and most reporters, and they'll probably
>roll their eyes. Jesse Jackson calls W.'s good-guy pose on race the "inclusion
>illusion." New York Times columnist Bob Herbert complains, "The Republicans
>still aren't interested in blacks. They are simply trying to present a
>friendlier, more moderate face." Many journalists don't think Bush is really
>trying to appeal to blacks at all--he's just surrounding himself with them
>in
>an effort to win over white women, in what The New Republic's Michelle Cottle
>dubbed "the ricochet pander."
>
>But there's a good reason to believe Bush's posture on race is sincere:
>It's a
>family tradition. During the late '50s and early '60s, few senators--not
>Al
>Gore Sr., not John F. Kennedy--had a better record on civil rights than
>W.'s
>grandfather Prescott Bush. The Connecticut Republican sponsored legislation
>desegregating schools, protecting voting rights, and establishing an equal
>employment commission. His son George led fund-raising drives at Yale for
>the
>United Negro College Fund. And when, in turn, George's own son George Walker
>was caught using the word "nigger," Barbara Bush washed his mouth out with
>soap.
>
>In fact, the Bushes' problem on race isn't that they're insincere; it's
>that
>they're overly sincere. They're so convinced of their personal decency that
>they expect it to trump the deep, long-standing ideological differences
>that
>separate their party from black political opinion. Most Republicans take
>a
>hardheaded view of race: Blacks are Democrats, and there's not much you
>can
>do. The Bushes, by contrast, not only want to be loved by African Americans,
>they think they deserve to be loved--even when they hold political views
>that
>are anathema to most black voters. This combination of self-righteousness
>and
>naivete creates a recurring cycle of courtship, disillusionment, and backlash.
>It marked President Bush's political career and is now clearly under way
>in
>George W.'s. But nowhere can it be seen more clearly than in the experience
>of
>W.'s more earnest younger brother, Florida Governor Jeb Bush, a man for
>whom
>racial politics has turned into an obsession, a psychodrama, and an utter
>disaster.
>
>To his credit, George Herbert Walker Bush tried to carry on his father's
>tradition of racial outreach in the much less receptive terrain of his adopted
>state of Texas. Soon after arriving in the oil town of Midland in 1948,
>Bush
>pointedly invited an official from the local naacp to his house for dinner.
>Later, as head of the Harris County GOP, he put the party's money in a
>black-owned bank. But he distinguished between his personal behavior and
>his
>stances on policy-- support for integration may have sold in Connecticut,
>but
>it was a nonstarter in West Texas, and Bush couldn't make a political career
>without playing to the crowd. So, when he ran for Senate in 1964, he bashed
>LBJ's civil rights record: "The new civil rights act was passed to protect
>fourteen percent of the people. I'm also worried about the other eighty-six
>percent."
>
>Bush's opposition to desegregation wasn't anything unusual among white
>Southern politicians in the 1960s. And his personal behavior was probably
>better than most politicians'. But what really distinguished Bush was his
>firm
>belief that the latter would override the former in the eyes of black voters.
>Years later, in his autobiography, Bush wrote that black support for his
>opponent in the 1964 race, which he lost by 300,000 votes, was "both puzzling
>and disappointing.... My hope had been that a Republican candidate might
>be
>able to break the Democratic Party's grip on black voters in the area."
>
>When he ran for president in 1988, Bush once again genuinely expected to
>do
>well among black voters. Had he not supported fair housing legislation in
>1968
>and implemented affirmative action as chair of the Republican National
>Committee in the early '70s? But, of course, he'd also been vice president
>in
>an administration that opposed sanctions against South Africa and tried
>to
>restore tax breaks for whites-only colleges. And, in the 1988 race itself,
>he
>crudely stoked white fears with his Willie Horton advertisement.
>
>Once again, the surprise wasn't that Bush took positions unpopular among
>blacks or that they responded by voting for his opponent; it was that he
>took
>the rejection personally. In 1989, months after he won the presidency, he
>commissioned a political consulting firm to diagnose African American
>perceptions of him. The firm suggested the obvious: He needed to improve
>his
>relations with black leaders and attend more "significant black events such
>as
>speaking at major black institutions like Hampton University." Bush redoubled
>his efforts to reach out, but in 1992 he once again utterly failed to win
>the
>black vote. Once again, the reasons were obvious--he wavered on affirmative
>action and offered no major policy response to the Los Angeles riots. And,
>once again, Bush seemed mystified.
>
>Ironically, at the beginning of his political career, Jeb Bush seemed more
>hostile to the black political class than his father ever had. A self-styled
>libertarian who subsisted on a regular diet of Heritage Foundation briefings,
>Bush kicked off his first gubernatorial campaign in 1994 by promising to
>beat
>"the government into submission." He pushed for a massive increase in prison
>construction, complained about welfare mothers, and vowed to end affirmative
>action. Bush's opponent, Lawton Chiles, accused him of appealing to "hate
>and
>fear" and branded his running mate, Tom Feeney, "the David Duke of Florida
>politics." But Bush, whose wife is Mexican, figured nobody would take such
>charges seriously. "In Miami, he'd integrated himself into the Hispanic
>community, with his wife and Cuban [business] partner. He thought that he
>could transfer that understanding to African Americans," recalls Feeney.
>"He
>was a bit naive about that." At a televised town-hall meeting in Tampa,
>a
>hostile black reporter asked, "What are you going to do to deal with the
>African American community? Don't tell me about welfare!" Bush replied:
>"Probably nothing."
>
>Bush paid a price, garnering only 6 percent of the African American vote
>and
>losing by a mere 63,000 ballots. "He took it on the chin," says Feeney.
>"That
>one response, `Probably nothing,' cost him big. Fairly or unfairly, it turned
>people off. It might have cost him the election."
>
>Like his father before him, Jeb seemed genuinely wounded by the turn of
>events. Tom Slade, then chair of the state Republican Party, recalls, "The
>defeat and the vileness of the campaign devastated him." Bush himself later
>said, "I felt bad that people felt the way they did about me. It broke my
>heart to see those things, because that is not who I am." And so, in the
>months following the election, Bush set out on a furious mission to refute
>the
>charges of bigotry. He began meeting with T. Willard Fair, the conservative
>head of the Greater Miami Urban League, and together the two opened a charter
>school in Liberty City, historic home of the city's black community and
>site
>of the infamous 1980 riots.
>
>Bush also created a think tank that would primarily study the political
>leanings of African American voters. For a year, he watched focus groups
>from
>behind the glass, listening to Florida's blacks explain their views on issues
>like welfare, affirmative action, and school prayer. He published his findings
>in a report, writing, "Just as alcoholics must first admit they have a problem
>before they can begin to deal with it, so too must conservatives admit that
>the old ways will ensure the same dismal results."
>
>When Bush ran for governor again, in 1998, he tried to put these words into
>action. He campaigned ferociously in black neighborhoods--praying with black
>ministers and addressing crowds after introductions from his friend Fair.
>He
>arranged scores of meetings with African American leaders, visiting them
>in
>their offices or inviting them to play golf. "He just showed up, and there
>are
>not many Republicans who do that," says State Senator Daryl Jones, head
>of the
>legislature's black caucus. "He was charming, but he was also a novelty."
>When
>Bush spoke to black audiences, he used carefully calibrated language. He
>referred to vouchers as "opportunity scholarships." He dropped the tough
>talk
>about welfare. And he avoided affirmative action. "It's a very sensitive
>issue, because it means different things to different people," he demurred.
>
>Bush even apologized for his previous campaign: "Republicans have ignored
>the
>black voters of this state, and I was a part of that. It was wrong." It
>worked. Helped by endorsements from prominent black politicians and ministers,
>Bush's support among blacks rose from 6 percent to 14 percent. Bush took
>the
>increase as a personal vindication, a sign he had finally broken through
>the
>Republican Party's race barrier. "He showed that he understood there's an
>important connection between blacks and Republicans," says Bush's longtime
>adviser Al Cardenas, now head of the state party. "African Americans have
>a
>natural home in the Republican Party."
>
>The euphoria didn't last. In January 1999, Bush got an unexpected--and,
>as it
>would turn out, unpleasant--visit from Ward Connerly. Connerly, the black
>activist who had sponsored California's anti-affirmative- action referendum
>three years earlier, told Bush he intended to sponsor a similar initiative
>in
>Florida. It was not exactly what Bush, just a month into office, wanted
>to
>hear, and he publicly denounced Connerly's tactics as "divisive." But
>Bush--who still, after all, opposed affirmative action himself--figured
>he had
>better seize the opportunity and review the constitutionality of the state's
>racial preferences. Because of his newfound credibility with black voters,
>he
>thought, he could convincingly push through a reform or maybe even a repeal
>of
>affirmative action that blacks would understand was not racist and possibly
>even in their best interest. "He believed," says Tom Slade, "that he was
>in a
>unique position to end affirmative action on his own terms."
>
>At first, it appeared the gambit might work. In November of last year, Bush
>unveiled "One Florida," an executive order banning the explicit consideration
>of race in admissions and contracting. It was a frontal assault on affirmative
>action, but Bush linked it to programs that he thought blacks might find
>preferable. He proposed investing $700 million in K-12 education and, more
>important, agreed to admit the top 20 percent of each high school's senior
>class into the state university system. Given Florida's sharply segregated
>high schools, Bush was, in effect, guaranteeing that minority admissions
>would
>increase. One Florida even won some early accolades from African Americans.
>Les Miller, the black Democratic leader in the state House, praised Bush
>for
>"taking positive steps toward protecting racial and gender inclusiveness."
>State Senator Daryl Jones told me, "I was prepared to believe him, because
>he
>seemed sincere."
>
>But it didn't take long for the support to unravel; in fact, it took about
>48
>hours. Threatened with losing his position atop the black caucus, Jones
>quickly retracted his tentative support. "Our people fought and died for
>affirmative action," he later explained. Willie Logan, the black former
>Democrat who consulted with Bush as he cobbled together One Florida, told
>me,
>"You can't take away people's affirmative action. That's something they
>understand and get mad as hell about. I told Jeb that he'd get clobbered.
>He
>told me that it wouldn't be a problem."
>
>It was. Within days, the national civil rights leadership descended on
>Florida. There were signs protesting pharaoh bush and jeb crow; Jesse Jackson
>denounced the plan as a "crucifixion." Part of the response was sheer
>demagoguery. But Bush had also miscalculated. He simply didn't have the
>credibility with black voters--and their elected representatives--that he
>thought he had. And it wasn't hard to see why. Sure, Bush had struck a
>conciliatory tone toward blacks in his 1998 campaign: He had made friends
>with
>all the right people and visited all the right places. But, when it came
>to
>actual policy, his platform had been largely the same as when he ran for
>governor for the first time. He was still for relatively strict welfare
>reform, school vouchers, cutting government spending--in effect, he was
>still
>pushing a typical Republican agenda. Bush's rhetorical shift had made some
>difference, but he had still won only 14 percent of the black vote, a
>percentage wildly out of line with his subsequent claims to have sparked
>a
>black political realignment. Bush and Florida's blacks remained on opposite
>sides of the ideological divide. And so when black Floridians saw Jeb
>attacking their community's most cherished issue, affirmative action, they
>turned on him with a vengeance.
>
>It came to a head at a Miami town-hall meeting last February. Addressing
>the
>largely black audience, Jeb sorrowfully talked of his "heavy heart," telling
>the crowd that "this has been a difficult time for me" and insisting, "I've
>lived my life embracing diversity." The crowd just jeered. As he left the
>hall, friends say he broke into tears. "He had simply no idea that this
>was
>coming," says Fair. "I remember him calling me one night in a real panic.
>He
>couldn't understand why people would do this to him." Just like his father.
>
>Politically, One Florida was a fiasco. Not only did it not turn black
>Floridians into Republicans, it cemented their allegiance to the Democrats.
>"The party had been pretty unhappy. One Florida helped bring us all back
>together," says Democratic State Senator Debbie Wasserman Schultz.
>
>Indeed, Florida's Democrats look more formidable this year than they have
>in
>close to a decade. Their U.S. Senate candidate has a double- digit lead,
>they
>have a good shot at picking up House seats, and, most of all, they are
>visiting their One Florida wrath on George W. In one of the strangest ironies
>of this year's presidential campaign, Jeb, who most observers assumed would
>deliver Florida for his brother, may have become a liability instead. Bush
>and
>Gore are running neck and neck in the Sunshine State, and Gore has a shot
>in
>large part because of an energized black vote. As one Democratic operative
>told me, "For black voters, this election will still be about punishing
>George
>W. for Jeb's sins." Or, as Wasserman Schultz puts it, "If George W. Bush
>loses
>Florida, he might not be the only Bush in peril."
>
>If W. loses Florida, he will almost certainly lose the election. And that
>would be a bit unfair--the animosity isn't really aimed at him; he's simply
>a
>proxy for his brother. But he's not a bad proxy. W., like his brother and
>father, is also fixated on proving his racial benevolence. In the campaign,
>he
>has surrounded himself with African Americans, visited numerous inner-city
>schools, and ensured that blacks filled the speaking roster at the
>Philadelphia convention this summer. His staff seems almost obsessed with
>the
>level of support he received among Latinos in his 1998 reelection bid and
>with
>his endorsement from Latino politicians like the Democratic mayor of El
>Paso.
>
>And, once again, the goodwill comes with a fair helping of self- righteousness
>and naivete. The Bush team consistently exaggerates W.'s share of the Latino
>vote in 1998--imagining a Hispanic realignment that this fall's vote will
>almost surely reveal to be a mirage. And Bush himself seems almost offended
>when critics note the racial disparities in Texas's criminal justice or
>health
>care system--insisting they have no right to judge what's in his heart.
>
>But they're not judging his heart; they're judging his policies, and that's
>the distinction the Bush family has been consistently unable to grasp. W.
>probably does genuinely care about the welfare of black Americans--so do
>his
>brother and father. But the assumption that blacks vote for the candidates
>who
>show them the most personal goodwill is itself paternalistic. Black Americans,
>like other Americans, don't need to be loved by politicians; they want to
>be
>served. And the Bush family opposes the agenda of activist government and
>group rights that most black Americans, for better or worse, think serves
>them
>best. Indeed, the Bushes have not even tried to convince blacks that their
>perceptions of their self-interest are wrong. Instead, they have agonized
>over
>how to show blacks that they personally view them as equal to other citizens.
>But the best way of recognizing black equality would be to treat blacks
>like
>everyone else--as a constituent group that votes not on sentiment or image
>but
>on selfinterest. Which is what black voters keep saying when they break
>the
>Bushes' hearts every election year.
>
>(Copyright 2000, The New Republic)
>
>
> -- End --

__________________

>InfoTrac Web: Expanded Academic ASAP.
> Source: Vital Speeches, Jan 1, 2000 v66 i6 p170.
> Title: Latino Voters.
> Author: ARTURO VARGAS
> Subjects: Hispanic Americans - Political aspects
> Politicians - Addresses, essays, lectures
> Elections - Analysis
> People: Vargas, Arturo - Addresses, essays, lectures
>Electronic Collection: A59363074
> RN: A59363074
>Full Text COPYRIGHT 2000 City News Publishing Company, Inc.
>
>THE NEW POLITICAL LANDSCAPE
>
>I want to thank Phil Burgess, president of the Center for the New West,
>and
>Sol Trujillo, who is chairman of the Center's board and chairman and CEO
>of US
>West, for inviting me to be with you here this evening, and to speak about
>a
>topic that I think is very timely: the role of Latinos in American politics.
>
>And I have to tell you, it is somewhat frightening to see two white, middle
>aged men speaking better Spanish than your own niece and nephews.
>
>Yet I believe it says a great deal about what is happening today with respect
>to Latinos and American politics. There are (and I do this for the benefit
>of
>my friends in the media) five main points I want to make with respect to
>this
>topic.
>
>First, the impact of Latinos in the electorate is largely based upon the
>increase of Latinos in the general population.
>
>Second, there has been a steady and consistent increase in Latino
>participation in voting since 1992, and much of this has been a result of
>a
>significant contribution of new citizens, newly naturalized citizens, who
>have
>had a demonstrable impact on the Latino electorate and their behavior.
>
>Third, the political hostility toward immigrants and Latinos contributed
>to
>the increase of legal permanent residents applying for U.S. citizenship
>and
>participating in voting, which set the stage for an overwhelming support
>for
>Democrats from Latinos from 1994 through 1998.
>
>Fourth, the concentration of Latinos in strategic states make their role
>in
>the Presidential election very important.
>
>And, lastly, the next election will be a true test of whether this trend
>of
>increased Latino voter participation, holds, and also will be a major
>opportunity for the Republican Party to make up some lost ground with Latinos.
>
>In 1990, the Census Bureau counted 22.1 million Hispanics in the continental
>United States. When we (NALEO) count the number of Latinos in elected office,
>we include only the 50 states. We do not include elected officials in Puerto
>Rico. The 1990 census represented a 50% increase over 1980. Half of this
>increase was due to immigration. Half of that increase was due to natural
>factors, the difference of births or deaths.
>
>Two weeks ago, the U.S. Census Bureau released population growth estimates
>from 1990 through 1998, and reported a 36% increase in the Latino population
>during this period. About 7.9 million Latinos were added to the U.S.
>population. Latinos now account for about 11% of the U.S. population, and
>in
>about five years, Latinos are expected to surpass African-Americans and
>become
>the second largest population group in the United States.
>
>Latinos are a large and growing population as well as incredibly diverse:
>63%
>of U.S. Latinos are of Mexican origin, about 14% of Puerto Rican origin,
>6%
>are of Cuban origin, and about 12% are of Central and South American origin.
>
>In the West, the Latino population is overwhelmingly of Mexican origin with
>a
>strong and growing Central American population, particularly in California.
>In
>fact, Los Angeles has the largest concentration of Salvadorenos of anywhere
>outside of El Salvador. Second only to Washington, D.C. and followed by
>Houston. The Latino population's diversity also is geographic. Latinos live
>in
>each of the 50 states, yet we are concentrated in a handful of states. Latinos
>also are incredibly diverse politically, which I will discuss shortly. Latinos
>are also a youthful population, which has a fundamental impact on Latino
>voting strength. Nationally, Latinos have a median age of about 26 years,
>compared to a median age of 36 years for the Anglo population in the United
>States.
>
>Thus, of every 100 Latinos, 40 of them are unable to vote because they are
>under 18. Of the remaining 60, about 40% of them, can not vote because they
>are not U.S. citizens. And when issues such as low levels of educational
>attainment, low levels of income, and low home ownership rates, are factored
>in, it is not hard to understand why 5% of the U.S. electorate is made up
>of
>Latinos while the U.S. population is 11%. Thus, when people claim, "Well,
>Latinos don't vote," this represents, I think, a lack of understanding about
>the nature of the Latino population. Often, Latinos do not vote because
>they
>can not vote Many are too young and many others are not citizens. Now, the
>age
>factor will adjust over time. The citizenship factor has been changing,
>and I
>will talk about that in a few seconds as well Yet despite these factors
>that
>inhibit voting, there nevertheless has been a steady and consistent increase
>in Latino voting strength.
>
>In 1992 about 4.2 million Latinos voted, accounting for about 3.7% of all
>voters. In 1994, 3.5 million Latinos voted, less than in 1992, but such
>a
>decrease is typical of an off-year election when there was no Presidential
>race.
>
>This decrease is expected among all population groups, yet the percentage
>of
>the electorate that was Latino went up, 4.1% of all voters. The 1996 election
>represented an historic rate of Latino voter participation. That year, there
>were 6.6 million Latinos registered to vote and just under five million
>voted,
>representing 4.7% of the overall electorate. About 1.1 million of those
>voters
>were in California. Figures of 1998 are still based on estimates and exit
>polls and Census Bureau has not issued date yet, but the common wisdom is
>that
>5% of the electorate in 1998 was Latino.
>
>How did Latinos vote? Well, in 1992, 65% voted for Clinton, and 25% for
>Bush.
>Nineteen ninety-four was the year of the Republican landslide, but it also
>was
>the year of Proposition 187 in California, which I believe really became
>the
>defining moment for Latino politics this decade.
>
>The initial impact was that in California, Latinos matched their voting
>performance in 1994 as in 1992. In other words, as many Latinos voted in
>a
>non- Presidential election year in 1994 as voted in Presidential year in
>1992.
>Every other population group experienced a decrease, as they do in every
>non-Presidential race. Nineteen ninety-four was the exception for Latinos.
>
>While Latinos still voted less than what their eligibility rates would
>suggest, 1999 represented a new direction for Latino voting patterns. In
>addition to marking historic rates of voter participation, 1996 also was
>marked by new milestones and an infusion of new voters.
>
>About 700,000 more Latinos voted in 1996 than in 1992, while the number
>of
>non-Latinos voting declined in absolute numbers. Thus, a phenomenon which
>is
>occurring is that as more Latinos are voting, more non-Latinos are not voting,
>which increases the overall Latino percentage of the electorate and makes
>the
>impact of Latinos so much stronger at the voting polls. Nineteen ninety-six
>also was the election that saw the strongest Latino support for a Democrat
>candidate. Clinton received about 71% of the Latino vote, while Dole, received
>21%, the lowest for a Republican candidate.
>
>And there is a gender gap among Latinos, just as there is among non-Latinos.
>Eighty percent of Latinas voted for Clinton, an 60% of Latinos voted for
>Clinton. Fifty-three percent of the electorate in the Latino community is
>made
>up of women; the gender gap is even more pronounced among Latinos than among
>non-Latinos.
>
>Of course, there were many milestones that occurred in 1996 that many of
>you
>already have heard about. The election in the 46th Congressional District
>in
>California was a major victory for Latinos, with Loretta Sanchez, who is
>now
>considered a hero in the Latino community defeating incumbent Robert Dornan
>by
>984 votes. Here, David slew Goliath.
>
>There was an overall increase in the number of Latinos serving in Congress
>which included the addition of Rep. Silvestre Reyes, the first Latino to
>represent the El Paso area of Texas in Congress. Even more significant was
>the
>Latino voting performance in a couple of key states. In Arizona, 80% of
>Latinos voted for Clinton, and Clinton carried that state. In Florida, 44%
>of
>Latinos voted for Clinton, and Clinton carried that state. In those two
>states, Latinos had a demonstrable impact; they made a difference for the
>Democratic candidate.
>
>How Latinos voted in 1996, I believe, is related to who were the Latinos
>who
>voted. Shortly after the 1994 election, there was an unprecedented increase
>in
>the number of legal permanent residents applying for U.S. citizenship. In
>fact, in April of 1995, the Los Angeles Immigration and Naturalization Service
>(INS) District Office was receiving 2,400 naturalization applications a
>day.
>In 1995, just under half a million new citizens were sworn in. In 1996,
>just
>over one million new citizens were sworn in, 36% of them in California.
>One
>out of seven new citizens sworn in 1996 were in Los Angeles.
>
>There can not be such a tremendous infusion of new citizens and new voters
>without having some kind of an impact. In 1996, 31% of all Latino voters
>in
>Southern California were first time voters, and of these, 72% were naturalized
>citizens.
>
>Naturalized citizens are having a real impact on who Latino voters overall
>are. Many observers of Latino political behavior who have been following
>these
>trends in the Latino community believe that the increase in the interest
>in
>naturalization is a reaction, in fact, to Proposition 187 in California
>and to
>the welfare legislation passed by Congress in 1995 that denied benefits
>to
>legal, permanent residents. Not undocumentedimmigrants, but to legal,
>permanent residents.
>
>Many of these citizens during this period of overt hostility toward
>immigrants, and Latinos specifically, sought out U.S. citizenship, I believe,
>as an act of self-defense, out of anger, out of fear, and out of a real
>desire
>to play a role in politics. And they have had an impact on the Latino vote
>overall. Eighty percent of the new voters voted for Clinton and only 5%
>of the
>new voters voted for Dole.
>
>According to the Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 75% of Latinos who voted
>that
>year in the L.A. area voted to support Democrats, but only 16% say they
>voted
>to punish Republicans. Yet 63% believe that Governor Wilson's proposals
>on
>illegal immigration reflected his racism toward Latinos. We at NALEO conducted
>a survey of over 1,000 Latinos who had applied for U.S. citizenship between
>1992 and 1995. We asked them what were the most important reasons why they
>were applying to become a U.S. citizen.
>
>Result: 96% of them said that the most important reason was to vote; 73%
>of
>them said to keep benefits. Interesting thing was that of those who applied
>in
>1992, 72% said it was important to become a citizen to fight discrimination
>against Latinos, but in 1995, 87% of them said it was important to become
>a
>citizen to fight discrimination against Latinos. Thus we have seen a great
>infusion of new citizens who are voting, and they are voting with a mission.
>A
>new U.S. citizen is often more American, and more interested in participating
>in American politics, than native born citizens. In fact, they are
>outperforming native born Latinos, and in many areas they are outperforming
>native born non- Latinos in their rates of voter registration and their
>rates
>of voting.
>
>I would like to share a personal story with you. My parents are from
>Chihuahua, Mexico and I was born in El Paso. My parents moved to El Paso
>in
>1952. My folks moved to L.A. in 1964, and in 1993 my mother decided to apply
>to become a naturalized U.S. citizen. At her swearing-in ceremony, there
>were
>about 6,000 other applicants crowded into the L.A. Convention Center. All
>of
>them were waving miniature American flags and, this is one of the things
>that
>I'll admit the INS does right; it makes it a special, emotional event.
>
>Afterwards, I asked her, "Mom," and of course all of this is in Spanish.
>"Mom,
>why did you finally decide to become a U.S. citizen?"
>
>"Well," she said, "there were two reasons. One, because all the work that
>you've done," and I thought to myself, "Oh, finally, she gets it."
>
>Then I asked her, "Well, what was the second reason?" It does not translate
>that well from Spanish to English, and she used more colorful language,
>but in
>essence she said, "Because I want to vote against (Governor) Pete Wilson."
>
>This, I believe, was the motivation that drove those hundreds of thousands
>of
>Latinos who applied for U.S. citizenship right after the November 1994
>election.
>
>A new generation has emerged, although not necessarily permanently, a
>generation of Latino voters who vote religiously and vote to support
>Democratic candidates. In the 1998 elections, Latino support helped in
>Congressional, state legislative and statewide races throughout the State
>of
>California and in the West. Again, the Tomas Rivera Policy Institute reported
>that Wilson's high negatives among Latinos really dragged down Republican
>candidates. In fact, in a 1997 special election for a state legislative
>race
>in a heavily Latino and heavily immigrant district where all the candidates
>were Latinos, the one who won in a landslide used the message that he was
>the
>best candidate to oppose Pete Wilson's policies.
>
>Now, he was going to be one of 80 members of a legislature, but his campaign
>was, "I'm the best one to go up against Pete Wilson," and he won in a
>landslide in a Latino district.
>
>Gubernatorial candidate Gray Davis also was a huge beneficiary of the Latino
>vote. Eighty-one percent of Latinos voted for Davis; 77% of Latinos voted
>for
>U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer. Cruz Bustamante, the first Latino to win a
>statewide race since 1871, was elected Lt. Governor.
>
>GOP gubernatorial candidate Dan Lungren received 20% of the Latino vote,
>despite the fact that he did everything he could to distance himself from
>Pete
>Wilson and spent a great deal of money advertising in Spanish on television
>and radio, and mailing campaign literature in Latino communities. His outreach
>did not work because the memory of Pete Wilson was much, much too strong.
>This
>trend has continued in the increase of voters. At the same time, again,
>that
>we are seeing the overall voting rate of non-Latinos decreasing.
>
>Three Latino candidates also beat Republican incumbents in the California
>state legislature. One in Orange County, one in the Bakersfield area, and
>one
>based in Pomona, in eastern Los Angeles County. We also saw the election
>of
>Latino mayors in the City of Salina, the City of San Jose, and Congresswoman
>Loretta Sanchez came back and, once again, beat Bob (Dornan). This time,
>though, by 56% to 39%.
>
>The coattails of Latinos spread beyond California as well. We are here in
>a
>state (Colorado), one of only four states, that has elected a Latino to
>statewide office: Ken Salazar, the Attorney General of the State of Colorado,
>a Democrat.
>
>New Mexico has a long history of electing statewide candidates. That state
>currently has six statewide Latino elected officials.
>
>A critical element in producing Latino voters is organized labor. I encourage
>you to look at the role of labor unions in not just organizing Latinos to
>join
>labor unions, but organizing Latinos to turn out at the polls. Unions have
>had
>a demonstrable impact on California races and could be pivotal in the 2000
>election.
>
>Of course, there are notable exceptions to the Latino Democratic landslide,
>obviously George W. Bush in Texas is one of these exceptions. There are
>estimates that he received anywhere from 39% to 49% of the Latino vote in
>1998. Some argue that Latino turnout in Texas was low to begin with, so
>it was
>only his hardcore supporters who turned out. So the percentage of Latino
>support that Bush received may not necessarily represent his strength
>throughout all the Latino community. Yet the bottom line is the Governor
>is
>popular among Latinos in Texas, and he had coattails as well. Tony Garza
>won
>statewide in the State of Texas as a Republican, and he now sits on the
>Texas
>Railroad Commission. California elected three Republican Latinos to the
>State
>Assembly, joining the one who was elected in 1996. There are now four Latino
>in the Assembly who are Republican, and 13 who are Democrat. And there are
>two
>caucuses: the Latino Legislative Caucus that is Democrat, and a Hispanic
>Republican Caucus. Great diversity for th e community that I think is very
>healthy.
>
>When you step back one year, back to 1997, another Republican candidate
>who
>did very well among Latinos is Mayor Riordan of Los Angeles. He received
>a
>majority of Latino support and 48% of Latino voters were first time voters.
>Here was a situation where new voters who support Democratic candidates
>were
>supporting a Republican incumbent mayor in a local race.
>
>There is another election going on right now, also in Southern California,
>to
>replace the late George Brown in Congress. In the primary, State Senator
>Joe
>Baca was the Democrat who came in first, and he could very likely become
>the
>19th Latino in Congress today. So that is another development to keep an
>eye
>on. What is interesting about this race in San Bernardino County is that
>it is
>a fairly conservative blue collar district -- in the Inland Empire that
>is far
>east of the City of Los Angeles. Joe Baca is a member of the NRA. He is
>a
>conservative Democrat. He probably will play very, very well in that district.
>
>Of course, the focus of the Latino vote today is the potential impact on
>the
>elections of next year, and the concentration of Latinos in several strategic
>states make them an important calculus for whoever intends to win a majority
>of the Electoral College. Ten states with significant Latino voting
>populations have about 80% of the Electoral College votes needed to win
>the
>White House. These states include Massachusetts, Illinois, New Jersey,
>Florida, New York, Texas, and out here in the West, California, Arizona,
>New
>Mexico and Colorado. Latinos are about 12% of the voters in California,
>11% in
>Arizona, 33% in New Mexico, and about 8% in Colorado.
>
>California, of course, with 54 electoral votes is a vital state, which
>explains why both Al Gore and George W. Bush are spending an awful lot of
>time
>in California. Arizona Senator John McCain is also somebody who has been
>very,
>very popular among Latinos in the State of Arizona, and he is seeking out
>Latino venues. It is no surprise that these candidates are speaking Spanish
>and seeking to address Latino voters.
>
>The Republican strategy is really to try to get at least 40% of the Hispanic
>vote. If Republicans get 40% of the vote, they believe they will have been
>successful. They claim that they are going to work hard for the Latino vote.
>They are going to put money into TV ads, something that we have not seen
>nationally since the 1998 race between George Bush and Michael Dukakis.
>Bush
>is attractive to the Latinos. He has a base in Texas, and his brother (Gov.
>Jeb Bush) is very popular among Latinos in Florida where he received 67%
>of
>the Latino vote. Bush is also consciously distancing himself in California
>from Pete Wilson. I have yet to see George W. Bush and Pete Wilson in the
>same
>room, and to me it is no surprise. George W. Bush opposes English Only.
>He
>supports vouchers, which in fact are popular among Latinos, and he has worked
>well with Hispanic leaders in Texas.
>
>Many Latino elected officials in Texas who are Democrats are hard-pressed
>to
>really criticize George W. Bush as somebody who has not looked out for the
>interests of Latinos on some issues. So he is doing something right in terms
>of reaching out to Latinos in the State of Texas. The big question is, will
>he
>lay outside of Texas?
>
>You may have heard about the controversy this summer where Bush was invited
>by
>three national organizations to address them at their annual meetings: the
>National Council of La Raza, LULAC, the League of United Latin American
>Citizens, and NALEO, the National Association of Latino Elected And Appointed
>Officials.
>
>It really was puzzling to me why he decided to skip each of our three
>conferences. Each of us draw significant media attention. Each of us draw
>significant and different niches of the Latino community. Yet to each one
>of
>us he claimed to have scheduling conflicts.
>
>I think, however, that he is being strategic in which Latino venues he seeks
>out. He was in California twice recently. Once to speak at the Latin Business
>Association conference, and then in San Diego to speak at the conference
>of
>the US Hispanic Chamber of Commerce. I think he is being very strategic
>in
>which Latino venues he selects, selecting those where he believes he will
>have
>a receptive audience. He also believes he can win California. Again, he,
>and
>Republican strategists believe that he needs 40% of the Latino vote to win
>the
>state, and I think he can actually do it.
>
>Bush's biggest liability, though, I believe, is his Party's leadership in
>Congress. A recent poll by Univision, the Spanish language TV network,
>indicated that Latinos support Democrats in Congress 66% to 24%, and they
>disapprove of Republicans in Congress 50% to 39%. And Congress is doing
>things, as Congress can do, that are not to the benefit of Latinos, and
>frankly, I think that they could be a huge liability for Bush.
>
>House Speaker Dennis Hastert, for example, has not made himself available
>to
>meet with the National Hispanic Leadership Agenda, an organization which
>I
>chair. It is a coalition of 32 national Latino organizations. We met at
>least
>twice with Speaker Newt Gingrich, and we agreed to disagree on some issues,
>and on some issues we found common ground. Yet, since he took office, Dennis
>Hastert has not been able to make time to meet with the CEOs of the 32 largest
>national Latino organizations, something that is baffling to me.
>
>I think the debates over the Census and sampling were harmful to the
>Republican Party. The Census is an issue that is very keen in the Latino
>community. Latino organizations and Latino leaders made the census a priority
>in 1970, 1980 and 1990, and we will again in the year 2000.
>
>Latino organizations and leaders are engaging in comprehensive outreach
>efforts to educate Latinos about the importance of being counted in the
>Census. Whenever anybody puts himself in the position of appearing not to
>advocate for a full Census count, it sends a strong message to Latinos that
>you are not on their side.
>
>There are a couple of other issues before Congress this session that also
>could hurt the image of the Republican party among Latinos. The restructuring
>of the INS is being proposed in a way that my organization opposes -- my
>board
>of directors, which is 20% Republican -- opposes. Congress is proposing
>to cut
>funds for bilingual education, which has strong support among Latinos.
>
>I think these actions in Congress are not helpful to Bush, and I believe
>Bush
>is doing all he can not to associate himself with members of his Party who
>are
>in the Congress, and in the Senate. The Senators have done a very poor job
>of
>confirming Latino judicial candidates, which is probably the most important
>issue we in the Latino community before the U.S. Senate. Judge Richard Paez
>from California, who has been nominated to the Ninth Circuit, has been waiting
>for three years and 10 months to be brought forward to a floor vote. He
>has
>been reported out of committee, but he is being held up by a couple of
>Senators and not being brought to a vote. This is an issue that many of
>us in
>the Latino community are following very, very closely.
>
>Nonetheless, I think the Republicans can make headway among Latinos, who
>do
>support some traditional Republican themes. The Univision polls show that
>Latinos strongly support school prayer, they support vouchers, but they
>also
>support Medicare, health care reform, education, education funding, and
>affirmative action, which I think gives Gore and the Democrats the opportunity
>to distinguish themselves from the Republicans.
>
>Gore is very well known among the Latino community. He has had an
>infrastructure for the past six years to reach out to Latino leadership
>and
>Latino elected officials. He will need every one of them to inspire Latinos
>to
>go out and vote for him. The big question is the Bradley factor. Obviously
>the
>race between Bradley and Gore is tightening. Bradley is largely unknown
>to
>Latinos. I do not know a single Latino elected official who has endorsed
>Bradley.
>
>I recently had a long conversation with an individual who works in the Bradley
>campaign who was lamenting the fact that there are no Latinos involved in
>the
>Bradley campaign infrastructure, and that Latinos are supporting his
>candidacy. His message to me was that Latinos had better get on the bandwagon,
>because Bradley is going to win and Latinos would be left out if Latinos
>are
>all with Gore.
>
>Well, if Bradley intends to carry California, he needs to start reaching
>out
>to Latinos. The Bradley factor may be a very interesting wrinkle in the
>Democratic strategy to try to carry states like California and to carry
>the
>Latino vote. The most recent polls in California among Latinos still show
>an
>edge for Gore over Bush. Gore, 54%, Bush, 37%, and there are other polls
>that
>suggest Gore at 49%, Bush at 24%. But remember, success with Latinos for
>the
>Republican Party is getting 40% of the Latino vote.
>
>The L.A. Times poll put Bush at 37% support among Latinos. It is within
>reach.
>
>The big question is, will the trend of voter participation among Latinos
>continue in the year 2000? There are some indications that the factors
>contributing to low voter turnout overall, the good old American political
>apathy, may be catching up to Latinos and affecting them as well.
>
>The sting of Proposition 187, welfare reform, Proposition 227 may be fading.
>And other than in Arizona, where there is another initiative to eliminate
>bilingual education, there do not seem to be emerging other wedge issues
>that
>may be galvanizing Latinos like they were in 1994, 1996 and 1998.
>
>Ultimately, I believe, the candidate who can best convey a message to Latinos
>on the most important issues that they care about will have the advantage.
>
>The most important issues for Latinos today are crime and drugs, education,
>and economic opportunity. Look for continued outreach to new voters. Look
>for
>the use of Spanish language media to reach these voters.
>
>As the Presidential race unfolds, Latinos are settling into position where
>we
>have worked very, very hard to be. We want to be in a place where our vote
>is
>not taken for granted by Democrats or Republicans; where candidates
>consciously reach out to Latino voters and work hard to convince us that
>they
>offer the better alternative to advance our interests, and that political
>parties think twice about pursuing policies that will alienate Latinos.
>
>This is essentially where we want to be. We are not there yet, but I think
>we
>are well on our way. Thank you.
>
>
> -- End --

_____________

>InfoTrac Web: Expanded Academic ASAP.
> Source: World and I, Jan 1999 v14 i1 p42(1).
> Title: Waiting for 2000.
> Author: NANCY E. ROMAN
> Abstract: The 1998 election results gave much encouragement to Republican
>George W. Bush and Democratic Dick Gephardt. Bush emerged out of Texas
>gubernatorial race as a strong candidate for year 2000 presidential election.
>He attracted much minority votes and stayed strong with his Republican voters.
>Gephardt after the elections became a stronger figure in Congress as Democrats
>picked up five seats. He helped craft health-care reforms and education
>despite trailing Vice President Al Gore as a likely Democratic candidate
>in year 2000.
> Subjects: Elections - Political aspects
> People: Bush, George W. - Political activity
> Gephardt, Richard - Political activity
>Electronic Collection: A53634673
> RN: A53634673
>Full Text COPYRIGHT 1999 News World Communications
>
>The unexpected November election results gave boosts to Republican George
>W.
>Bush and Democrat Dick Gephardt.
>
>The unexpected November election results turned politics 2000 on its head,
>giving a big boost to one man on each side of the aisle: Republican George
>W.
>Bush and House Minority Leader Democrat Dick Gephardt.
>
>Bush, the popular governor of Texas, went into the election as the fair-haired
>Republican boy and emerged in even better shape for two reasons:
>
>* He would have strong support in two of the nation's four most populous
>states: Texas, where he governs, and Florida, where his brother, Jeb Bush,
>won
>the governorship.
>
>* He is one of few Republicans who have been able to crack the black and
>Hispanic electorate, both of which are growing as the white vote declines.
>
>Reaching out to minorities
>
>Rep. J.C. Watts of Oklahoma, the only black Republican in the House, singled
>out the Bush boys as the only Republicans who have demonstrated that reaching
>out to minority communities can be met with success.
>
>"We are going to have some growing pains," he said, explaining that the
>Republican Party must develop a vision that includes those minorities if
>it
>wants to continue to govern.
>
>Watts noted that in 1998, key Republicans failed to reach out to minority
>communities in California and New York and got clobbered. Liberal Democrat
>Sen. Barbara Boxer, who has high negatives, trounced GOP candidate Matt
>Fong.
>Likewise, Rep. Chuck Schumer was outspent by about $9 million and still
>defeated Sen. Alfonse D'Amato.
>
>By contrast, Bush's performance in the minority communities makes him
>enormously popular with Republicans, who know that they must crack these
>communities to remain a majority party. He won 29 percent of the black vote
>in
>an election year in which more than 90 percent of the black vote nationwide
>went to Democrats.
>
>P strategist William Kristol predicted that Bush will run and noted that
>his
>concerns about then House Speaker Newt Gingrich contributed to a dynamic
>that
>led to Gingrich's resignation in November.
>
>Kristol said Bush told at least one GOP House member that he is probably
>going
>to run for president but feared a House dominated by a negative messenger
>like
>Gingrich.
>
>He said Bush told the member: "If I lose the presidency, I want it to be
>because of Al Gore, not because of Newt Gingrich." That fear was widespread
>in
>Congress and three days after the election Gingrich had resigned, thwarting
>his own hopes for the presidency. Gingrich had been mulling a presidential
>bid
>and had worked very hard to improve his stubbornly high negative ratings.
>
>But in the end, neither diets nor resolving to speak less often and less
>extemporaneously--not even his book Lessons Learned the Hard Way-- could
>put a
>softer face on the man who many saw as partisan and mean spirited.
>
>"They did not want to risk having Newt Gingrich there," Kristol said. "That's
>the key reason he's gone. They did not want to go into 2000 with Gingrich."
>But those close to Gingrich expect him to make political speeches around
>the
>country. He will fine-tune and reassess his message and be credited for
>stepping down from the House.
>
>In his first public address since his resignation, Gingrich appeared to
>be
>honing a stump speech. Speaking before a pro-Newt GOPAC crowd, Gingrich
>focused not on the past but the future, calling for missile defense,
>litigation reform, and an overall taxation rate no greater than 25 percent.
>
>Gephardt's maneuvers
>
>Gingrich's rival, House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt, has been cheerful
>since
>being boosted by November's election results. Democrats picked up five
>seats--bringing him within sniffing distance of the speakership and inspiring
>House Democrats, who have not enjoyed toiling in the minority.
>
>He also helped craft the message of health-care reform and education-- and
>doggedly stuck with it--which helped the Democrats pick up seats.
>
>Vice President Al Gore remains the front-runner, of course. He's got all
>the
>trappings of incumbency, including the most money to spend on a presidential
>bid.
>
>But Gephardt has been quietly moving to position himself--knowing that Gore
>has vulnerabilities, including campaign-finance problems that Congress is
>still probing.
>
>Asked about his plans for 2000, Gephardt deflects the question, saying
>Americans don't care about who has which job in Washington, only that the
>nation deals with the "kitchen table issues": health care, education, Social
>Security.
>
>Behind the scenes, he is pulling off a remarkable balancing act, eclipsing
>rival Gore to the right while holding fast to his leftist base--organized
>labor.
>
>Consider three issues: global warming, taxes, and the Clinton sex scandals.
>Gore went to Kyoto and came back supporting a treaty that calls for the
>United
>States to reduce emissions of certain gases that treaty backers say contribute
>to a "greenhouse" effect, in which the emissions trap heat in the atmosphere
>and warm the planet.
>
>Gephardt, a Missouri Democrat who is widely expected to challenge Gore for
>the
>nomination, has been careful to criticize the Clinton-Gore Kyoto
>treaty--loathed by big business, most Republicans, and organized
>labor--without torpedoing it. "I see this treaty as a work in progress that
>must be improved and broadened before it can be ratified," he said.
>
>Laura Nichols, a spokeswoman for Gephardt, has said he accepts the science
>that predicts global warming. But he is reluctant to embrace unreservedly
>a
>treaty that is staunchly opposed by labor and that, critics say, places
>a
>disproportionate burden on the United States.
>
>While Gephardt has not opposed Kyoto outright, he is in a position to do
>so if
>he chooses. If he does, he puts himself to the right of the vice president,
>earning labor's gratitude while leaving Gore the largely leftist environmental
>base.
>
>On taxes, Gephardt was the first high-profile Democrat to come out with
>a
>tax-reform plan--announced early in 1995. In 1998 he modified that plan
>to
>eliminate the tax penalty many married couples face and help stay-at-home
>spouses, once again positioning himself to the vice president's right.
>
>"There is little I agree with the Republican leadership in Congress on,
>but I
>agree we must make radical changes to fix the system," Gephardt said. "Just
>because Republicans have been more skillful in turning the anger about taxes
>into political gain" doesn't mean Democrats should ignore that anger, he
>said.
>
>And Gephardt is further removed from the sex scandal that enveloped the
>White
>House. Both Gephardt and Gore can boast of solid marriages; Gephardt has
>two
>children and Gore has four. Neither man has been tainted by allegations
>of
>sexual impropriety of any kind.
>
>But as No. 2 in the administration, Gore has not been able to criticize
>the
>president. Gephardt has been very critical at times, though he ultimately
>acted as Clinton's defender.
>
>Dueling with the GOP House
>
>Whoever emerges at the top of the Democratic ticket will have to duel with
>the
>GOP-led 106th Congress. And Speaker Bob Livingston said his goal will be
>to
>run the House in such a way that Republicans are well positioned for
>2000--both in congressional races and the bid for the White House.
>
>The narrow GOP majority will make it difficult to achieve anything sweeping
>in
>the next two years. In fact, the poor GOP performance dimmed chances that
>broad tax cuts, legal reform, or any of the other big-ticket Republican
>items
>on the agenda would be achieved in the next two years.
>
>"The GOP base is going to be frustrated for another two years," said Ralph
>Hellmann, lead House lobbyist for the National Federation of Independent
>Business. "A significant change of legislative pace won't occur until a
>Republican wins the White House, and they are going to have to get used
>to
>it."
>
>But Livingston aims to change one thing: Social Security. He has vowed to
>take
>the national retirement system off budget, meaning its revenue could not
>be
>tapped for anything other than Social Security. That would make it politically
>easier to advocate tax cuts, which Clinton has previously attacked as a
>threat
>to Social Security.
>
>In the interim, Republicans are working to improve their position in
>California, where they have big problems as evidenced by November's election:
>Not only did Barbara Boxer beat Matt Fong handily, Democrat Gray Davis crushed
>GOP candidate Dan Lungren for governor. This in the nation's most populous
>state, with more than 52 electoral votes.
>
>GOP pollster Frank Luntz said California poses a big problem for Republicans
>because it is rich in electoral votes as well as the front- runner on many
>policy initiatives. "The root of the problem is that California has changed
>in
>the last 20 years," said Luntz, who did the polling for Lungren. "It is
>not
>the same state that elected Ronald Reagan or Jerry Brown."
>
>Social conservatives have given way to libertarians, he said, and Republicans
>have failed to take that into account. Luntz is among those who would advocate
>a kinder and gentler approach to politics styled after George W. Bush.
>
>Rep. Bill Paxon (R-New York), who is leaving Congress, acknowledged California
>is a problem for Republicans but said it is offset by other gubernatorial
>gains.
>
>Republicans hold the governorships of 9 of the 10 most populous states,
>including Texas, Florida, New Jersey, New York, Illinois, Ohio, and
>Pennsylvania. "They are going to try to spin it on the short term," Paxon
>said. "But they ignore the fact that we hold all the other major
>governorships."
>
>That will help in delivering electoral votes in 2000.
>
>The only other candidate affected by November's results is Jesse Jackson,
>who
>had been contemplating a run but may see little need to now.
>
>Black voters turned out heavily, despite predictions they might stay home,
>and
>voted en bloc for Clinton-Gore style politics, helping to deliver victories
>to
>John Edwards in North Carolina and Schumer in New York.
>
>"Jesse Jackson wants to run, but African Americans voted for the Clinton-Gore
>approach," said George Stephanopolous.
>
>Nancy E. Roman is the Capitol Hill correspondent for the Washington Times.
>
>
> -- End --

________________

>InfoTrac Web: Expanded Academic ASAP.
> Source: National Journal, May 8, 1999 v31 i19 p1254.
> Title: Blacks and Hispanics: A Lock for Democrats?
> Author: MARK MURRAY
> Abstract: Presidential campaign official Jose Villareal believes African
>Americans and Hispanics are participating more in election campaigns because
>of their increasing prominence and because minorities are being wooed as
>a new ource for campaign contributions. Democrats doubt that Republicans can
>tap into minority pocketbooks.
> Subjects: Campaign funds - Planning
> Political consultants - Attitudes
> Ethnic attitudes - Political aspects
> Minorities - Influence
>Organizations: Democratic National Committee - Economic aspects
>Electronic Collection: A54775113
> RN: A54775113
>Full Text COPYRIGHT 1999 National Journal Inc.
>
>Jose Villarreal was a political director for Michael Dukakis in 1988 an
>deputy
>campaign manager for Bill Clinton in 1992. This year, Villarreal, a partner
>at
>Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld's law office in San Antonio, Texas, is
>serving as a fund-raiser and the national treasurer for Vice President Al
>Gore's presidential bid.
>
>In his relatively short time as a presidential campaign player, Villarreal,
>a
>Mexican-American, has seen his ethnic group enjoy an immense increase in
>clout. This rise has a lot to do with the increasing number of
>Mexican-American voters, but it also has a lot to do with the increasing
>amount of political money coming from Mexican-Americans and other Hispanics.
>
>"In 1988, Latinos were an invisible factor," Villarreal recalled. "All of
>that
>has changed with the explosive growth in numbers and economic power."
>
>Much the same could be said of African-Americans. In 1994, the Democratic
>National Committee hosted a birthday bash for President Clinton that was
>attended predominate by African-American The event ever more than $1.2
>million--the most ever for an African-American fund-raiser. A June fund-raiser
>for Gore is being targeted primarily at African-Americans and Hispanics.
>
>[Graphic omitted]What explains the increased willingness of blacks and
>Hispanics to open up their wallets? A couple of factors appear to be at
>play.
>One is the increased prominence of minorities in all walks of life. As more
>and more Latinos and African-Americans rise to higher professional positions
>and achieve more wealth, they naturally seek a greater voice in the political
>system; and there is nothing like contributing money for making one's voice
>heard. Second, minorities are being wooed like never before because they
>represent a new source of campaign money--and in a time when
>multimillion-dollar campaigns are commonplace, politicians desperately need
>new sources. "Everyone is tired of going to the same people," said David
>Mercer, a former African-American DNC official who now owns a Washington
>consulting firm. "You can only go to the well so many times."
>
>Thus far, Democrats have enjoyed a clear advantage in raising money from
>blacks and Latinos, just as they've won big majorities of their votes on
>Election Day. But Republicans hope to do better in 2000, particularly if
>Texas
>GOP Gov. George W. Bush heads the ticket. Bush, who won as much as 49 percent
>of the Hispanic vote and 27 percent of the black vote in last year's
>gubernatorial race, already has minority fund-raisers on board.
>
>Houston engineer Raul Romero is helping Bush because he is impressed with
>the
>Governor's pro-business outlook and his conservative values. Ditto for San
>Antonio advertising executive Lionel Sosa, who says that he has had an easy
>time gathering funds from Latinos for the Governor's 2000 bid. "Up until
>now,
>nobody has said no. It is absolutely amazing." According to Bush's campaign
>team, other minorities who are helping include oil executive Tony Sanchez
>of
>Laredo, Texas, and Leonard Coleman, president of Major League Baseball's
>National League.
>
>But Democrats scoff at the idea that Bush or other GOP candidates will be
>able
>to tap deeply into Latino money. They cite the growing network of Hispanic
>Democrats who raise funds, the efforts by the Clinton Administration to
>give
>high-profile jobs to Latinos, and Administration policies that benefit
>minorities.
>
>"I would hate to be the Hispanic fund-raiser for the Republicans," said
>Joe
>Velasquez, a former national vice chairman of finance at the DNC. "They
>will
>get a handful of money." One reason for his confidence, Velasquez said,
>is the
>fund-raising prowess of Rep. Loretta Sanchez, D-Calif.
>
>Sanchez has drawn rave reviews in her new role as co-chair of the Democratic
>National Committee. Velasquez said that Sanchez is particularly effective
>because she is a member of Congress and because she's very popular among
>Latinos after twice defeating conservative Republican Robert K. Dornan.
>Other
>key Latino fund-raisers include Villarreal, Puerto Rican attorney Miguel
>Lausell, New York City businesswoman Marife Hernandez, and Velasquez, who
>worked previously in the Clinton White House and now operates his own
>government relations shop.
>
>[Graphic omitted][Graphic omitted][Graphic omitted]Among African-American
>Democrats, some of the more notable fundraisers are Robert L. Johnson, the
>founder of Black Entertainment Television; Frank Savage, a New York City
>investor; Ernest Green, the managing director of Lehman Brothers; and Weldon
>H. Latham, a Washington attorney.
>
>Mercer, the former DNC official, says that the 1989 election of Ron Brown
>to
>head the DNC was pivotal to the growth of African-American donors, who gave
>substantial amounts during Brown's tenure because they knew that Brown
>wouldn't take their money and then ignore them. With Brown's leadership,
>he
>said, "you got a natural tie-in that led to an expansion in African-American
>financial participation."
>
>At the DNC, Brown also recruited African-American staffers--such as Mercer
>and
>Yolanda H. Caraway, now president and CEO of the Caraway Group, a public
>relations and event-planning organization--who now act as key Washington
>liaisons to the community. The Gore camp is using Mercer and Caraway to
>tap
>into African-American money.
>
>Indeed, Gore seems to be the favorite of most high-profile minority
>fund-raisers. New York City investor Frank Savage says he's backing Gore
>because he believes that the Vice President will carry on the Clinton agenda.
>
>Bob Johnson, who's regarded as perhaps the nation's most important
>African-American fund-raiser and donor, happens to be one of Gore's good
>friends--their relationship dates back to the time Johnson was a lobbyist
>at
>the National Cable Television Association, while the Vice President served
>on
>a House Interstate and Foreign Commerce subcommittee.
>
>Already, Johnson is organizing a fund-raiser for Gore in June, which will
>be
>attended primarily by African-Americans and Latinos. "I'm confident that
>I can
>raise a couple hundred thousand dollars [at this event]," he said. "Early
>money is the toughest to raise."
>
>But not everyone is backing Gore. Ted Wells, a Democratic African-American
>attorney from New Jersey, supports Bill Bradley and is serving as his campaign
>treasurer. "I have been one of his chief fund-raisers for all three [of
>his]
>Senate campaigns," Wells said, adding that he plans to host a minority-focused
>event for Bradley at his home, at which he hopes to raise $50,000. Other
>minorities backing Bradley include Peter Bynoe, a Chicago attorney and a
>former owner of the NBA's Denver Nuggets, and Chicago investor John W. Rogers
>Jr.
>
>Loretta Sanchez, although a friend of Gore's, says her role with the DNC
>precludes her from endorsing a candidate until a nominee is selected.
>
>Despite this split in support among Democratic minorities, Democrats are
>confident that the Republicans won't make much of an inroad into the
>African-American and Latino communities. Rep. Sanchez argues that the GOP
>really doesn't need to knock on minorities' doors, since "Republicans have
>always outraised Democrats." But according to Manuel "Manny" Sanchez, a
>Chicago attorney and a Gore fundraiser (not related to the California
>congresswoman), that's a luxury that the Vice President--or any other
>Democrat--can't afford.
>
>"He's got to ask. If he doesn't ask, he will not go anywhere."
>
>LIONEL SOSA
>
>Age: 59
>
>Address: San Antonio
>
>Work: CEO and partner at Garcia LKS, an advertising firm
>
>Politics: Has worked as a communications and advertising strategist for
>Republican presidential campaigns since the Reagan days. One of the country's
>most influential GOP Latinos, Sosa is backing fellow Texan George W. Bush.
>
>JOSE VILLARREAL
>
>Age: 46
>
>Address: San Antonio
>
>Work: Law partner at Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld
>
>Politics: Currently serving as Gore's national treasurer, and has played
>major
>roles on Democratic presidential campaigns since 1988. He's considered one
>of
>the Democrats' most important fund-raisers within the Latino community.
>
>ROBERT L. JOHNSON
>
>Age: 53
>
>Address: Washington, D.C.
>
>Work: Founder of Black Entertainment Television and BET Holdings Inc., the
>first black-owned firm to be traded on the New York Stock Exchange
>
>Politics: Will be hosting a large fund-raiser for the Vice President in
>June.
>Since 1996, he's contributed more than $200,000 to Democrats.
>
>
> -- End --

____________________

InfoTrac Web: Expanded Academic ASAP.
> Source: Black Enterprise, August 2000 v31 i1 p85.
> Title: strength in numbers.(minority participation in politics and
> economy)
> Author: SAKINA P. SPRUELL
> Subjects: Minorities - Political aspects
> African Americans - Political aspects
> Political participation - Social aspects
> Labor supply - Social aspects
> Judicial activism - Political aspects
> Minorities as consumers - Political aspects
> Minorities in technology - United States
> Social planning - United States
>Locations: United States
>Electronic Collection: A63974377
> RN: A63974377
>Full Text COPYRIGHT 2000 Earl G. Graves Publishing Co., Inc.
>
>To gain real economic and social power, you'll need to compete in a world
>that
>is drastically changing in size and diversity. Here's how.
>
>YOU CAN'T MAKE IT ALONE, and that's a good thing. There is an anticipated
>growth in America of the Hispanic and Asian populations, as well as those
>of
>"other" ethnic groups and nationalities, over the next 10 years. This means
>there will be more people to join forces with the African American community
>to combat racism and discrimination. But this growth will have implications,
>such as increased competition, so it's paramount that African Americans
>prepare to capitalize on the changing majority now in order to succeed in
>the
>future.
>
>According to Brimmer & Company Inc., the Washington, D.C.-based economic
>and
>financial consulting firm headed by Andrew Brimmer, a member of the BLACK
>ENTERPRISE Board of Economists, the number of people of "other" races in
>the
>labor force (mainly Native Americans, Asians, and Pacific Islanders) is
>predicted to increase at an annual rate of 3.8% over the next 10 years,
>which
>would raise their total representation from 6.6 million to 9.6 million.
>The
>number of Hispanics is also expected to rise substantially, from an estimated
>15.4 million in 2000 to 20.9 million by the year 2010, or by 3.2% percent.
>
>The number of African Americans is expected to rise a mere 1.8%, to 19.8
>million. There are currently 16.6 million blacks in the labor force. Trailing
>even more so in growth are whites. They are expected to increase in the
>labor
>force at a rate of 0.9% per year, from 118 million to 129 million.
>
>[Graphic omitted]The influx of more minorities will definitely yield
>challenges as well as opportunities for all Americans. As a people, we must
>build on the strength we've mustered over our 600 years in America, implement
>some new concepts, and fortify some basic practices to flourish over the
>next
>decade.
>
>* LEVERAGE THE POWER YOU HAVE.
>
>Despite the challenges we've faced since the civil rights movement, African
>Americans remain a viable force in America as employees, voters, consumers,
>and proactive citizens in all walks of life. The influx of more minorities
>will continue to force corporations to recognize the increasing diversity
>of
>customers, employees, and communities on which the rely for profitability.
>We
>must capitalize on this attention and leverage the power already gained
>to
>create more outlets for senior-level management positions, entrepreneurial
>opportunities, community resources, and consumer power for African Americans.
>
>Despite negative opinions of the political system, people make the government.
>You have decision making power as to whether the historic church in your
>neighborhood is knocked down, and as to whether commercial trucks can continue
>to run on your residential street. Attend a city council meeting with your
>block association and make your presence known.
>
>It helps to have elected officials on your side, so it's imperative that
>you
>vote in all elections, from those for the local school board to that for
>president. But don't stop at merely casting a vote. Contribute money to
>the
>campaigns of candidates whose policies and proposals you support. Possibly,
>work as a campaign volunteer.
>
>Also, you must vote with your dollars as well as your ballots. Remember,
>you're not just worth your salary and investment portfolio. You make up
>part
>of the population projected by economist Andrew Brimmer to earn $522.4 billion
>in total money income this year. Your spending power is a great deal more
>than
>that, and it should be leveraged in support of black businesses and other
>companies and institutions that provide jobs and services that strengthen
>and
>empower our communities.
>
>* USE THE "BROWNING" OF AMERICA TO YOUR ADVANTAGE
>
>Form alliance with other minorities. "We need to push hard for programs
>that
>aren't just for small businesses anymore," says William Spriggs, director
>of
>research and public policy at the National Urban League, "and that won't
>happen with blacks standing alone."
>
>BE Board of Economists member Marcus Alexis echoes this sentiment. "We would
>have a more effective, collaborative voice in lobbying to advance the cause
>of
>minorities if we formed alliances," says Alexis, who is also a professor
>of
>economics and management at Northwestern University.
>
>[Graphic omitted]As collective force, African Americans, Hispanics, Asians,
>and other minorities will have more of an impact when voting for a Mayoral
>Candidate or demanding changes in government programs designed for their
>social and economic growth. The National Association of Black Journalists
>(NABJ) began building these relationships more than a decade ago by
>co-founding UNITY: Journalists of Color. Along with the Native American
>Journalists Association, the National Association of Hispanic Journalists,
>and
>the Asian American Journalists Association, NABJ saw a struggle that could
>be
>tackled collectively.
>
>NABJ Executive Director Antoinette Samuel says, "Because [members of UNITY]
>have the same mission to increase journalists of color in the newsroom,
>our
>partners will support us in our personal cause."
>
>"We will have to share our status with more groups. However, with increased
>respect for cultural fluency and multi-culturalism, it won't weaken the
>African American's position," says Dr. Jessica Gordon Nembhard, research
>director of the Washington, D.C.-based Preamble Center, which is dedicated
>to
>educating the public about economic and social justice issues. "We should
>all
>gain more equality."
>
>* BECOME GLOBALLY AWARE. Although it may seem that the whole world will
>be in
>the U.S. in the next 30 years, it won't be. The Internet has made it possible
>for companies to sell internationally, students to study abroad, and consumers
>to purchase overseas--all without leaving their homes.
>
>As America becomes more multicultural, experts predict more global
>opportunities will become accessible, Ronald Walters, director of the African
>American Leadership Institute at the University of Maryland, College Park,
>predicts that more African Americans will be employed in other countries
>in the years to come. "With developments like the China trade bill, I envision
>blacks working in China some day," Walters says.
>
>With President Clinton's bill to grant permanent normal trade relations
>to China, the opportunities in China will be expanded. Because of similar
>legislation such as the Africa Growth and Opportunity Act, passed into law
>as the Trade and Development Act of 2000, many businesses and employees are
>already taking advantage of global opportunities.
>
>To ensure you respect the natural concerns and economic culture of a foreign
>country, Randall Robinson, president of TransAfrica Forum, suggests, "Seek
>out people that can facilitate international discussions. You don't need to
>know the countries' principles. There are other people that do."
>
>The relaxation of immigration laws to allow for high-tech and other
>professionals from other countries to work in the U.S. will also create
>more competition for Americans.
>
>BE Board of Economists member and Pomona College Associate Professor of
>Economics Cecilia Conrad recommends black technology professionals seek
>training every six months to stay competitive with immigrant workers being
>sought from Asia and India,
>
>* TO BE A PLAYER, GET TO KNOW THE PLAYERS. Players include those in your
>immediate circle of influence, as well as those in the world at large.
>
>Do you know who your congressional Representative is? What senators represent
>your state? who the most influential executives (black and otherwise) are
>in your company? Your industry? Who is the editor of your city's most influential
>newspaper? Who are the members of the school board governing your child's
>school?
>
>Once you identify which of these leaders are most key to your success, find
>out which civic organization, or events they frequent and make it a point
>to attend that group's next function.
>
>You want to seek out opportunities for major players to get to know--and
>to think positively of--you. This is how networking results in the acquisition
>of power and influence. Whether your priority is improving the quality of your
>life in your community or achieving business and professional success, you
>must know who the movers and shakers are shaping business, the economy,
>politics, and public opinion, both within and outside the African American
>community.
>
>With the melting pot taking affect, it's essential to become familiar with
>a diversity of people from all aspects of your chosen industry at all
>professional levels.
>
>Also, you shouldn't limit your focus to CEOs; don't underestimate the value
>of knowing the gatekeepers--the secretaries, executive assistants, and other
>professionals who can either run interference for you or interfere with
>your efforts to make a connection with a person of influence. In other words,
>nobody is too unimportant to pay attention to, and access and influence
>can ome from the most unlikely sources.
>
>* BECOME A NEWS JUNKIE. It's not enough to know who the players are. You
>must understand why they are players, and how they relate to your community,
>your industry, the nation, and the world.
>
>The most successful human beings have at least one thing in common. They
>are well informed. No matter how busy they are, they read at least one daily
>newspaper and a variety of magazines and industry publications; they tap
>into the news on the Internet; and they devour local and national political,
>financial, and business news programs on television and radio. You must
>do no ess.
>
>There are few more reliable indications of powerlessness than being asked,
>"What's going on?" and having to answer, "I don't know." Such an exchange
>can have disastrous results if it takes place in a business meeting, at a
>networking reception, during an industry conference, or in the course of
>a job nterview. On the other hand, knowing the who, what, when, where, and, most
>important, why, can distinguish you as a person primed for opportunity.
>In the quest for economic and political power, whether you are perceived as informed
>or not can be the difference between being a player and being played.
>
>"We live in an information society where information is power," says NABJ
>Executive Director Samuel. "Whether you're looking to buy a house, want
>to know who to support politically, or where to send your kids to school, you
>need information to make those decisions."
>
>In fact, you can't effectively implement any of the 30 keys to empowerment
>mentioned in our editors' stories unless you are committed to becoming as
>informed as you can on the news, trends, and changes that will impact your
>present and shape prospects for your future. Evidence of all of the above
>can and will be broadcast, printed, and spoken about in a news medium.
>
>[Graphic omitted]rev. al sharpton
>
>president, national action network on activism in the 21st century
>
>ACTIVISM WILL BE EXTREMELY IMPORTANT IN THE 21ST CENTURY. WE HAVE the double burden now of not only continuing our march toward empowerment--both economic and political--but also of protecting the gains made in the 20th century.
>Without that, major corporations will not be held accountable, nor will
>major political parties or officeholders, nor will we be able to galvanize our
>community to support our own businesses. Take, for example, things like
>the Madison Avenue Initiative, where we hold the advertising industry accountable,
>and things like the political movements surrounding voter registration,
>and rying to empower our people by getting ourselves into office: these things
>will not happen without community activism. They never have and they never
>will.
>
>Politically, we must register our people [to vote], but more important,
>we must give them reasons to register, and candidates who will stand up for
>those reasons. They must be aware that everything from racial profiling to the
>awarding of contracts-every decision made in their life--as made from some
>public decision made in their life--is made from some public policy.
>Therefore, we must be involved in the process that will make those decisions.
>The question is not whether we're going to be involved, it's about when
>we're going to have a say-so.
>
>For those who say that political action will not solve our problems, consider
>that everything--from your birth certificate to your death certificate,
>where you work, where you live, what kind of school you go to--is the result of
>some policy decision. By thinking that, you are really saying that you concede
>to letting someone else make the decisions for you, that your self-esteem is
>so low and that your confidence is so bankrupt, that you don't think you can
>be a part of the process and make decisions for yourself. We must not tell
>ourselves that because we are in a new millennium, white America is
>[operating] in a new mode.
>
>The Rev. Al Sharpton found his calling at age four, when he preached his
>first sermon. Ordained as a minister at age 10, Sharpton has been preaching the
>gospel of civil rights ever since. More than an activist, he has championed
>the causes of those victimized by racial profiling, mob justice, and police
>brutality. In the 1990s, he twice ran for the U.S. Senate, garnering 14%
>and then 26% of the vote, Head of the National Action Network, a civil rights
>organization based in New York City, he was instrumental in bringing the
>Amadou Diallo tragedy to national attention.
>
>george herrera
>
>president and ceo, u.s. hispanic chamber of commerce on the "browning" of
>america
>
>[Graphic omitted]WHAT YOU'RE SEEING RIGHT NOW IS A TRANSFORMATION OF AMERICAN SOCIETY THAT IS GOING to have an amazing impact on the way that corporate
>America deals with our communities--not just from a consumer standpoint,
>but also from a business standpoint. The changing demographics in this country
>are going to result in the minority community comprising at least 50% of the
>population in a very short time. The Hispanic community and the African
>American community need to come together to be able to develop a comprehensive
>and cohesive national agenda that will result in creating true economic
>empowerment.
>
>Our leaders must lead the charge in bridging the gap between the African
>and Latin American communities. They must go to their constituencies and explain
>to them that the Anglo community--the powers that control the resources
>in this country--views us all as minorities, not as Hispanics and African
>Americans. When you sit back and look, you'll see the economic and social
>ills that plague our communities: economically, it's access to capital; access
>to wealth-accumulation capital; and procurement and business opportunities;
>socially, it's access to education and access to health services. Once we
>come to the realization that our ills are the same, we can sit down and develop
>a cohesive agenda.
>
>Most of these corporations do business with minorities not because they
>want to but because they feel that they're forced to. If the African American
>and Hispanic communities came together as consumers alone, that's $800 billion
>in purchasing power. If we said that we would stand shoulder-to-shoulder, united,
>that would change the dialogue with corporate America overnight. We need
>to develop strategic alliances and collaborations with these corporations,
>resulting in us being a part of the process of bringing corporate America's
>products and services to the marketplace.
>
>We must also build political alliances with each other on a community level.
>For instance, in New York and Los Angeles next year, we're going to have
>a tremendous opportunity to elect a minority mayor, in my opinion. In New
>York alone, that's nearly 5 million votes. We need one candidate who will represent
>our communities. We cannot continue to be divided. You must understand the
>direct correlation political empowerment has to true economic empowerment.
>And that political strength won't be given to us. We must take it away.
>
>George Herrera was elected to lead the USHCC in August of 1998. A strong
>advocate for the Hispanic business community, he communicates the needs
>of more than 1 million Latino American-owned businesses to the public and private
>sectors. Herrera is co-founder of the Long Island Hispanic Chamber of Commerce
>and creator of NBC's Hispanic Business Today, the first ever Latino-American
>business television program. He was recently recognized as one of the 100
>most influential Hispanics in the United States by Hispanic Business magazine.
>
>randal pinkett
>
>scholar on building institutions
>
>GENERATION X IS THE FIRST GENERATION OF AFRICAN Americans who have full
>access to institutions. Because of our parents, and our parents' parents' fight
>to get into corporate America prestigious universities, and the upper echelon
>of social economics, we didn't have to fight to open doors We didn't have to
>fight to get into Harvard, AT&T, and fight to get into the upper class.
>
>The challenge of our generation is to leverage those opportunities that
>our parents and their parents opened for us as a means to social, economic,
>and political power. With the generation before us, we see mayors and senators.
>We have mayors in major cities such as Detroit, and we run Atlanta. But we
>still haven't transmitted that into true economic power.
>
>We have to begin to pull our resources together and build our own
>institutions. I'm talking about entities that will exist long after we have
>left this world. The companies many work for are institutions. Viable non
>profit organizations are institutions. Schools are restitutions. So, I'm
>not talking about Amway. And I'm not, talking about mom-and-pop operations.
>Mom-and-pop stores are nice, but that's what the last generation was poised
>to do--open storefronts and independent consulting firms. That might represent
>the means to what I'm envisioning, but certainly not the ends. We are poised
>for much greater accomplishments.
>
>Randal D. Pinkett is a Rhodes scholar currently working on his doctorate
>in the Epistemology and Learning Group of the Media Laboratory at the
>Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He holds tour degrees: a B.S. in
>electrical engineering from Rutgers University; an M.S. in computer science
>from Keble College, Oxford University; as well as an M.B.A. and an M.S.
>in
>electrical engineering from MIT.
>
>
> -- End --