Arizona
Immigration
Law
Motivates
California
Hispanic
Voters
The
legislation
could prove
problematic
to
Republicans
as the
gubernatorial
contest here
could
ultimately
be
determined
by the
state's
growing
Hispanic
electorate.
LOS ANGELES
(By Maria
Elena Durazo)
July 16,
2010
—
Earlier this
year, the
Los Angeles
County
Federation
of Labor,
which I
oversee, set
out to learn
how local
Hispanics
decide
whether to
participate
in
elections.
The issue
was more
complicated
than we'd
anticipated.
We began our
research
with six
focus groups
composed of
registered
Hispanic
voters who
had cast
ballots in
the 2008
presidential
election,
yet hadn't
always voted
in elections
for
California
governor. We
wanted to
know why
they
sometimes
didn't vote.
But the
groups had
something
else they
wanted to
discuss. It
took no more
than 10
minutes for
each of the
groups to
shift to
very
emotional
discussions
about
Arizona's
draconian
new
immigration
law. It was
a subject we
hadn't
planned to
raise, but
we soon
learned that
it was very
much on the
minds of
Hispanics
here as they
talked about
government
and why they
do or don't
participate
in it. In
fact, to our
surprise,
more
focus-group
participants
knew the
number of
the Arizona
bill (SB
1070) than
the names of
California's
two major
candidates
for
governor.
In
discussing
the Arizona
law, group
members
passionately
recounted
how they had
been
"singled
out" by law
enforcement,
schools,
stores and
employers
because of
their skin
color. They
held a
variety of
views about
immigration
issues, but
they all
strongly
viewed
Arizona's
law as both
an outgrowth
of racial
profiling
and as a
policy that
would lead
to more of
it.
The focus
groups were
followed by
a poll of
600
"occasional"
L.A. County
Hispanic
voters from
all
political
parties.
About 92%
knew about
the Arizona
law, and 81%
opposed it.
And 73%
feared that
California
could pass a
similar
measure.
Like the
focus
groups, poll
respondents
worried
about the
Arizona
statue's
intent, with
84% seeing
it as being
more about
racial
profiling
than about
controlling
illegal
immigration.
And they
overwhelmingly
believed it
would have
ramifications
outside of
Arizona,
including
more racial
profiling by
law
enforcement
here in
Southern
California.
So what
effect are
these fears
likely to
have on
future
elections?
After former
Gov. Pete
Wilson's
1994 attack
on
immigrants,
Hispanics
flocked to
join unions,
and they
then went on
to vote for
pro-union,
progressive
candidates
and
measures.
The growing
strength of
the labor
movement has
made the
difference
in election
after
election
since then,
producing
four
Hispanic
Assembly
speakers, a
lieutenant
governor and
a mayor of
Los Angeles
and making
the Hispanic
caucus the
largest in
the
Legislature
outside the
two parties.
According to
the Field
Poll, the
Hispanic
share of
registered
voters in
California
nearly
doubled
between 1990
and 2005
(from 10% to
19%), and
the trend is
continuing.
If the past
response
among
Hispanic
voters to
immigrant-bashing
is a model,
this year's
Arizona law
could prove
problematic
to
Republicans.
California's
gubernatorial
contest
could
ultimately
be
determined
by the
state's
growing
Hispanic
electorate
and by the
proven
ability of
organized
labor to
turn that
vote out on
election
day.
And Arizona
Republicans
shouldn't be
overconfident
either. The
last time
Arizona
voted for a
new
governor,
Democrat
Janet
Napolitano
won by
12,000
votes. On
the same
ballot,
Republican
Secretary of
State
candidate
Jan Brewer,
who took
over as
governor
when
Napolitano
went to
Homeland
Security and
who went on
to sign SB
1070 into
law, won
with 37,000
votes.
This fall,
Arizonans
will vote
again for a
governor,
and Brewer
hopes to
retain the
office. But
Hispanic
leaders
there have a
goal of
registering
and turning
out 50,000
more
Hispanics
this fall
than voted
in the last
statewide
election. We
intend to
help.
Hundreds of
California
labor
activists
will begin
that effort
by traveling
to Arizona
in a caravan
of chartered
buses July
29, the day
the Arizona
statute is
set to take
effect.
In 1972,
when Arizona
passed a law
preventing
farmworkers
from
organizing a
union, Cesar
Chavez
responded
with a
25-day fast
and campaign
against the
measure,
calling
people to
rally behind
the phrase
"Si, se
puede!"
("Yes, we
can!"). Time
after time
since then,
people have
found that
yes, they
can. And
this fall,
in both
California
and Arizona,
we will see
once again
that careful
organizing
against
wrongheaded
policies can
carry the
day.
Maria Elena
Durazo is
executive
secretary-treasurer
of the Los
Angeles
County
Federation
of Labor,
AFL-CIO.