With the focus now squarely on the general election, the pressure intensifies to work those pieces of the demographic pie that could mean The White House. Among the tastier slices? U.S. Latino voters.
Ten years ago, at just under 11% of the U.S. population, the U.S. Hispanic market began drawing interest in earnest, some pointing to untapped spending, others to the potential for playing a decisive role in an election. Even so, efforts have been piecemeal and adjunct. Today, at just over 15% of the population and growing, campaigns are finally getting game, dedicating larger budgets and integrating efforts earlier. More important than the percentage of the U.S. population that is Latino is the percentage of the voting public they represent in many key states as demonstrated in the recent Democratic primary contests.
In Texas, Latino participation went from 24% in 2004 to 32% this year. In California, where roughly a third of the population is Latino, 1.2 million Latinos voted – the highest total of any state – representing a whopping 29% of the total vote. This is a dramatic increase from the 2004 primaries where Latinos accounted for just 16% of the total vote. According to studies by the Pew Hispanic Center, Latinos’ stake of the Democratic primary vote increased significantly since 2004 in 15 other states, including Arizona, Nevada, New Jersey and New Mexico.
What could be bringing Latino voters out in such record numbers? It could be the record amounts being spent on Spanish and English language ads targeting Latinos; however, the proportion of dollars spent to the relative increase in voter turnout doesn’t support this idea.
And although more attention than ever is focused on the Latino electorate, media still struggles with how to characterize Latino voters and campaigns how to decisively galvanize their support.
Why should this group be so hard to get a handle on?
Perhaps it’s because the descriptor “Latino” tends to be erroneously interpreted as meaning this is a homogeneous group or, at least as an electorate, a group that shares the same general cluster of characteristics somewhat discrete from other groups. In my experience when there is some acknowledgement of heterogeneity it is typically in terms of different levels of “acculturation,” a concept I heartily dissuade clients and all comers alike to discard as virtually useless.
The problem with applying the term “acculturation” to the U.S. Latino experience is that there is no specific definition, only the vague inference that people progress along an implicitly linear continuum of mainstream American-ness going from “Less American” to “More American” until they are “fully acculturated.”
But more or less American than whom or what? A flourishing advertising and marketing industry spends tens of millions of dollars each year carefully dissecting and targeting all different kinds of Americans.
Going back to the homogeneity assumption, when it comes to trying to differentiate Latinos as a group from other groups, the temptation is to focus on cultural differences such as the much-touted family-centric ethos. I contend this is not relevant when addressing Latinos as voters. Instead, I believe the focus needs to be on characteristics that correlate highly with being a U.S. Latino and are shared in common with other groups in order to understand their needs and draw support.
The average U.S. Latino has more children, earns less money and has a lower level of educational achievement than the average American. For Spanish language dominant Americans (22% of eligible Latino voters), the language barrier means there are fewer resources available to them, resulting in frustration and alienation. They feel no one understands the special challenges they face in raising their family in today’s society. Interestingly, in focus groups I’ve found these same feelings voiced by single mothers.
The lower paying jobs U.S. Latinos tend to hold typically don’t offer health insurance, further threatening the tentative foothold many have on economic survival – a worry they have in common with more and more Americans as the ranks of the middle class continue to shrink. Latinos also represent an unusually high proportion of family members serving in the Iraq war – a burden they share with low income Americans of all races and ethnicities.
The key to appealing to Latinos in this election year is understanding that they represent the hardest hit of the hardest hit in the current economic downturn and have the most to lose as the war grinds on in Iraq. Hillary Clinton’s relative success with Latino voters had nothing to do with Black-Brown tensions undermining Obama and everything to do with her campaign focus on the needs of working class people and the Bill Clinton legacy of a strong economy.
And while historically Latinos have leaned towards the Democratic Party, examination of Latino voter behavior over the last few elections suggests neither Democrats nor Republicans can count on party line support. In 2004 George Bush drew more than 40% of the Latino vote, and I would contend this was in large part due to his ability to appeal to the working class. And while the 2006 mid-term elections showed an overall decrease in Latino support of Republican Congressional and gubernatorial candidates and an overall increase in support of Democrats, Latinos split their ballots voting in record numbers for certain Republicans.
So why are Latinos turning out in record numbers to vote? Because not since the 1960s has so much been at stake for the lowest on the economic totem pole. The economy and the war have only worsened in the last two years. While these are important issues for everyone, for working class families their very survival hangs in the balance.
To carry the Latino vote in this election, the focus is simple… think “hardest hit of the hardest hit.” McCain has a good start in this direction. His Spanish language ads are direct and to the point, saying, “When it comes to filling up our shopping carts or gas tanks, we aren’t Democrats or Republicans. We’re Latinos suffering in this together…” and promising (however vague) solutions to these economic woes.
While Obama’s Latino-focused ads are hip, catchy and even moving (reggaeton beats to chants promising “Hope has arrived”), they do not address important needs or propose a plan of action. As Reina, an anonymous Latina in Los Angeles commented in response to seeing these ads, “It’s upbeat, but does he get how bad things are? Can he handle the challenges? What has he ever done?”
As Obama heads into the final months of the general election, if he wishes to garner the coveted Latino vote, he will have to present the answer to an even more important question: what will he do for Hispanics, the people on the front lines of our floundering economy.
Ines Poza, Ph.D., is the owner of Poza Consulting Services, a market research firm based in Santa Monica, CA providing research and strategic planning for media and consumer goods targeting general market and Latino audiences in the U.S. and Latin America. Contact Dr. Poza at 310.264.4637.
“*
WHO:
