Archive for the ‘Politics’ Category

Why Trump is fighting over The Wall

Tuesday, December 18th, 2018

The Wall is smack dab in the center of the movement of voters switching between the two parties in successive Novembers. People who voted for Obama, then Trump, and then voted Democratic in November 2018 are the “switcher” voters today.  A poll reveals that Trump’s Wall is not just aimed at his base, but at the relatively small band of voters who switch.

David Leonard of the NY Times interpreted a poll of switchers this way: “People who voted for both Barack Obama and Donald Trump are closer to loyal Republicans on immigration and gun control — but much closer to loyal Democrats on health care, jobs and education.”

The poll categorized voters along a spectrum of loyal Democrats to loyal Republicans, with switchers in the middle (those who switched in any direction the past few elections. It asked about building The Wall:

“Our preliminary results suggest that many voters who swung to Democrats in 2018 are to the right on the issue of border security. While straight Democratic voters oppose increasing border security, including “building a fence along part of the US border with Mexico” by a 66-7 margin, Obama-Trump voters who swung Democratic support increased border security by a 63-12 margin, up to a 73-13 margin for Romney-Trump voters who swung Democratic in 2018.”

I assume that Trump understands this dynamic, which is why he has raised building a wall to the level of a national crisis. the switchers want The Wall, by a not overwhelming majority.

Abolishing ICE

Switchers do not want to abolish ICE: “Respondents across the political spectrum opposed abolition of ICE. While loyal Democrats narrowly supported outright abolition of ICE, every other group of voters on net opposed abolition. We note that while abolition of ICE is typically couched with a reminder that border-related crimes in fact remain crimes with or without ICE, and would be pursued as such by traditional law enforcement agencies at the Federal, state, and local levels, here we simply asked respondents whether they approved or disapproved of outright abolition. That said, there is not presently widespread political support for abolishing ICE.”

Time line of the citizen census question

Sunday, November 11th, 2018

 

The Census Bureau’s current plan

The Census Bureau plans to use the same wording as what is already used in the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey, which asks respondents to check one of five categories to describe their citizenship status. Three categories apply to people who are U.S. citizens at birth: born in the U.S., born in a U.S. territory, or born abroad with at least one U.S. citizen parent. People who say they are a naturalized U.S. citizen are asked for their naturalization year. The fifth category is “not a U.S. citizen.” The survey does not ask whether noncitizens are legally in the country.

1880 – 1950 Census includes question about citizenship. Question then was dropped.

January 20, 2017.  Trump Administration begins.

May 2017. Commerce Secretary Ross expresses frustration that his plans to introduce a citizenship question are not being supported (reported by NY Times). “I am mystified that nothing has been done in response to my months-old request that we include the citizenship question,” he groused in a May 2017 email to an aide tapped out on his iPhone. “Why not?”

July – November 2017. Ross conversed with Stephen Bannon and Kris Kobach. Koback recommends that the Census use the same question as that used in the American Community Survey. Sept. 17, Justice Dept responded to Ross that “the AG is eager to assist.” On Nov. 23, Ross joined Mr. Trump for Thanksgiving at Mar-a-Lago, Upon his return, he fired off another message to his general counsel. “We are out of time,” it read. “Please set up a call for me tomorrow with whoever is the responsible person at Justice. We must have this resolved.” (per NY Times)

September 20, 2017. Internal Census Bureau memo discusses respondent confidentiality concerns.

November 2, 2017. Internal Census report warned of adverse impact of citizenship questions.” CSM researchers have noticed a recent increase in respondents spontaneously expressing concerns about confidentiality in some of our pretesting studies conducted in 2017. We recommend systematically collecting data on this phenomenon, and development and pretesting of new messages to avoid increases in nonresponse among hard-to-count populations for the 2020 Census as well as other surveys like the American Community Survey (ACS).”

December 12, 2017. Justice Department wrote the Census asking that a citizenship question be re-instated in the 2020 census.

December 29 2017 Pro Publica reported that The Justice Department is pushing for a question on citizenship to be added to the 2020 census, a move that observers say could depress participation by immigrants who fear that the government could use the information against them.

March 20, 2018 Ross told the House Appropriations Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Subcommittee that the insertion of the question had been initiated “solely” by officials at the Justice Department, with no involvement from officials in the White House. “Has the president or anyone in the White House discussed with you or anyone on your team about adding the citizenship question?” asked Representative Grace Meng, Democrat of New York. “I am not aware of any such,” Mr. Ross testified.

March 26, 2018 Department of Commerce announced that a question on citizenship status will be reinstated to the 2020 decennial census questionnaire to help enforce the Voting Rights Act (VRA). Press release said that “Secretary Ross’s decision follows a request by the Department of Justice (DOJ) to add a question on citizenship status to the 2020 decennial census.”

March 26, 2018 The state of California sued the Trump administration Monday night, arguing that the decision to add a question about citizenship in the 2020 Census violates the U.S. Constitution. The state’s attorney general acted just after the Commerce Department announced the change in a late-night release. The lawsuit is here.

April 3, 2018 The District, Virginia, Maryland and 15 states filed a lawsuit Tuesday to block the Trump administration from adding a last-minute citizenship question to the 2020 decennial Census. The suit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, also includes six cities and the bipartisan U.S. Conference of Mayors and comes a week after California sued the administration over the same issue.

July 3, 2018 Judge Jesse Furman of Manhattan’s Southern District allowed a multistate lawsuit to move forward amid “strong” evidence that the Trump administration acted in bad faith in its push for a controversial citizenship question to be added to the 2020 Census, plaintiffs in the case said. Furman also granted a request for discovery, according to New York Attorney General Barbara Underwood, whose office filed the case on behalf of 18 states, the District of Columbia, nine cities, four counties and the U.S. Conference of Mayors.

July 17, 2018 Furman allowed a lawsuit to move forward against the Trump administration over its controversial decision to add a question about citizenship in the 2020 Census.

Furman ruled that Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross did in fact have the authority to add a citizenship question on the census. But the way in which he carried out that authority, the judge said, may have violated the plaintiffs’ rights to equal protection under the law. Ross’s decision to add the citizenship question, the judge said, “was motivated at least in part by discriminatory animus” and by President Trump himself.

Furman said the plaintiffs gave plausible evidence that U.S. officials intended to discriminate against immigrant communities, driven by President Trump’s incendiary statements about immigrants of color.

September 21, 2018 A federal judge ordered Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross to sit for a deposition in a lawsuit challenging Ross’s addition of a question about citizenship to the U.S. census.

November 2, 2018 The Supreme Court refused to delay a trial in which a number of states and civil rights organizations allege there was an improper political motive in Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross’s decision to add a citizenship question to the 2020 Census.

November 5, 2018 Trial began.

Hispanic voters in Florida growing fast

Monday, November 5th, 2018

The number of Hispanics eligible to vote in Florida has reached a high of nearly 3 million this year, up from 2.9 million from 2016. As of August 31, there are about 837,000 registered Democrats, 775,000 unaffiliated voters, 527,000 Republicans for a total of 2,139,000 or about 70% of eligible Hispanic voters.

Nationwide, eligible Hispanic voters register to vote much less (57%) than the national average (70%).

Since 2010, all registered voters have increased every two years by an average of 3.9%. Hispanic registered voters have increased by an average of 11.8%. Today they account for 16.4% of all registered voters.

Some of the Hispanic voter growth may be due to Puerto Ricans. Puerto Ricans have been the state’s fastest-growing Hispanic-origin group over the past decade. The state’s Puerto Rican population now rivals that of New York, the main destination of the mid-20th century’s migration from the island. They make up a third (31%) of Florida’s Hispanic adult citizens, a similar share to that of Cubans (31%),

Since the 2016 election, the number of Hispanics registered as Democrats has increased by 5%, approximately twice the 2% growth rate for Hispanics registered as Republicans. The number of Hispanic registered voters with no party affiliation has grown the fastest (14%).

From Pew Research

Breitbart and Trump’s immigration ideas

Thursday, August 18th, 2016

With the arrival of a key Breitbart executive to the top ranks of the Trump campaign, count on a high-decibel nativist assault on immigrants and immigration by Trump. A large part of the Breitbart publication’s content is devoted to immigration topics such as “the refugee resettlement industry.”

A typical article, published on August 16, starts with:

The politically powerful refugee resettlement industry is accelerating its propaganda campaign to significantly increase the number of Muslim refugees allowed into the United States with a rally in Washington, D.C., on August 28. “You have got to hand it to them (to the likes of George Soros and big progressive funders like the Tides Foundation), they know how to promote a propaganda campaign,” Ann Corcoran of Refugee Resettlement Watch says of the August 28 event.

The financial backers of the rally include most of the big political players in the lucrative refugee resettlement industry, where government funded “voluntary agencies” [VOLAGs] receive more than $1 billion from taxpayers annually to resettle on average 70,000 refugees each year in the United States.

Among those rally sponsors on the VOLAG federal gravy train are the U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants (whose local affiliate is currently embroiled in the Twin Falls, Idaho refugee rape controversy), Church World Service, the International Rescue Committee, World Relief, HIAS (formerly known as the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society), the Episcopal Church, and the Ethiopian Community Development Council, Inc…….

The Hispanic vote in Arizona in 2016

Monday, August 8th, 2016

Republican presidential candidates have won Arizona in the past four elections, getting 54% of the vote in 2012. As of today FiveThirtyEight predicts 46.4% for Trump, 46.3% for Clinton, and 5.9% for Johnson. How might the Hispanic and other minority vote affect the outcome?

The Hispanic vote is credited with moving New Mexico into the Democratic column, and it may well be determinative this November in Nevada and Colorado. Arizona is on the edge.

Romney won 53.5% of the vote in Arizona in 2012. Obama won 74% Hispanic vote then, according to exit polls by NBC.

The Center For American Progress Action Fund, in a December, 2015 analysis of six states, says that the Latino population in Arizona increased from 13% in 1980 to 33% today. Whites, today 55% of the population, are 66.7% of eligible voters and 74% of the electorate. Latinos, with 33% of the population, make up 22.6% of eligible voters and 18% of actual voters. (Nationwide, Latinos may account for 12% of the entire presidential vote in November.) Asian/other voters are 7.7% of eligible voters in 2016.

The Pew Research Center reported national polling results that Clinton is well ahead of Trump among Latinos, but the spread varies among voter segments. Among millennials (18 to 35 year olds) – who make up 44% of all Hispanic eligible voters – Clinton leads 71%-19%. Her advantage is roughly as large (65%-26%) among older Hispanics (those 36 and older). Among Hispanic women, 71% say they support Clinton while 19% say they support Trump. By contrast, among Hispanic men, 61% support Clinton and 30% support Trump.

Clinton holds an 80%-11% lead among Hispanic voters who are bilingual or Spanish-dominant (those who are more proficient in Spanish than English); these voters make up about 57% of all Latino registered voters. However, among the smaller group of Hispanic voters (43%) who are English-dominant – those who are more proficient in English than Spanish – just 48% back Clinton (41% would vote for Trump).

 

Six common features of the 1920s and the 2010s on immigration sentiment

Monday, July 11th, 2016

The 1920s can help us understand  immigration’s hold on public opinion and politics during the 2010s.

One: Disruption. Both periods were burdened with war’s aftermath. And the speed of corporate innovation in the consumer economy alarmed and today alarms many.

Two: New immigrants. Both periods experienced huge surges in immigration from new sources, which contributed to disruptions and also served as a simplified explanation for troubles.

Foreign immigration had surged since the 1880s, the peak year being 1907, when 1.3 million people entered legally. (That’s equivalent to over 4 million new immigrants a year now.) Germans had been the dominant source; Eastern and Southern Europeans and Jews took over. Since the 1980s, non-Europeans have dominated immigration.

Three: Black-white relations were a factor. Then, migration of a million southern blacks to Harlem added to anxiety that white dominance was under siege. Now, conservatives demonize Black Lives Matter.

Four: Purity, pollution and order. Then, white racial purity movements flourished. Now, Donald Trump launched his campaign by castigating the morals of Mexican immigrants. He encourages conspiracy thinking.

Five: Intellectuals’ ambivalence, shown by avoidance. Then, as also now, liberal media often avoided the issue of cultural cohesion, focusing on economic inequality and class. The liberal media today also overlooks today economic disruption of immigration.

But some intellectuals added to support for curtailing immigration. In 1922 John Dewey said, “The simple fact of the case is that at present the world is not sufficiently civilized to permit close contacts of people with widely different cultures without the deplorable consequences.” He said that tighter immigration would allow for “rest and recuperation.” Today, some intellectuals are calling for lower immigration to preserve cultural cohesion, but none of Dewey’s stature.

Six: National politics becomes ethnic. Then, the Democratic Party discovered the national ethnic vote — New York Governor Al Smith’s 1928 presidential campaign won the major cities. This northern bloc of Democrats paired with Southern Democrats in 1932 to give the election to Roosevelt. Now, Reps and Dems fret over the Hispanic vote.

Jefferson Cowie’s The Great Exception (2016) illuminates some of these themes. Cowie holds that the New Deal would not have happened except for closing the borders to immigrants by the 1924 Act and exclusion of blacks from full labor and political participation.

 

Asian American voters this November

Sunday, June 5th, 2016

The data on Asian American public opinion reveal that Asian Americans are shifting in party identification towards the Democratic Party, and exclusionary rhetoric is a likely cause. There has been a 12-point increase in the proportion of Asian Americans who identify as Democrats from 2012 to 2016.

Asian American voters nearly doubled from more than 2 million voters in 2000 to 2000 to 3.9 million voters in 2012. Since in the last three presidential cycles, the number of Asian American voters has grown by an average of 620,000 votes, the 2016 turnout might be 4.4 million voters. Asian Americans will reach 5% of voters nationally by 2025. In battleground states in 2012, they were 6.5% of the voters in Nevada, 3.9% in Virginia, and 1.8% in Florida.

Trump’s unfavorability rate is 48% for 65 yo and older, 63% for 35-64, and 86% for 18-34 yo. 31% have a very or somewhat favorable view of the Republican Party, vs. 65% for the Democratic Party and 68% for Barak Obama.

This information is from a May, 2016 report, Inclusion, Not Exclusion. Apiavote stands for Asian and Pacific Islander American Vote.

2012 exit polls showed at least 70% of Asian-American voters chose Obama. Two decades ago, Asian-Americans reported voting Republican by a nearly 2-to-1 margin. See my post election posting here.

 

The emerging Latino voting bloc in Arizona

Monday, November 12th, 2012

Latino voters in Arizona are gradually growing in absolute and percentage terms. A report issued earlier this year, Arizona’s Emerging Latino Vote (published by the Morrison Institute), lays out the trends. In this November’s Senate race, Democratic candidate Richard Carmona, received 45.8% of the vote, more than had been expected in the Summer. Six years from now, winner Jeff Flake will be facing a larger Latinos voting bloc.
According to long range projections of the growth in Latino voters, each year will cause the Latino voter share to increase by on average 0.5%. Latino voters were probably 12% of all voters this November. In six years Flake may likely be looking at an increase in the Latino voting percentage to 15%.
Hispanics now make up 30% of the state’s population. One third of Latino adults are not citizens. The Latino voting population is much younger than non-Latinos (the median Latino age is 25 vs. non-Hispanic whites at 44), suggesting lower voter turnout due to younger age. In 2010, 69% of vote-eligible Latinos voted vs. 8% for non-Hispanic whites.
Thus the actual Latino bloc of voters is probably 12% of actual voters, the percentage projected for 2012. Exit polling indicates that 74% voted for Obama.
Each year, more Latinos become eligible to vote – at a much faster rate than other groups. In 2010, 15% of registered voters were Latino. That is expected to grow to 25% in 2030.
In a June 2012 poll, only 9% of registered Latinos identified themselves as Republican.