Home Opinions World View Business & Technology IC Politics Features

Intellectual Capital Politics
Republicans and the Minority Vote
by Everett Carll Ladd
Thursday, December 10, 1998
Comments: 88 posts

This Issue's TOC
IC Archives
Sign Up to the IC Mailing List
Related IC articles
It's Regional, Stupid : Everett Ladd describes the American voters' post-industrial realignment.



Search
 
Previous Article Next Article
The United States once again is experiencing a great wave of immigration that is changing its ethnic makeup and promising further political change. The main development: the population growth among Hispanics and Asians. In 1998, these two groups and blacks combined to total 18% of the electorate, according to the exit poll taken by Voter News Service (VNS) on Election Day.

These contemporary shifts in ethnic background obviously matter to the parties. But how we respond politically to the emergent ethnic makeup and its new inter-group tensions carries implications that reach far beyond the parties' electoral strength. When ethnic-based polarization occurs in voting, it is likely to cause polarization in the society at large.

In a pluralistic nation like ours, all major parties must compete effectively among all the principal groups to maintain a robust democracy. The parties need not be of equal strength everywhere, but they do need to be "in the game" everywhere.

A modest Republican gain?

The United States has had great success in this area. Low-income Americans are more Democratic than those with high incomes, for example, but both parties have significant support in each income group. The same is true when we look at most of the other major demographic categories -- those defined by education, gender, region, religious denomination, etc.

Blacks are the one major exception. They are the only ethnic group brought to this country against its will and then subjected to a gross denial of equality. And for nearly 40 years now, they have been the only big group where one party, the Democratic Party, has been dominant. Now there are signs of a modest revival of party competition among blacks. If established, it would benefit both parties and America's social health.

Never has a political party experienced so profound a shift in any social group as the GOP has among blacks. The party of Lincoln and the one that finally ended slavery, the Republicans gained after the Civil War the backing of most blacks not disenfranchised by Southern, Democrat-controlled state governments.

Post-election Gallup surveys show that Republican presidential candidates won some 30% of the black vote in all presidential elections from 1936 through 1960. Not until the party's catastrophic errors of the 1960s -- notably in Barry Goldwater's 1964 presidential campaign -- was it virtually abandoned by black America.

Many Republican leaders have regretted this modern-day debacle and sought remedies, but there was scant sign of even a slight Republican revival until now. Admittedly, recent readings detect only a faint Republican pulse. Nonetheless, they encourage those who think it is essential that the GOP regain its competitiveness.

A Nov. 3 exit poll by Voter News Service indicated that Republican congressional candidates won a substantial vote among young blacks (ages 18 to 29). A fifth of young blacks backed a Republican for Congress. In 1996, Republican congressional candidates did better among all age groups of black voters than in any previous congressional election of the past 40 years. (See Chart 1.)

Chart 1
Congressional Vote of African Americans, By age, 1980-1998

Years of Age

  18-29 30-44 45-59 60+
  D R D R D R D R
1980 88 12 88 12 86 14 83 17
1982 91 9 88 12 91 9 85 15
1984 94 6 93 7 90 10 87 13
1986 81 19 84 16 91 9 90 10
1988 84 16 86 14 87 13 82 18
1990 85 15 82 16 74 26 70 30
1992 90 10 88 12 89 11 90 10
1994 94 6 91 9 91 9 93 7
1996 83 17 84 16 81 19 76 24
1998 79 21 89 11 93 7 91 9
Source: Exit polls by CBS News/New York Times, 1980-1988;
Voter Research & Surveys, 1990-1992; Voter News Service, 1994-1998.

At the gubernatorial level, Republican stirrings have been more impressive. In 1998, according to VNS statewide exit polls, Republican incumbent Mike Huckabee (AR) won 48% of the black vote. John Rowland (CT) won 45% in Connecticut, indicating that given certain conditions, the popularity of a moderate conservative can now reach across racial lines. In Michigan, John Engler captured 27% of the black vote, the same percentage George W. Bush won in Texas. (See Chart 2.)

Chart 2
Gubernatorial Vote (percentage Republican) of African Americans,
Hispanic Americans, and Non-Hispanic Whites, in Six States, 1998.

 
Florida
  Bush Bush Increase (+) or decrease (-)
in vote percentage
  1998 1994 1994-1998
African-American 14% 20% -6
Hispanic 61 27 +34
Non-Hispanic White 60 62 -2

 
Texas
  Bush Bush Increase (+) or decrease (-)
in vote percentage
  1998 1994 1994-1998
African-American 27% 15% +12
Hispanic 49 28 +21
Non-Hispanic White 78 62 +16

 
California
  Lungren Wilson Increase (+) or decrease (-)
in vote percentage
  1998 1994 1994-1998
African-American 11% 20% -9
Hispanic 17 27 -10
Non-Hispanic White 46 62 -16

 
New York
  Pataki Pataki Increase (+) or decrease (-)
in vote percentage
  1998 1994 1994-1998
African-American 15% 9% +6
Hispanic 25 32 -7
Non-Hispanic White 61 55 +6

 
Connecticut
  Rowland Rowland Increase (+) or decrease (-)
in vote percentage
  1998 1994 1994-1998
African-American 45% 12% +33
Non-Hispanic White 65 37 +28
 
* The governor's race in Connecticut in 1994 was four-way. Republican Rowland got 37% of the white vote, to 31% for Democrat Curry, 19% for "A Connecticut Party's; Grourk,and 11% for independent Scott. Among blacks, the 1994 vote was 12% Rowland, 57% Curry, 22% Grourk, and 9% Scott.
Source: Voter News Service exit polls, 1994 and 1998.

Battle for the Hispanic vote

It may seem strange to consider percentages in the 20-point range as encouraging. But the erosion of the Republican base in black America has been so profound, and wrought by such forceful political experience, that a large and rapid revival would be inconceivable. What's more, to be competitive within a social group, a party needs only 25% backing.

We know from previous experience with group realignments that they begin first with voting for more visible offices and surface last in party identification. Yet for all its anemic condition, the Republican position in party identification among young blacks is clearly better than among those who came into the electorate earlier. (See Chart 3.)

Chart 3
Party Identification of African Americans and Hispanics, By Age


Source: Surveys by the Gallup Organization, January-November 1998 combined.

In contrast to their total collapse among black voters, Republicans never dropped out of competition among Hispanics. In exit polls taken since 1980, GOP congressional vote percentages among Hispanics have ranged from a low in the mid-20s to a high in the upper-30s. (See Chart 4.) Contrary to much speculation that the GOP's stance on immigration has undermined its position among Hispanics, Republican congressional totals in 1994 (39%) and 1998 (37%) are the highest since exit polling began.

Chart 4
Congressional Vote of Hispanic Americans, 1980-1998


Source: Surveys by the Gallup Organization, January-November 1998 combined.

Gubernatorial voting last Nov. 3 showed that Hispanics remain open to persuasion by both major parties. Republican Jeb Bush won 61% of the Hispanic vote in Florida, and his brother, George W., 49% in Texas. Republicans Jane Dee Howell (AZ) and Gary E. Johnson (NM), meanwhile, gained 40% and 33%, respectively.

The Democrats' lead over Republicans in party identification is large among Hispanics -- 22% in 1998, according to the findings of 21 Gallup polls conducted for USA Today and CNN. (Each of these surveys asked party identification and ethnicity; combining them gave a sample big enough for reliable estimates. See Chart 5.) Still, only 43% of Hispanics identified as Democrats, just 8% more than the party's total among all adults.

Data on party identification by age also suggest that the GOP does better among younger Hispanics than among those who enter the electorate earlier. (See Chart 3.)

Closing the ethnic divide

Republicans have a clear majority among non-Hispanic whites. Even in 1992 and 1996, George Bush and Bob Dole outdistanced President Clinton in the 80%-plus of the electorate classified as non-Hispanic whites. Republicans' margins over Democrats have been at least 10% in the last three House elections. Republicans now lead in party identification among whites other than those of Hispanic background. (See Chart 5.)

Chart 5
Party Identification of African Americans, Hispanic Americans, and Non-Hispanic Whites, 1998


Source: Surveys by the Gallup Organization, January-November 1998 combined.

These areas of strength have brought the party to parity with Democrats overall. But Republicans' weakness among blacks, and their relative weakness among Hispanics, leave them lacking the inclusiveness a great democratic party requires, and that it must have to hold a firm majority. It also leaves the country open to further ethnic polarization and to the possibility that such polarization could get worse.

Fortunately, recent trends offer a glimmer of hope that the GOP can regain competitive status among blacks and move toward parity among Hispanics. Making this happen offers Republican leaders a formidable challenge -- and a great opportunity.

Everett Carll Ladd is a professor of political science and president of the Roper Center for Public Opinion Research at the University of Connecticut. The views expressed here are his own and not the center's. He is also a contributing editor of IntellectualCapital.com.

Related Links
For more on registration and turnout, see also the Committee for the Study of the American Electorate. Recent changes in House Republican leadership include the election of J.C. Watts, the only black Republican in Congress, to the position of GOP conference chair, as the Washington Post reports. Hispanic support for the GOP in Florida is based solidly in Cuban immigrants, with whom Jeb (The Other) Bush spent significant time in his campaign. For other demographic information, check out Urvashi Vaid's highlights and analysis of Out and Voting from the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force.


Do you think the GOP will continue to make inroads among African Americans and Hispanics? Do they need to to win consistently? Do you agree with Ladd that one-party minorities are bad for America?

Below are the last ten comments in chronological order.
Click here to view the full comment history.

  [View all comments]

12/16/98 Mark Kein mjk99@netscape.net
Larry: The fact that David Duke was a democrat for most of his life is relevant only to show that again the racists of the south were, in fact, democrats. Of course this does not implicate the entire democratic party, but still the point is, these racist groups have NEVER been republican. Somehow we have allowed the liberals (especially people like Jesse Jackson) to paint us as being associated with these off the wall groups and as being against basic civil liberties for blacks. In fact exactly the opposite is true.

12/16/98 Mark Kein mjk99@netscape.net
I would like to say one more thing about Buchanan since I have followed him a little. Remember Pat Buchanan is a reaganite to the bone. He loved the way reagan was able to get working democrats to support him. Many of the things he does, including disassociating himself from some of reagan's own policies, is an attempt to follow up on this. He wants to get working democrats on board his ship. So whatever slightly stupid things he has done were done mainly in an attempt to woo, you got it, democrats.

12/16/98 El
Mark Klein reads selectively. I didn't say the GOP is formally aligned with white supremacist groups, althogh I'dbet bucks some GOPers are individually. Enacting lawsthat keep people of color disenfranchised is a racist act.Prop 187, 209 in Calif. were sponsored by the GOP. The GOP also sponsored anti bi-lingual education. It seems thatwhite people weren't the target of these racist initiatives.The GOP sponsored segragation and laws that kep blacks from voting in the south. Need I go on, Mark. Read "LiesMy Teacher Told Me."

12/16/98 DZ dzink@rocketmail.com
Mr. Kein: I think you might want to do some more study of Pat Buchanan. He has a fairly long history of anti-Semitic remarks including Holocaust denial. Given his public record to date, I think that a prudent American of any political persuasion could reasonably conclude that Buchanan is a racist.

12/16/98 Leonard alias@fakename.com
DZ: Actually, Buchannan has a very *short* history of anti-Sematism. In the 1980's, he had a reputation as "Isreal's best friend in the White House." It was only when he began his ill-fated second bid for the President that he made such absurd statements as his holocost denials. I don't think he really believed them... but then that leads me to wonder what he does believe. I don't trust him because he is at best a lie-spewing manipulator of white supremists and at worst a bigot. Personally, I'm backing Kemp in 2000, if I vote Republican at all.

12/16/98 Leonard alias@fakename.com
"Prop 187, 209 in Calif. were sponsored by the GOP." I'm not from California, so you will have to bring me up to speed on what these are. --- "The GOP also sponsored anti bi-lingual education." I'm not sure I'm willing to accept that as evidence of racism. Many would argue that hispanic kids are far better off learning English early and learning it well, and the fastest way to learn a language is total emmersion (sitting in a classroom full of English-speaking kids, using English to communicate with the teacher). The success they have on their first job interviews would more than justify any early academic stumbles while they struggle to master a tongue their parents don't speak.

12/16/98 Mark
el azul: You don't have to bet bucks that many democrats have been (and still are) aligned with those groups since it's a fact that they are. This just shows how you are willing to make false accusations for no good reason. I'm not going to argue with you over prop. 209 and prop 187 except to say that 80+% of all americans support the ideas in those propositions. Obviously this includes many democrats, women and minorities. If you want to believe that this is racism then you can - but that don't make it so. Also, I can't believe that Buchanan really has a history of racist remarks but then again I can't say I've checked into it. I can only say I've never heard him say anything even slightly questionable along those lines.

12/16/98 Mark
All I was really saying here was - get your accusations straight. Do you want to call republicans elitist? Maybe. slightly sexist?- possibly. Capitalist pigs? definitely. But racist? no way. Racism violates fundamental religious tenets that are near and dear to most republicans. Don't forget that abolitionism was nurtured in the churches of the north by people who today would be called "christian conservatives". This might be confusing for some people - but for the same reason that most republicans are pro-life, most republicans are also not racist.

12/17/98 D.M.
Dearest PMM, I sincerely thought Ex-Klan leader and Racist and racism could be thought of as somewhat synonymous. Perhaps we could ask Morris Dees of SLPC he seems to place them together often enough. As far as my being "superior" I never said that, its maybe what you been a smokin that led you to write that simple slur. Mr. Kein maybe you and ElAzul should get together and iron out those small differences. Mr. Zul will gladly define Racism for you and outline the steps you would need to take to correct yourself. I'm sure after that love-in we can all live happily ever after in Ben Wattenburg's "Universal Nation."Well toodaloo I must go and watch how our "Glorious Leader"is punishing those bad Iraqis, making the world safe for Democracy or oral sex, I must admit I don't know witch is the goal of this cluster comb and cruise missle exercise.

12/17/98 Larry lbloomer@bellatlantic.net
Prop 209 was to end affirmative action. Prop 187 was to limit ILLEGAL immigration (found unconstitutional for some reason). The conservative take on Prop 209 is that affirmative action itself is racist and unconstitutional, in that it delivers government preferences to a group because of skin color. To oppose such a policy cannot possibly be racist. Conservatives believe that public education, etc., should be open to everyone. They do NOT believe in granting favors to minority groups because of past misdeeds. I'm not as familiar with the details of Prop 187, but it's difficult to see how limits on ILLEGAL immigration is a racist policy. Sounds more like an effort to enforce an existing law, to me. Limits on immigration bother me only if they are enforced disproportionatly against a particular group; this is hardly the case with Mexicans, who are after all flooding the country, legally AND illegally.

  [View all comments]



Previous Article    Back to the Table of Contents    Next Article

 

Home Opinions World View Business & Technology IC Politics Features