by José de la Isla
HOUSTON – A recent news report referred to Latinos as having an “unrealized potential” as a decisive force in the November elections. Hispanics, the item said, may be poised to make a difference this year.
On the face of it, this is conventional truth. Perhaps a Latino precedent will be set. But that line of thinking is an urban legend. Truth is the “potential” has already been unleashed.
This needs mentioning because another writer from that same news source said earlier that a cooling off was taking place.
So what gives? In June the theme was Latinos were being ignored.
Then came July. The Triple Crown of Latino conventions — the National Association of Latino Elected & Appointed Officials, the League of United Latin American Citizens and the National Council of La Raza — coincided that month. The three organizations form the largest national advocacy bloc on behalf of Latinos.
Each was visited by Barack Obama and John McCain. Latinos couldn’t get more attention.
The conventions and the media that covered them all talked up the “issues.” But the hidden subtext was about how partisan relations could either be solidified or formed. New elements grow out of ever-expanding Latino networks. This year it’s homeowners. Last year it was business owners.
Of course, the touchstone issues were familiar to Latinos: education, immigration, language learning, health and income security. They are decades old. The staging this summer was more about the candidates coming to spread the message as if it were news.
Here is what’s wrong with the theory of “unrealized potential.” This play is now in its 48th season. Its purpose is to make the contenders the focus, the heroes. It is about “discovering” the issue as a way of discovering the people connected to the issue.
It is not really about the potential, but about continuity. The potential has already been realized as a decisive force.
Think, for instance, about how John Kennedy was elected president in 1960. He had chosen Lyndon Johnson of Texas as his running mate. The election came down to the results from Illinois and Texas. Illinois delivered. Hispanic South Texas delivered, too. This inaugurated a new political era.
Something like that happened again in 1976 when Latinos carried Florida, a southern state, for Jimmy Carter. Florida Latinos had voted Republican in the two previous presidential elections. Without the Florida win and ten other Electoral College votes, Carter would not have become president.
Need we even get into the 2000 George W. Bush “win” in Florida? Some of the election night confusion occurred because exit polls failed to account for the changes in the state’s Hispanic voting pattern. The Latino population, other than Cuban, was partly responsible for a change in pattern, creating the teeter-totter. Outdated voter profi les led pollsters to miscalculate. The outcome was called too soon, causing tremendous election night confusion. Only 500 votes made the difference in that state, and the Latino voting pattern had changed.
That was a decisive shift in the outcome, wouldn’t you say?
The theory of the Latino voting potential — redux — is an urban legend worthy of another big one — that Christopher Columbus discovered America. It’s as if the continent was lost until Columbus arrived, and then it could begin.
It was the other way around. Columbus didn’t know where he was. He thought he had reached an island next to Japan.
Discovery, like potential, is one of those ideas that go down as easy as orange juice. The yarn is soft-sell in the morning and still works at night.
The real facts are not as easy to explain, but they are accurate. Maybe we can get it right this year.
[José de la Isla writes a weekly commentary for Hispanic Link News Service. He is author of The Rise of Hispanic Political Power (Archer Books). Email: joseisla3@yahoo.com]. ©2008
