The good folks at the Field Poll have been quiet recently. Other than a poll about the national health care debate, they hadn't released much since back before the May 19 debacle at the end of April.
However, today, they've decided to present the Republicans with some solid evidence of their worst nightmare: an electorate controlled by minorities (PDF). Using some data from various sources the numbers are pretty much as you would expect, the numbers of Latinos and Asians in both the general populace and the voting booths are up, while the numbers of African-Americans and whites are down. Given the lengths that the Republicans have gone to alienate immigrants, these numbers cannot be good for them.
Of course, whites are still very over represented in the voting booths, but much of that is from one very discouraging fact. Despite all the hubub about Barack Obama activating the youth to engage, and get involved, the California electorate is now older than it was in 1978. Of course, much of this has to do with the fact that people live longer than they did in 1978. Medical technology and understanding of health has increased substantially. But while we have come a long way in activating young voters, there is always a lot of work yet to be done.
All news is not rosy when looking back over the last 30 years for the Democratic Party. For example, when loo9king at registration, the rapid increase of Decline to State Voters has come almost exclusively from the Democratic column. In 1978, Dem registration was at 56.6%, whereas it is now at 44.6%. DTS registration is up 12 points to 20, Republican registration is down 3.2 points to 31, and "Other" is up 3 points to 4.4.
Many voters simply don't take party affiliation as seriously as they used did back in 1978, and the Dems were always more of a big tent than the ideologically rigid GOP. And the DTS generally break towards the Dem candidate and/or position. So, perhaps this isn't that serious, but it certainly is stark.
But, in the main, let's see the GOP keep up this anti-immigrant thing, and see how it works for you as these patterns continue.
In 2007, right-wing political operatives tried to place a measure on the June 2008 ballot that - if successful - would have awarded California's electoral votes by Congressional District. Democrats and progressives strongly opposed it, because everyone assumed it would give the G.O.P. presidential nominee an extra 19 votes. California is a deep blue state, but parts of Orange County and the Central Valley are still reliably Republican. New data from last November's election, however, suggests that "Red California" is becoming less and less relevant. Barack Obama carried eight Congressional Districts that had long voted for Republican presidential candidates, and John McCain came close to losing three more. All these districts are currently represented in Congress by Republicans, but a few incumbents came close last year to losing to Democratic challengers. It's only a matter of time before some of these districts will eventually flip. None of this is a surprise, however, because the state's Republican base is older, whiter and shrinking in size. But the rate of this change is quite staggering, which explains why Republicans in the state legislature have clung to the "two-thirds rule" for passing a budget. After all, it's the only reason they have any power left in the state.
I am looking for people who would be willing to collaborate with me in an attempt to continue something similar to a very comprehensive project that gave "grades" of gay rights legislative, judicial, and executive bodies on the federal, and state/provincial levels in the US, and even the rest of the world, that, until recently, was done by Bill Myers. You can see one of the latest versions of it available on the web here, courtesy of The Wayback Machine. I could especially use someone to keep track of events in California as they happen.
With a week out until the June 3rd primary, I thought I'd do a series of posts on the Congressional, legislative, local lawmaker, and ballot races we'll see up for grabs. This is a little more of a forward-thinking post, but it'll provide a good baseline for what to watch on Tuesday.
Nick Beaudrot at Cogitamus Blog did a fascinating set of calculations looking at Republican-held seats and, through demographic numbers, coming up with a reasonable baseline expectation of Barack Obama's general election support. There is a set for open seats and a set for seats held by incumbents. And the numbers are really fascinating. Nick explains his methodology and what the chart means:
I've attempted to build a very crude estimate of Barack Obama's performance on a district-by-district basis. I've given him 95% of the black vote, 60% of the Hispanic vote, 55% of the college white vote, and 35% of the non-college white vote. This gives him 43% of the overall white-plus-Asian/other vote, and just over 50% nationwide. I've then assumed that Black voters and Latino voters exhibit uniform voting patterns, and then computed the Partisan Voting Index among white voters to arrive at a number for Obama in the district. This has obvious problems in districts that have a large number of illegal immigrants from Latin America, or in the three Cuban districts, but we can use some common sense to throw out these outliers.
Anywhere that Obama gets 45% of the vote or more, a strong local challenger has a shot at winning the district, especially if it's an open seat.
We have SEVERAL challengers in that range in California. Numbers on the flip:
Let's face it. This blog - and to an extent, politics in this state in general - is heavily tilted to the large population centers in the Bay Area and Southern California (including Orange County and down to San Diego). But to continue in this fashion would be shortsighted, because it's clear that the population patterns are moving away from two all-powerful hubs and toward a more widely spread pattern. What has been getting most of the ink from the recent study by the state Department of Finance is that the Inland Empire will soon become home to the second-largest county (Riverside) in all of California. But what has been less remarked upon is the expansion of the Central Valley:
With a new state forecast predicting that California's population growth will tilt ever more toward the Central Valley, Southern California's Inland Empire and fast-growing areas around Sacramento, experts say the state's political center of gravity may shift, too - away from the more urbanized, coastal metropolitan areas that dominate the state's political and economic life today.
The Central Valley "will clearly gain heft compared with the other metropolitan regions," said Carol Whiteside, president of the Great Valley Center and the former mayor of Modesto. "It won't be the baby cousin any more."
The Central Valley will grow from 10 percent of the state's population in 2000, to 16 percent of all Californians by 2050. The Bay Area is projected to gain about 3.5 million new residents by 2050, but its share of California's population will drop to 17 percent, from 20 percent in 2000, an analysis of new state Department of Finance projections shows.
This is something important for political groups to internalize. The traditional structure of Democratic election efforts has been to raise turnout in LA and SF, and hope to do half-decent everywhere else, and walk away a winner. That's not going to work as we go forward. With 1 in 6 Californians living in places like Modesto and Fresno and Stockton and Bakersfield and Merced and the numerous towns throughout the San Joaquin Valley, Democrats must build and grow their presence outside of the urban metropolises, to a level where they were in the recent past before giving up practically all of that ground to the Republicans.
I think this is a significant development in the future of California, both political and otherwise. According to this report (PDF) from the California Budget Project, job growth in the inland counties of the state grew nearly FIVE TIMES LARGER than job growth in the coastal counties between 1990 and 2005. In fact, they've contributed to more than half of the total job growth in the state, despite having only 1/5 of the jobs currently. What used to be bedroom communities in the Inland Empire of SoCal, for example, are now very much self-sustaining and thriving, particularly in the western edges of San Bernardino and Riverside counties.
If this trend continues, it could either be very ominous or a great opportunity, depending on your outlook. On the one hand, it tracks with a pattern of population shift from areas that are reliably Democratic into areas that are reliably Republican. On the other hand, it represents a demographic shift in those "red" areas, and could lead to opportunities to build a Democratic resurgence inland, as possibly evidenced by Jerry McNerney's victory in CA-11.
Whatever the case, it's something that progressives must deal with. The power bases in LA and SF are only going to retain their power for so long. Places like Ontario and Auburn are goin to have more and more importance, and it's time RIGHT NOW to ensure that there's some Democratic infrastructure in place to identify and engage people in those areas who share progressive views. Take Back Red California is an organization of Democratic activists trying to do just that, but more attention must be paid. This is a generational shift, and it will only grow and grow.
I hope to see more of our friends from the inland counties here in the coming months.
A few articles came out yesterday describing some of the demographics of the election last Tuesday. Both are positive in terms of the Democratic coalition, regionally, statewide, and nationally, going forward.
First, unsurprisingly, Latino voters shifted towards Democrats this year. Nationally, this is likely due to the James Sensenbrenners and Duncan Hunters of the world attacking immigrants. (Oh, yeah, I'm going to love seeing Duncan Hunter in the presidential debates).
Anger over anti-immigrant rhetoric helped fuel a shift in the Latino vote to Democrats, damaging Republican hopes of luring this fast-growing population into its fold, Latino activists and political analysts said Thursday.
{snip}
Analysts said that Republican attempts to use immigration as a wedge issue to galvanize conservative voters backfired by instead rousing more Latinos to vote. Those results were particularly apparent in Arizona, "ground zero" of the immigration debate, where several Republican immigration hawks were defeated, analysts said.
"[Republicans] have done long-term permanent damage to their brand with this community," said Simon Rosenberg, president of the Washington, D.C.-based New Democrat Network. (LAT 11/10/06)
And who else would the immigration message of the Republicans ("GO HOME!") offend? Well there's a wide range of groups, especially here in the cultural mish-mash of California. One group is California's Asian-Americans. In the SF Bay area, they voted strongly in favor of Phil and the Dem ticket.
[As for the] governor's race, the Bay Area's Asian-American voters favored Democratic Party candidate Phil Angelides ? about 67 percent ? while Los Angeles County voters were again nearly evenly split between Angelides and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, according to the poll.(Oak Trib 11/10/06)
It's also important to note the role of Asian-Americans in John Chiang's victory over Tony Strickland in the controller's race. Given the vast IE resources supporting Strickland, grassroots and identity politics played a big role in our victory in that race. The state party needs to encourage outreach in the Asian-American community. We need to cultivate a diverse range of leaders, and encourage further involvement in state and local politics.
In 2007, right-wing political operatives tried to place a measure on the June 2008 ballot that - if successful - would have awarded California's electoral votes by Congressional District. Democrats and progressives strongly opposed it, because