July 3, 2002
COMMENTARY
Bush and Latinos:
Narrowing the Gap En Español?
By Domenico Maceri
Although George W. Bush tried very hard
to woo Latino voters in the last
presidential election by speaking Spanish
and relying on his moderate positions, he
only managed to do a little better than
his father in 1992 and Bob Dole in 1996.
In the 2000 election, Latinos supported
Al Gore by 2 to 1 margins. It was not for
the lack of trying on Bush’s
part. His continued interest in
issues dear to Latinos, particularly
immigration, and the Democrats'
lackadaisical attitude, may enable Bush
to make inroads in the growing Latino
electorate.
The most visible example of the
Democratic Party's fumbling in Latino
issues was evident in US Senator Robert
Byrd's (D-West Virginia) rejection of an
amnesty bill for undocumented
workers. The measure in question
was approved by the Republican-controlled
House and would have allowed undocumented
workers, married to an American citizen
or a permanent resident in the US, to
apply for green cards without having to
leave the country. The current law states
that they must leave the US to apply,
which can mean delays as long as 16
years.
Byrd’s protest was very strong and
not typical of Democratic beliefs. The
Senator called the bill "sheer
lunacy," providing as evidence the
9-11 attacks and claiming that the
measure would endanger American security.
Although Byrd’s position is not
shared by most Democrats, it was
certainly a step backwards in their
relations with Latinos.
Bush seems to be getting the upper hand
with Latinos at least from the point of
view of effort. To begin with there is
the question of language. To be sure,
language—English or Spanish— is
not the President’s forte. His
English mistakes are infamous. Even in
Spanish he managed to trip a number of
times. For example, during the 2000
election he asked an audience for their
"botas" (boots) instead
of "votos" (votes). Yet,
Bush tried to connect in Spanish, forcing
Al Gore and Democrats to follow suit en
español.
Bush’s efforts go beyond the
question of language, which has primarily
symbolic value. A speech on immigration
given by the President last year at Ellis
Island points to a welcome mat for
immigrants, which pleased the Latino
population. His plan to split the INS
(Immigration and Naturalization Service)
into two parts, one dealing with
defending the border and the other which
would provide faster services to those
seeking naturalization, was welcome news
for all immigrants.
The proposal would eliminate the
contradictory role of the INS, which on
the one hand tries to keep immigrants out
of the country, and on the other welcomes
them as they undertake the bureaucratic
task of becoming US citizens.
To ease the naturalization process,
Bush's plan would spend 500 million
dollars over five years to help the INS
become "customer" friendly and
speed up the citizenship process.
Currently, becoming a citizen can be
delayed up to three and even four years
because of bureaucracy. The new funds
would reduce the wait to six months or
less.
To ease the movement of people across the
border, Bush is working with his Mexican
counterpart, Vicente Fox, to expand the
guest worker program. The major hurdle
will center on the possibility of guest
workers eventually becoming US citizens
instead of returning home once their
labor contracts expire. The other
controversial proposal deals with
granting amnesty to the several million
undocumented workers already in the US.
Bush stated in a speech last year
"Immigration is not a problem to be
solved. It is a sign of a confident and
successful nation." These words
reflect a total reversal from the 1996
Republican convention where bashing
immigrants and languages other than
English was de rigueur.
Democrats have accused Bush of pandering.
They pointed out that his use of Spanish
and his "conciliatory" policies
toward Latinos represent a mask, for his
real beliefs focus on favoring big
business. The charges have some truth,
but they don't capture the whole story.
Bush’s policies on immigration, if
approved, would certainly benefit
undocumented immigrants. These
policies in all likelihood would reduce
if not completely eliminate the hundreds
of deaths of Mexicans as they attempt to
cross the border illegally. They would
also benefit Vicente Fox and Mexico as a
whole.
Yet, the Democrats are right in that the
policies would also benefit big business.
Bringing in new immigrants and legalizing
the status of undocumented workers
already in the US is likely to be a boon
for companies who need workers to keep
wages down.
American consumers would
also benefit since the increased presence
of low-skilled workers would keep costs
down in the service industry and in
agriculture. At least part of these
"savings" would eventually
filter down to consumers.
The biggest winner in these
"immigrant-friendly" policies
will be the President himself. He can
legitimately claim that progress would
occur in the American and Mexican
relationship and at the same time peel
away Latino voters from the Democrats.
The losers will be the Democrats who will
have to offer the Hispanic electorate
more if they hope to hold on to their
votes.
Bush could rest on his
laurels and try to maintain his
stratospheric popularity by focusing on
foreign policy and exploiting the climate
of fear because of terrorism. Yet,
assuming that the terrorist threat
subsides, his popularity could easily go
down significantly. The support of the
Latino vote could in that case be his
winning card to hang on to the White
House for a second term.
Domenico Maceri (dmaceri@aol.com),
PhD, UC Santa Barbara, teaches foreign
languages at Allan Hancock College in Santa
Maria, CA. His articles have appeared in
many newspapers and some have won awards
from the National Association of Hispanic
Publications.
|
