tv U.S. House of Representatives Morning Hour CSPAN March 1, 2016 10:00am-12:01pm EST
and what the revolution is. you get a much broader sense of where iran is going. host: we have to end it there but we appreciate your time on the washington journal. we will take you live to coverage of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. e clerk: the speaker's room, washington, d.c., march 1, 2016. i hereby appoint the honorable daniel m. donovan jr. to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, paul d. ryan, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the order of the house of january 5, 2016, the chair will now recognize members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning hour debate the chair will alternate
recognition between the parties with each party limited to one hour and each member other than the majority and minority leaders and the minority whip but in to five minutes, no event shall debate continue beyond 11:50 a.m. the chair recognizes the gentleman from connecticut, mr. courtney, for five minutes. mr. courtney: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, in a few moments this morning i will be introducing a house resolution, a bipartisan house resolution with congressman don young from the state of alaska calling on the senate to once and for all ratify the u.n. convention on the law of the sea treaty. mr. speaker, this is a treaty which was negotiated by the reagan administration back in the late 1980's. it's a treaty which has been endorsed by democratic presidents, republican presidents, couldn't lisa rice, military -- miss rice:, military leaderships of all tripes to
create rules of the road in -- stripes to create rules of the road. as i said, the military leadership of this country has been adamant and consistent year in and year out about the need for our country to join 166 other countries in the world in terms of ratifying this treaty. as marine general joe dunford said a short time ago, the chairman of the joint chiefs of not in the rulebook. the purple countries are those that ratified the treaty and the blues are not. the united states refuses to ratify this treaty. north korea, iran, syria, libya and venezuela. now, again, this is a measure that's been debated over the years and it's been -- and i would argue -- sort of washington, d.c. parlor game in terms of the theoretical impact it may or may not vfment but in recent months, the -- may or
may not have. but in recent months it has become clearer. the house armed services committee that i serve on, admiral harry harris testified. he's our commanter of pacomm. the region of the world where china today is blatantly violating maritime law by creating islands out of nothing, creating landing strips, militaryizing those new land masses in a clear attempt to, again, violate the u.n. convention law of the sea treaty by creating an economic zone that is going to interfere with the free passage of commercial traffic, 95% of the world's commodities goes by sea. and their intentions are crystal career. and admiral harris when he testified the other day made it clear that exceeding to the convention, the law of the sea treaty, would give us the moral high ground to criticize those countries that would have
freedom to maneuver in the oceans, including the avea pacific region. -- asia pacific region. the commander of nato -- european command for the u.s. came in and without any prompting testified to exactly the same policy position. because what he's seeing in his region of the world is that a resurgent russia is militarizing the arctic circle, that they are using this, again, melting of the ice cap as an opportunity to militarize that region of the world and try and control what is going to be a maritime passage where both military assets and commercial traffic is going to move back and forth. and general breedlove, made exactly the same point. we need to get into the game. and this was made crystal clear just a few months ago. the government of the philippines, to its credit, has challenged china. they filed an application before the hague, citing the law of the sea treaty, that what they're doing in the south china sea blatantly violates international law. the united states asked not to
participate directly as a party, because we haven't ratified the treaty, but simply to be an observer, a friend of the court, to be able to contribute ideas and data which our navy has more than any other navy in the world and we were denied observer status because we have not ratified this treaty. right now people are hard at work in the hague writing the rules of the road in terms of maritime issues that are going to determine budgets and, again, the ranking member of the sea power committee, so we -- this is driving a lot of decisions about building submarines and surface ships and stronger munitions because what's happening in the south china sea and it's also going to be driving the outcomes of what's happening with resurgent russia. putin is not kidding around in terms of what he's doing in the arctic circle or in the north atlantic. breedlove made that very clear. right now we're playing zone defense in terms of what's happening in that region of the world. it's time for the congress to listen. if nothing else, to our military leadership and recognize that the
international law of the sea treaty, which 166 nations in the world has ratified, is time for the u.s. to get in the game, get off the bleachers and be able to set those rules because it's going to determine for decades to come decisiones that this body is going to be stuck with if we're not part of that process. again, our military leadership, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, c.n.o. of the navy, head of the coast guard, they have all been very clear and public about the fact that it's time for this nation to get into the game and endorse the international law of the sea treaty. i'm very pleased that congressman young is joining me with this effort and i urge all members to support this resolution, which will be filed this morning. with that i yield back, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: thank you. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from north carolina, ms. foxx, for five minutes. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. today i rise to talk about a blight that nearly rendered the american -- recognize a teacher
in alexander county, north carolina, who's helping lead in the rebirth of these great trees. the american chestnut was the dominant hardwood species in the eastern united states. prior to the european colonization of north american, american chestnut trees were found from maine to florida with the largest trees occurring in the southern appalachias. when early european settlers first arrived they were used in different ways, including providing timbers and tools. the he hadible nut was a significant contributor to the rural economy. families would collect the nuts to sell and eat and they were also used as feed for livestock. domesticated hog and cattles allowed the animals to gorge themselves on these highly nutritious nut. it coincided with the thanks giffling and christmas holidays
and newspaper clippings showed train cars rolling in the cities overflowed with chestnuts. the american chestnut was truly a heritage tree. however, the booming trade industry introduced fungal disease that is would change the species' composition. a root rot disease thought to be cause the death of them. and constricted its natural range. this fungal disease was followed by the more commonly known chestnut blight which spread throughout eastern hardwood forest at a rate up f up to 50 miles per year. by the -- rate up to 50 miles per year. by the late 1950's, they succumb to the disease and it was known as the worst ecological disasters in the united states. the american chestnut has been relegated to a minor understory
component, existing as sprouts from old stomps and root systems. modern technologies is bringing them back from near extinction but the success of these efforts will be the result of decades of genetic hybridization. the american chestnut foundation has embarked on an elaborate and time-consuming breeding program to develop a tree that can withstand blight and exhibit virtually every characteristic of the american chestnut of the past. by back-crossing the american chestnut with the blight-resistant chinese chestnut the foundation has produced the restoration chestnut. last december, the american chestnut foundation planted four restoration chestnuts on the campus of alexander central high school in taylorsville. cky, a biotech and biology teacher, has partnered with the
foundation to gather information about the health, diversity and blight resistance of these trees. her students will actively participate in collecting data, documenting growth rates and transplanting american chestnut sprouts in alexander county. she should be commended for raising awareness about the american chestnut and for her work to reintroduce these giants to their rightful place in alexander county and america's ecosystem. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from connecticut, mr. himes, for five minutes. thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, as you know it has been the custom of the last couple of congresses to open the congress with a reading of the entire united states constitution. i have generally not participated in that because i'm not all that comfort with
public displays with piodies and what really matters is what you do, not what you say. and never is the spread between what we say and what we do quite as wide as it is when we consider the approach that my friends on the republican side have taken with respect to the absolutely essential constitutional duty of appointing a supreme court justice. so i'm going to break with my past pattern and read briefly from the constitution, article 2, section 2 which reads, he shall have the power -- that's referring to the president -- by and with the advice and consent of the senate to make treaties, provided 2/3 of senators present concur and he shall nominate and by and with the advice and content of the shall shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and counsels, judges of the supreme court. and there it ends. he shall approve -- appoint justices of the supreme court.
there it ends. there's nothing there about he won't do that in an election year. there's nothing there saying that if there's not enough time he won't exercise his constitutional authority. there's nothing there that maybe because then-senator biden said something 25 years ago. he won't appoint a supreme court justice. and yet my colleagues on the other side of the capitol have said they won't even offer the president's nomination the courtesy of a meeting. and let's be very clear. that is a profound abrogation of the constitutional duty that is set out in black and white in the constitution of the united states. so let's just spend a minute on the three objections that we're hearing from the republicans on why the president shouldn't appoint and why they shouldn't even extend the courtesy of a meeting to the president's proposed appointment to the supreme court. first and foremost, they say that it's an election year. the precedent would dictate that the president not nominate
in an election year. well, that's exactly wrong. and you can look it up. these are historical facts. i'll just read quickly at scotus blog. amy says the historical record does not show any instances of the president failing to nominate and/or the senate failing to confirm a nominee in a presidential election year because of the impending election. the record does not reveal any instances. and then it goes on to list those that have occurred. president william taft nominated pit knee. wilson nominated -- made two nominations in 1916. president hoover nominated benjamin cardoza. roosevelt nominated murphy. president ronald reagan nominated justice anthony kennedy. so the idea there's no precedent is exactly wrong. which brings us to the other argument. the second argument which is there's not time. i brought this graphic here to show that for the last several
presidents, the average approval time was something like two months. and the current president has some 00 days left in his -- 300 days left in his term. take a look at this one. approval time for justice lito, roberts, justice breyer, ginsburg and thomas. if you add all those individual periods of time together you still don't get the amount of time that the current president has left in his term. which, of course, brings us to the arguably most laughable argument that we hear lately which is that some 20-plus years ago then-senate judiciary chairman joe biden said something along the lines perhaps then the president shouldn't make an appointment because it was an election year. as much as i like the vice president and respect him, his words of 25 years ago do not carry constitutional force or the force of law. we shouldn't spend a lot of time on that argument. so what's really going on here? if those are the best arguments
against even extending the courtesy of a senatorial meeting to a president's number netion, a precedented action, what's really going on? here's what's really going on. it's a government shutdown. we have seen this w. my friends on the other side of the aisle -- my friends on the other side of the aisle, the rules which we read, resulted in an outcome they don't like, they simply shut it down. they did that in october of 2013 between the days of october 1 and october 16, they shut down the federal government in an action that standard & poor's estimated cost the u.s. economy $24 billion or fully .6% of our economic growth gone because the republicans wouldn't accept the affordable care act. and look, i get that they don't like that, but it had been passed in due course in this house, shown to be constitutional by the supreme court, but the answer is, no, we don't like it, we're shutting down the government.
let's not shut down the government over the supreme court. thank you, mr. speaker. . the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from florida, ms. ros-lehtinen. ms. ros-lehtinen: thank you so much, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i would like to bring to the attention of this body the current negotiations taking place in cuba between the colombian government and the park -- farc, which is a u.s. designated terrorist organization. that deal is dangerous for floma and for our u.s. national security. and let me explain. as a friend of the colombian people, i have been a proponent of widening and strengthening our bilateral ties with colombia by supporting the united states-colombia trade promotion agreement. this agreement has helped many companies in my congressional district of south florida to strengthen their trade capabilities with colombia. i have also supported plan
colombia. a collaborative effort, alongside the colombian armed forces and security forces, aimed at improving the security environment. plan colombia enjoys wide bipartisan support, resulting in a significant reduction in the cultivation of coca in years past, record dismantling of labs, and drastically reducing kidnappingsry which are an important source of revenue for the farc. denight great advances in the con-- despite great advances in the conflict during the uribe administration prior to president santos, i have expressed serious misgivings about the negotiations initiated by the colombian government with the murderous castro regime as a supposedly impartial mediator. mr. speaker, the castro brothers run an oppressive communist state with complete disregard for human rights, for due process, and notorious histry of supporting of nefarious actors throughout the region, using
cuba as a mediator in the negotiations is misguided at best. it is widely known that the castro brothers have been great supporters of the terrorist group, the farc, have allowed the farc to use cuba as a safe haven, and have even trained some farc terrorists in guerrilla warfare tactics. despite knowing that the castro regime has internationally voiced strong support for the farc, even lending materials and monetary aid to the rebels, we expect the castros now to be acts as impartial mediators? absolutely not, mr. speaker. with the colombian government negotiating with the farc, and with cuba as a mediator that is supposedly impartial, the pending agreement includes no jail time for any of the farc criminals. these criminals have kidnapped and tortured scores of colombian
citizens, and have even held american citizens hostage. no jail time. according to the agreement, if the farc members admit to their crimes, they would be put in what's the equivalent of house arrest, from two to eight years, eight years is the maximum, and they will not serve any jail time. they will not be extradited to the united states to face any charges they have pending here. you heard that right, mr. speaker. this agreement could include a request to drop any arrest warrant and drop any extradition process from the united states that we have filed to persecute, prosecute members of the farc. this is completely unacceptable, mr. speaker. and i'm also concerned about provisions in the agreement that would allow members of the farc to run for political office as they would likely use the massive funds that they have from their illegal narcotics trade to finance their campaigns
and further undermine what the colombian people are trying to achieve by having a safe, secure colombia again. evidence has shown that since the negotiations began with the farc in havana, coca cultivation numbers in colombia have increased now from 2014 and 2015 we have seen an increase of drugs flowing from colombia. who do we think is responsible for that? the farc. who is making more money from narcotrafficking? the farc. and what i find most disturbing mr. speaker, was the call by the colombian government to remove the farc, an organization with american blood on its hands, from the u.s. state department's foreign terrorist organization. list. lastly, there are several unanswered questions about the implementation of this misguided deal. how will the farc disarm? how will they surrender their weapons? what role will the united nations play as it oversees the
implementation of the process? will the obama administration continue its pattern of granting concessions and end up releasing farc leader trinidad who is serving time in our prison? mr. speaker, the united states must re-examine this agreement and urge the colombian government to address some of these grave concerns. we have a responsibility to our taxpayers to be good stewards of their funds as well as a moral imperative to support and seek justice for the victims of the farc not their perpetrators. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. the chair recognizes the gentleman from arizona, mr. gallego, for five minutes. mr. gallego: mr. speaker, on behalf of the people of phoenix, i rise to demand an end to business as usual at the federal aviation administration. in 2014, the f.a.a. decided without any i put from civic
leaders or members of our community to implement a new flight path for air path departing from the sky harpor airport. the impact was severe. without warning our communities were suddenly exposed to constant deafening aircraft noise as they run businesses, raise families, and struggle to sleep at night, phoenix russ dents must now contend with the increased roar of planes passing overhead. imply put, the new slight path deprived the residents i represent of the peace and quiet they deserved before the f.a.a. intervened. it has only exaser rated this difficult situation by overlooking the objections of local residents and ignoring the clearing direction from congress to reconsider these routes. when urged by the house in the 2015 omnibus to, and i quote, identify appropriate mitigation measures to address the problem aircraft noise in phoenix, the agency disregarded the will of this body and took no meaningful
action. that's simply unacceptable. the american people deserve a government that is responsive to their needs and accountable to their elected officials. we have seen the same pattern of indifference repeated in cities across the contry. now, final lirks leaders from both parties are demanding real reform at the f.a.a. democrats and republicans came together to include the language in the fiscal year 2016 spending bill that will require the f.a.a. to develop a plan to proactively address the concerns of americans, including phoenix residents, exposed to high levels of aviation noise. in addition, legislation introduced earlier this month to re-authorize the f.a.a. contains several key provision that is could help to provide relief to phoenix residents plagued by noise from passing aircraft. the bill would require the agency to review flight path changes if the f.a.a. administrator determines that they have harmed communities in the vicinity of the airport. the measure will also compel the
f.a.a. to consider steps to mitigate aircraft related noise and concerns if requested to do so by a local community or airport operator. finally, the f.a.a. will be required to simultaneous a report to congress on how the agency intends to improve its woeful community outreach and engagement efforts. collectively these provisions represent an important step forward, but they can't and aren't enough. together, we are the members of the quiet skies caucus, i am committed to strengthening the legislation as the process moves forward. mr. speaker, civic leaders, business owners, and families in phoenix have been ignored for too long. the flight paths over our city must change and so must the course of an agency which for too long has disrespected congress and disregarded the needs of nigh constituents. now is the time to pass legislation to ensure that local communities have a seat at the table when new flight paths are plotted. let's give local residents the
ability to appeal routes undermining their quality of life. mr. speaker, on the issue of aircraft noise, the people of phoenix are speaking loudly and they deserve to be heard. thank you. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the chair recognizes the gentleman from florida, mr. jolly, for five minutes. mr. jolly: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today to recognize an institution that for 150 years has served the people of pinellas county, people of florida. has served people in all corners of the world. and an institution that continues each day to serve our loving god. mr. speaker, i rise today to recognize and honor, cavalry baptist church in clear water, florida, as it celebrates its 150th anniversary. in 1866, reverend c.s. reynolds and his wife, along with a handful of christ followers founded the midway baptist church in clear water harbor. the church is considered tonight first organized church of any kind in what later became the city of clear water, and the
very first baptist church. during the 1920's under the leadership of pastor a.j., the church undertook a major building project. the ornate rotunda was completed in 1926 and became known as one of the most magnificent buildings in the south land. it stood as the home for the church and recognized as a clear water landmark for nearly 80 years. the history is a story of god's grace and providence. it endured the effects of both world wars and great depression and continue to experience years of significant growth under the leadership of pastors burton throughout the 19 50 east -- 1950's and 1960's, bill anderson who led the church from 1975 to 2002. since fwour, pastor willie rice has led this vibrant church and expanding outreach. the church is distinguished by its faithful adherence to the message of god's love. the church has served its local
community and partnered with other communities through its historic affiliation with the southern baptist convention, extending its influence of compassion-based ministries around the world. throughout its history the body of believers who make up the church have been instrumental in founding and supporting many local ministries in the tampa bay area. ministries that touch every human facet. to partnership with several community-based pregnancy centers, members of the church provide resources and support to struggling pregnant mothers and their unborn children. honoring the sanctity of life. they provide clothing, food, and shelter to the homeless and the church is faithful each day to honoring our veterans. calgary supports individuals transitioning out of prison as well as recovering addicts. and the support they provide to these individuals helps restore dignity and purpose of life. the church ministers in many ways to the young people of the community through vie brandt in house youth programs as well as numerous community outreach
programs. cavalier christian high school itself coped its doors in the fall of 2000, with the goal of challenging all students to achieve academically to the highest levels of their god-given abilities. another community outreach program provides school materials to disadvantaged elementary students through the adopt a classroom project. supporting children and families is a central element of the christian lifestyle and central to the mission of calgary baptist church. internationally they provide financial material resources to hundreds and they provide hundreds of volunteers to support disaster relief and recovery efforts. through medical mission trips, the church provides much needed care to communities in far reaches of the globe. with direct support and global partnerships, calgary assists in community development efforts throughout the world. in short, spreebling, -- mr. speaker, calgary baptist church in clear water, florida, has become a part of the fabric of our community enriching the lives of its members and neighbors. far more important, calgary
continues each day to share the message of the saving grace of the christ in whom we put our faith. and in whom we put our trust. mr. speaker, i urge my colleagues to join me today in recognizing calgary baptist church of clear water, florida, as it celebrates 150 magnificent years of ministry and service. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. thompson, for five minutes. thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i rise today in recognition of grace preston, a 6th grader from the brockway area elementary school, which proud to say is located in the pennsylvania fifth congressional district. grace was recently among two students in pennsylvania to be honored with a prudential spirit of community award.
this award is given to young people for outstanding acts of volunteerism. grace has raised more than $4,000 in the past three years to improve the lives of animals in her community. she's done this through the sale of homemade dog treats and cat toys, flea and tick repellent. she became interested in helping animals after her family adopted a dog from a local shelter. . through her efforts grace has raised enough money to purchase a storage shed as well as rabies meds and has animal oxygen masks for pets that are caught in fires. help pay for a shelter dog's recent surgery and collected animal food for the pets of needy families. mr. speaker, it's wonderful to see such dedication to community from someone so
[no audio] >> the house has gaveled out for now. members will be back at noon eastern. a dozen bills are scheduled, including one requiring more public information about federal advisory committees. 11 of the bills renamed post offices and other federal buildings. wednesday, it will be a bill to require the h.h.s. to keep track of health care providers convicted of fraud and to make sure they are removed from allowed medicaid providers lists. thursday, blocking regulations going into effect setting new emission stands for industrial break and clay kilns. live coverage when the house gavels back in here on c-span. the house judiciary committee is looking into whether apple should unlock eye phones and other devices for law enforcement investigations. apple's top attorney will testify along with f.b.i. director comey, c-span3 will have live coverage beginning at 1:00 eastern. c-span2 will be live at 1:15 with a memorial service for
supreme court justice antonin scalia. he's being commemorated by family, supreme court justices ruth bader ginsberg, clarence thomas, and former law clerks. pictures of bernie sanders this morning in burlington, vermont, as he's placing his vote during this super tuesday. over a dozen states and american samoa are taking part. our live coverage tonight on c-span network starts at 7:00 p.m. eastern. also includes your phone calls and comments. >> c-span's "washington journal" live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. that's coming up tomorrow morning.
david drunker from the washington examiner will join us to talk about super tuesday voting. the states involved, the candidates, and what the results could mean for the election. then i.r.s. taxpayer advocate, nina olson, will take your calls and questions about your filing options and this year's tax topics. be sure to washington c-span's "washington journal" live beginning at 7:00 a.m. eastern tomorrow morning. join the discussion. >> a look now at republican party strategies for attracting latino voters. this is part of the american university latino public affairs forum. analyzing the immact of the latino electorate on the 2016 presidential election. this discussion is about an hour and 10 minutes. >> we are ready to begin. f people can get settled in.
i'd like to welcome everybody. if i can get people's attention. i'd like to welcome everybody to the second annual latino public affairs forum here at american university. i'm delighted we are convenienting this forum for presidentialp studies in the school of public affairs whose director will say a couple words of welcome in a moment. but who has been extraordinarily supportive as always. our two centers are committed to foster state-of-the-art research on topics that fit within our mandate. latin american and latino studies, and congressional and presidential studies in the case of ccps. just as importantly, we are committed to communicating the results of that work beyond
academe. to do that we draw not only on exspear tees of a faculty but also on the knowledge of researchers and practitioners from other institutions. our program today reflects our commitment to recruiting expertise from beyond as well as within the confines of american university. we have scholars from other campuses as well as experts at think tanks, advocacy institutions, and consulting firms, among others. each year this forum focuses on a specific topic in public affairs that seems to us especially timely for latino communities in the united states. and for understanding how latinos impact the broader landscape of public affairs. we actually launched this in 2014, but we weren't calling it the annual forum. so technically the first annual forum was in 2015, and this is the 2016 annual -- second annual forum. although some of you who have been coming for several years, if you're puzzled as to why we call the second annual, that's
the explanation. the first -- when we did this in 2014, we focused on immigrationpolicy. last year having made it an annual undertaking we focused on latinos in the republican party. and that topic remains today as important as we had anticipated a year ago. i'm sure it will come up over the course of this afternoon. but today our topic is the impact of latinos on the 2016 election. an additional way we might frame that topic, is the impact of the 2016 election on latino communities, political identities, and behaviors. and beyond that the impact of latinos on the longer term configuration of american party system and the american political landscape. i think these are questions that we'll have plenty of opportunity to discuss over the course of the day. i want to thank all of our panelists for agreeing to take part. i want to thank you, the audience, for taking the time from busy schedules to join us. i also want to extend special
thanks to my colleague, professor rob albero, who i saw moments ago, rob really took the leadership in pulling this together. and both in the design and the logistics with support of others on the staff of the center for latin american latino studies, particularly dennis and jacqueline. i'm very grateful to all of them. we are going to organize this in three sessions. the first two panels, moderated by jim and matthew, respectively, will cover the republican primaries and the democratic parties' effort to sustain its advantage with latino voters. we are interested here in both how latinos will affect the outcome of the primaries in the general election, and how the primary campaigns of both parties may influence latino political behavior and allegiances over the longer term. as most of you know, jim is director of the center for
congressional and presidential studies. he's also a university professor in the department of government at a.u. his contributions to the study of american politics and institutions are many. i won't try to list them all but call attention to his recently published book, "american gridlock, the sources of character and impact of political -- sources, character, and impact of political polarization." the second panel will be moderated by matthew wright, my colleague in the department of government. he directs or graduate program in political science. conducts research on a wide range of issues in american political behavior, including on questions of ethnic and racial diversity and public opinion about diversity opinion. i will moderate a third panel, wild cards in swing states. the program description hints a bit as what we see as wild cards. rather than sketch those now, i'll leave you in suspense and address that when we get to the afternoon. it may well be that over the
course of the afternoon and in our discussions, additional wild cards come to the fore and we'll have time to discuss these. before turning it over to jim for a word of welcome and introduce the first panel, let me say that we want this to be an opportunity, both for panelists to share their ideas with you, but also to have questions and answers and discussion and we'll be able to do that in each of the sessions. welcome, thank you very much. [applause] jim: thank you, eric. welcome, everyone. welcome to c-span. we are going to have millions watch this at 3:00 a.m. in the morning when they don't have anything to do. sorry, c-span, that happens when you run them at various times.
we get a lot of emails at 3:00 a.m., 4:00 a.m. sometimes about our programs. they have covered a lot of them. it's a pleasure to work with you, eric. and your staff, rob has done a terrific job. we've got great panelists here. we do have forums where we bring together academics, journalists, and professionals in the field, campaign professionals, pollsters, and we have that today. we have a balance between democrats and republicans. and the views between the two parties. but let me put this forum, this conference in context generally. as you know, 27 million -- there are 27 million eligible hispanic voters in america. 12% of the electorate. they are going to make a significant impact upon this election as they have in the past. there are 600,000 latino voters are added to the voting rolls
each year. the question is whether they turn out or not, we'll talk about that. this is especially important in places like texas, california, new mexico, florida, nevada, north carolina, even in virginia where there's 9% of the population are latinos. if you look at the break down of the previous presidential elections, latinos had a significant impact. obama took 71% of latino vote. that was 44% more than romney. in 2012. 2008, he took 67% of the latino vote, which was 36% more than republican -- than mccain. kerry, he took 18% more hispanics at 58% with bush. 31%. bush, george w. bush did better with hispanic voters than any
other republican candidate. this year, we have planned this to come just before the super primary tomorrow. after the super primary, we'll know a lot more about whether trump has it or not. whether it's going to be a clean sweep. we'll know certainly more about cruz and rubio. rubio has to take 20% in some of these states. looks like he may not do that. we'll get into that later. the panlts that we have -- panels that we have, the way we'll run this panel, we'll have very short statements, about five minutes, at the beginning, an overview related to the republican primaries and some questions i'm going to outline here. then we are going to go into sort of a fluid "q&a" on the panel with people not interrupting but people commenting on the questions. we are going to pass around. then we'll go to the audience. the audience is full of people
who really know this. students, academics, journalists. we want to have many questions from the audience. the first panel is focused on what in the world is the republicans going to do in terms of the strategy to bring in latino voters? we have experts here to talk about that. what is the strategy of the republican party? what are the effects of the republican discourse and positions during the primary process? here we are talking about trump and the wall. trump and the wall and having it made pade by the mexican government of -- paid by the mexican government. the anti-immigrant statements that have come out not only about hispanics and others. he's insulted a whole lot of people. will it have an impact on these primaries? anti-general election? can a republican -- and the eneral election?
can a republican can a republican candidate improve on historically small proportion of hispanic voters? is the latino background or cuban background, cultural background of cruz and rubio very meaningful this year for latino voters? this is a heritage relevant? what are the stands of latino voters on immigration? and their reaction to the republican party, but also the democratic party and deportations by obama? will that have an impact on the primaries and this vote? we have three outstanding people to talk about that. glen bowl ger -- bullinger in the middle is president of public opinion strategies an a.u. graduate. he teaches survey research here. he's very loyal to american university. that's not why we have him here. p.o.s. is the primary republican
pollster in america and he is focused impackerically on the -- impackerly on the latino vote. to my immediate left is neri martinez, she's the director of the republican state leadership committee. she's been involved in trying to recruit more latinos to run, to try to turn -- get people registered and turned out. she has worked for years on voter engagement and outreach strategies, women and latino politics. she is right at the center of what must be somewhat frustrating right now with respect to the leading candidate. sort of leading you into this. at this point in terms of what you're rige to do. david karol was a professor here at american university. we'll leave it at that.
we miss you, david. academic units and universities are like baseball teams. and baseball team somewhere out in the speshes, wait out there, university of maryland stole david from us. i will never forgive you, david. because you are doing such good work about parties in american politics, but more specifically today you know about demographics and the parties and the latino voters and parties. let me begin by asking neri to start if that's ok with the panelists for a few remarks. and then we'll go to glen and we'll end with david. if that's ok. all right. thank you very much. neri: thank you, james. thank you, american university, for having me on this panel. this is an incredibly important topic. i am, myself, latina, of course. and i am the executive director
of the future majority project, which is an initiative of the republican state leadership committee to identify, recruit, train, mentor women and minority candidates from all diverse communities. i have been in this role for about three years. the project has been enormously successful. over the past couple cycles the republican state leadership committee has recruited hundreds minority nd candidates. we have been helpful in electing 72 candidates, new candidates of all diverse ethniesities, over 250 new women for state level office. a lot of times these folks the first time they are running for office. we are engaging with the caucuses in the state to identify the best candidates that represent their districts, that represent their communities, and their winning and winning many times in states where we haven't had wins before. we are able to flip the majority with many of these candidates. they have been the key target in the key state. and we have also created a number of firsts as a result.
in 2015, we helped elect the very first latino to serve in the mississippi legislature. we helped to elect the very first cuban american in the virginia house. we have also helped elect folks like jeannine who is the only african-american female lieutenant governor in the contry. we helped the only latina lieutenant governor in the contry. we are creating a lot of firsts. we have been able to flip majorities in colorado, new mexico. we have been able to maintain majorities in arizona. these are places where the latino community is either emerging, established, or about to emerge in a very big way. the republican party in the states have been very engaged to try to find the best candidates and to are have them represent the republican party. we have seen a really interesting trend as a result of these elections. this trend may be familiar to you if you're watching the
primaries. in iowa, for example, the vast majority, about 60%, of the republican electorate chose a hispanic or minority candidates date as their candidate for president. so combined, marco rubio, ted cruz, and ben carson received 60% of the vote in iowa. not a place that is typically known as very diverse. although their demographics are rapidly changing as well. we are seeing a wave of new faces representing the party. we feel this is an important project to not just help to diversify legislatures now, but to also build a diverse bench of candidates for the future. for example, marco rubio started in the -- miami-dade west miami commissioner. he was the firts hispanic speaker of the house. we find that building these candidates at the state level helps to build a party from the ground up. it's been enormously successful in helping us win. not just with the regular
nonhispanic and nondiverse voters, but winning with women and other minority opportunities in the states where we are actively playing. jim: thank you. i'll come back to the question of turnout. i'm sure you have recent data on that. we'd like to find out what you're doing to improve turnout and mobilization and how it's going. glen. glen: sure. thank you, jim. i'm always excited to come to american university, 31 years ago i graduated -- i know i look longer, but 31 years ago i graduated from a.u. and have tried to be supportive of the programs here ever since. i appreciate it every time that dr. thurber extends an invitation or somebody associated with the school extends an invitation. i have come to as many basketball games as i can. this year not so much. not a reflection on the team but on my schedule. one of the reasons i'm thrilled
to be here today is that 31 years ago in the winter i took a short-term three-week class called campaign management institute. it was one by wilma goldstein, who became my mentor and steered me into my current occupation--- occupation, despite my skepticism. i did not want to become a pollster. she is here today. i just wanted to -- a shout out to her. thank you. wilma. i was very reluctant. and she's one of the key mentors at a key point -- juncture in my life. i have appreciated t excited to see her here today. it did make it on the screen. this is according to the exit polls, i know there are other numbers floating around, jim used different ones for 2004, for instance, but this shows in republicans have gotten
both presidential and nonpresidential election years. of the latino vote since 2000. what percent they have made up of the electorate. if you look, any time that the republicans have gotten 35% or more of the latino vote, they have tended to win those elections. any time they have gotten less than 35%, they have lost those elections. including as jim pointed out, just 27% from mitt romney in 2012, which was also when the hispanic vote was the largest percentage of the electorate this century. it's not going down. it's going to go up. 2014, only 8% of the voters were latinos. that is not something that is likely to be replicated in 2016. so when you look at what some republican candidates have been saying, and jim raised, what is the strategy of the republican party when it comes to hispanic voters, i would have to say that some of those -- i just want you to bear with me for a minute, is
-- pretend you are a 7-year-old and make your hand into a gun and point your finger at your foot and shoot yourself in the foot. that's what we are doing. republicans, those who are attacking latinos, are bad at math. because they are not understanding that they are becoming a bigger part of the electorate. just to underscore that, hopefully that switched, you look at the exit polls by ethnicity, for both 2014 and 2012, and, again, the white electorate was 72% in 2012, went up to 75% in 2014. that's not going to reoccur in 2016. if anything, it's more likely to be 70%. and republicans get six out of 10, approximately, of the white vote. get 10% to 6% of the african-american vote. so where does the big fluctuation come. one is asians, they are 3%.
it's the latino vote where it really makes a difference. in 2014, republicans won by getting over 35% of the vote at 36%. 27% 12, as bheengsed, just -- as we mentioned, just 27%. just so people aren't confused, going lower is a bad thing. going higher is a good thifpblgt that's one of the things i learned here at a.u. when the line goes up, that's good. let me show you one last chart before i turn it over to david. who like gary williams spent time at a.u. before ending up at maryland. couple of people got the gary williams reference. you look at the winning coalition by ethnicity. latinos are 11% of the electorate. republicans need to win -- if they get 60% of the white vote and whites are only 70% of electorate, 10% of
african-americans, 40% of asians which is better than romny, 45% of other, diverse sub groups that don't add -- without adding up together to just 3%, again we need 39% of latinos, romney got 27%. where you look where we have to improve the most, it's with latinos and asians. in terms of the contribution to our victory, in a two-way race, latinos are the most important subgroup. the idea of attacking them runs counter at winning at math to win elections. david: thank you. it's great to be back here at a.u. my former colleagues, eric and jim. there couldn't be a more timely topic. but we are talking about republican party and latinos, i think, if you were old enough to remember the perreault debate, who am i?
what am i doing here? i'm not in either of those two groups, but i am a political scientist and student of political parties and party coalitions. i think maybe then i might still have something to contribute. that would hopefully be some perspective. i'm sure we'll talk more about it in response to questions. i wanted to say that trump in some ways is an aberration in terms of as a candidate he's unique. but as relates to this issue, i would say he's more the culmination of a trend than actually an outliar. i'm going to give briefly historical background to say he doesn't come out of nowhere. party coalitions evolve all the time. party leaders are trying to recruit new constituenties all the time. sometimes they can build on the existing base they have by bringing in a group with different concerns. ronald reagan took the republican party, which has been since the time of lincoln, basically a business oriented
party, and helped bring in social conservatives who cared about things like abortion and gun rights advocates. those issues really did not clash with the agenda of the business community and so it was a coalition builder. he was successful. but when we talk about republican efforts to attract latino voters, i'm reminded of an old story from a very non-latino part of the contry, northern new england, this guy in a car from out of town gets lost, he sees an old farmer, can you tell me -- this is like northern new hampshire maybe, how to get to boston? where's the road to boston? you can't get there from here. and i think that's the story of the republican party right now. the base that they have built since 1964 will not allow them to really reach out effectively to latino voters. so let me just very quickly review some things. 1964, barry goaltenderwater runs
saying -- goldwater runs, let's hunt where the ducks are. racial politics, it's not specific to latinos. but to the extent that the party now as we see in the trump phenomenon has a lot of voters who are ethnocentric and authoritarian, that's a result of a lot of actions by a lot of republican leaders over decades attracting this clientele, and now they are constrained by it. goldwater, the opposition of the civil rights act, support from the deep south, richard nixon, the kind of smoother version, ronald reagan attacks on welfare queens and strapping young bucks on welfare. george h.w. bush, the willie house reporton campaign, moderate republican governor in california, pete wilson using proposition 187 which was a use of the immigration issue as a wedge issue. two years later proposition 209,
the anti-affirmative action proposition. again, that is not specific to latinos, but certainly they are captured in that. this was embraced at that time by newt gingrich and bob dole. the big exception is the bush administration. the second president bush. under the rubric of compassionate conservatism moved away from this racially polarized politics. sincerely abandoned the opposition of affirmative action, had many -- people of color at the 2000 convention, many appointments, more diverse administration, but ultimately he failed to reorient the party. . in 2007 he pushed hard for immigration reform which is consistent with the business community, which is core constituency that the republicans wanted but then the base of the party which had been built rejected this. basically egged on by talk radio hosts. so it failed in congress. it was not unified with
democratic support but primarily the failure was with republican members of congress. then we saw after president obama was elected the tea party backlash and scholars, their g matt and co-authors have shown a large element of racial feeling and concern about immigrants that animates the tea party. we saw this, donald trump on the national stage five years ago asking to see president obama's birth certificate. not really pushed back against republican leaders for a long time. after the 2012 election, there was a sort of autopsy commissioned by the republican national -- sorry -- republican national committee, i should say in the 2012 campaign. in the 2008 campaign, immigration was an important issue in the republican primaries. it's not true donald trump was the first to discuss it. senator mccain in 2007 was initially the frontrunner and then for a long time he was in trouble because he supported immigration reform.
he had a problem with build the border fence. rick perry was supposed to be a major challenge from the right to mitt romney. he actually was hurt greatly by his position which was more moderate on immigration. this was an issue where romney was able to get to the right of perry more usually. that's the background. after they lose the 2012 election which romney talked about self-deportation, the republican national committee commissioned a report and they said that they had to go a different way. this is when the gang of eight emerges in the senate which is -- there is a bipartisan attempt to pass immigration bill and again it fails chiefly because of republicans in the house. and then one more example that people don't talk anymore and i think is important, eric cantor, eric cantor lost his primary, the house majority leader lost his primary for renomination in a shocking development. people who looked closely at that race and says immigration
and cantor was seen by the base of the republican party to be too soft on the immigration issue. so with that -- reviewing that context, i think you can see trump doesn't come out of nowhere even though he's an unusual figure. he's inheriting a lot of support in the republican party that is the result of actions taken by republican leaders over many -- over many decades. and i know a lot of republican leaders sincerely want to move in another direction on this issue but they are now constrained by the base they have. and the last thing i'll say, if we look at the exit polls from the primaries and caucuses we had is interesting. usually an insurgent -- that's the story about bernie sanders. hillary chinton -- and that was the story of barack obama. and bush won the republicans. if we look at trump, he's doing
about as well among a republican identifiers and independents in these republican primaries and contests so he has attracted and mobilized a vote that's already there and that's been in the republican party a long time and that is really the challenge for republicans who want to reorient their position. the last thing i will say is that in the short term, republicans can still win. i'm not predicting that this year with donald trump. but in the 1960's when the african-american vote was growing, because of the voting rights act and mobilization in the south, republicans, the party of lincoln, decided to go another way and alienated the limited black support they had hoping to get white southern votes and in the short and medium term that actually worked for them. so even if the segment of the electorate is growing, there's more than one way to slice a pie and there's more than one way to get to 50%. if they could get more white working class votes and they
had different economic policies, which trump actually proposes compared to most republicans, it is possible -- again, i'm not predicting success for him, but you can't say one segment of the electorate has grown and therefore they are the key to victory. there are different ways to get to a majority. but in any event, the republicans who do want to target latino voters, despite all their best efforts, i think they're very constrained by the base that has been built over many years within their party. thanks. >> thank you, david. let's applaud. [applause] let's start with a few questions and then we'll go to the audience. what is to be done by the and ican party, and neri glen in particular, when you lock at the data and you do every day, what is to be done to bring more latino voters into the republican party, especially when you have a candidate like trump that seems to be alienating that population?
what's the strategy? glen, we'll start with you. glen: especially when you look at senate candidates you have about five to seven that are in competitive situations. five toss-ups. a few others that are tight. in states where the latino vote is in a significant votes, it makes a difference -- james, what advice do you give them, run away from the candidate? glen: well, look, in 19 -- first of all, i'm not -- i don't have not wrapped my head around or concede that trump will be the nominee. it certainly looks like each primary and some people say i'm unrealistic that it won't be him. james: a bunch of people will take bets on it. glen: yeah. probably not at his casinos since it failed. [laughter] glen: but, you know, in 1996 we had an effective downticket
strategy of don't give bill clinton a blank check and i think that's what you're more likely to see if donald trump is the nominee is don't give hillary clinton a blank check. for the huge problems that he has with the american public that he's earned, you know, 's got a 59% negative rating in "the wall street journal" -- nbc/"wall street journal" polling. that's the most even as a challenger in modern polling history. the second highest negatives, hillary clinton at 48%. highest to date before that was michael due cackis right before the november election in -- dukakis right before the november election in 1988. they are right before the record. and she has huge problems as well which is -- it's a
challenge because you see the opportunity where she can be defeated. it's just hard to see a candidate with 58%, 59% negatives being the one to do that. and i think given his statements, i think he's just getting started on driving up his negatives. that all said, i think you're going to see a message of, look, we need balance. one-party rule does not work well. don't give hillary clinton because you don't trust her, don't give her a blank check. james: neri, what do you think? what are you doing to try to bring in more latino voters? neri: yeah, i'll address a number of subjects. we focus on helping to elect latino and other diverse candidates, women candidates. but you know, it's no secret that r.n.c. put together the growth in opportunity project. it was a direct initiative to be able to be on the ground and recruit, you know, managers of
different states, volunteers to really engage the hispanic community in the political process and to engage them for their republican party and thus far the initiative has been an enormous success. i was part one of the first classes of this type of work in 2012. i worked for the hispanic vote. i was director for the republican national committee in that -- in north carolina uring that time. we won north carolina for romney and woe won it largely because we increased the hispanic voter, you know, percentage for the republicans in that state. so now they've been this kind of initiative which is a successful strategy around the clock, 24/7 and have invests, according to the r.n.c. estimates, $10 million. future majority project invested $11 million in the candidates so we have new faces in the party. the first sort of test ground for this initiative that the
republican national committee has put together is 2014. glen has shown we received 36% of the hispanic vote which ultimately led to the elections of very swing senate states like colorado for cory gardner or florida for rick scott and most notably in texas greg abbott 46% of the hispanic vote. quite larger than his predecessor before him. this initiative, if you look at the actual numbers, seems to be working hard to engage in the hispanic community. i mean, i'm obviously a result of the hispanic community. i grew up in a majority hispanic area. i can tell you hispanics are not monolithic. we have to understand that the u.s. is not monolithic. i've been to over 35 states recruiting candidates and i can tell you a republican from arkansas is not the same one from washington, not the same one from oregon and similar as hispanics. a hispanic that grew up in southern california is not going to be the same as one that grew up on the border in texas or that grew up in miami
where i grew up. it is a very different culture. it's a very different country. i think one of the things that excites me about the hispanic community, particularly in this country, is that 85% of hispanics already living in the u.s. are citizens or are in the process of becoming citizens. you know, so we tend to, particularly in mainstream media, focus on these smaller percentages of hispanics which may be undocumented or not citizens or permanent residents but any combination of that is still significantly less than the majority of us which are in addition to being non-- not monolithic, because we live all over the country, have all sorts of opinions from all different things, come from all different backgrounds and have all manners of perspectives, like every other american, we largely focus on other issues which are not related to immigration because immigration is not a direct part of our life. i think more many hispanic families you obviously no somebody that's being affected
by immigration and immigration is an important topic that every candidate should have, you know, a stance on. but there are a number of different issues which also resonate with hispanics and particularly active hispanic voters like the economy, like education, like health care. and what we're seeing in the states versus some of the federal races is that in many states we're being successful in reaching hispanic voters and having them vote for the republican on a ticket because at the state level we focus on the local issues and more direct issues affecting the constituency. on that front when we recruit candidates that reflect the communities, that reflect the emerging leaders in the state and when we have good campaigns and we do good work for the people we find that we win. james: thank you. david, i know you're not in the business of giving advice to parties as to what they should do, but to follow up on this question, what does the republican party have to do to bring in minorities, generally, and latinos, specifically, into the party? david: well, i agree with what
neri just said, latinos are diverse. that's true of lots of communities. i mean, the african-american community is diverse. on issues there's a lot of disagreement. for example, not all african-americans are pro-choice and pro-same-sex marriage but still overwhelmingly democratic. i still -- i think the candidate recruitment efforts that were just being discussed i think in the long term that is important because when they want to have candidates for higher offices, this is the farm team, where -- from which those candidates emerge so i think that is valuable. but i really don't -- i think in the short term what i would say and, of course, a republican probably wouldn't say this and so i can say this because i'm neutral in this respect is i actually think the republicans have to lose. they have to lose some more elections. parties, it's painful for parties to change.
people like to do what they've been doing. most of the elected officials have been elected doing the same old things. the constituencies that they respond to have already the policies they prefer. the parties that have changed, if we look historically in america and other countries, it's a response to repeated defeat. bill clinton and the new democrats and the d.o.c. emerged after landslide defeats. democrats lost three presidential elections in the 1980's and bill clinton was the response that. in britain the labor party had to lose four elections, including one they should have won based on the economy and then they got to tony blair. and the conservative party in britain recently the same story with david cameron after three big defeats to blair. republicans have one -- won congressional elections. it's true they lost to barack obama but they can explain 2008 away because of the economic collapse. and 2012 was actually a close
election. romney did better than mccain. certainly obama's victory wasn't overwhelming. so i think given the constraints that the base is placed on them, they are not going to be able to break free from that until they can clearly make the argument to their own people what we're doing is really not working and for that to be overwhelmingly clear i think they have to lose some more and so they have to lose to hillary clinton and they probably have to lose the senate. that would be a good start in terms of reform. james: thank you. last question for me and then we'll go to the audience. can you tell us a little bit more about turnout, turnout by latinos, nationally over time but also state -- a few states that are key to the next election, especially in the battleground states? if you don't have specific answers for that, that's ok. we can go on. neri: sure. yeah. i think -- well, that one's
really loud and i'm already loud. james: you're fine. neri: yeah. i think turnout historically increases among the latino community year to year and i think that just makes sense because if you look at the demographic data you have 800,000 hispanics turning 18 every year so they're eligible to vote and a certain percentage get registered and they're absentive, etc. the turnout for the latino has increased cycle to cycle and that will increase year to year and that's true if you look at trends. if you look at particular state, that to me is what i find to be interesting. more or less 50% of the hispanic community lives in california and texas with another good percentage living in florida or new york or illinois. but what we have seen, at least from the last census, is that a significant amount of hispanics have actually moved to other states, particularly the midwest, the deep south, the
pacific northwest, etc. so the combination of both intrastate migration, if you will, and just the process of hispanics turning voting age every year, you know. so i think turnout will increase but then turnout in every particular state will fluctuate because of those demographic trends. a lot of times when you have a hispanic community that is moving into another state, particularly in a not typically heavily hispanic state, say, the case of iowa and illinois, right? iowa has seen a significant amount of hispanic voters increase. of course, it is still relatively small, but you see a large percent increase and you say, why is this happening? it's interesting because iowa is not necessarily a border state but they do border illinois. you know, a significant amount of hispanic families have left illinois in the past couple years, you know, we would argue due to high taxes and better -- they find better education possibilities in iowa.
maybe an opportunity to start a business where they can't in illinois. so now you have hispanic families that may traditionally vote democrat move to illinois -- i mean, to iowa. when i worked in north carolina, i found just as the non-hispanic population, a significant amount of the folks that were there and registered to vote had come from the northeast. they'd come from connecticut or new jersey or new york or maybe they came from florida or other states, you know. and they moved to north carolina. it was a better climate for them and now they're voting in north carolina. you're seeing the same thing in arizona, right? so arizona has increased its hispanic voter share year to year and a good part of that increase in the percentage is because they're moving from california. so i think when you're analyzing hispanic turnout in general, you're going to find an increase in hispanic turnout. but when you'reage o'sing it state by -- when you're analyzing it state by state it depends on the hispanic community in that particular state and that's going to be an interesting thing to look for in 2016.
james: what did your organization do? what's it doing now besides candidate recruitment in terms of mobilization of voters? neri: yeah. so what we've seen in general in terms of mobilization of voters is that republican enthusiasm, if you will, is really high. it's actually much higher than it is for the democrats. that's going to be very interesting for 2016. that's going to be interesting for the presidential or that's going to be interesting, particularly, for the races that our committee focuses on which is the ballot races. so republican enthusiasm is up and you see that in the primaries where we've been able to gauge these numbers so far. and my particular committee focuses on recruiting and electing republicans, you know. i think a lot of turnout work is done by the republican national committee in terms of their database and in terms of their voter turnout in general, you know, particularly with their engagement of diversed communities through the growth and opportunity projeck. i can tell you state level leaders are heavily engaged,
number one, on policy. we are at historic highs at the state. we control 69 of 99 legislative chambers and that's largely due in part of our voters at the local level and that goes up and, you know, the engagement at the top level comes down and that's just the way it works wholeistically so we've been working with the caucuses, of course, to not just recruit and -- holistically so we've been working with the caucuses, of course, not just recruit but help the caucus reach out to diverse communities at the local level in their particular districts to turn out the vote for their state elections. james: glen. glen: i think there are four ways for groups to increase their clout. one of which is run for office and win, as ms. martinez was talking about and focusing on -- what she's been focusing on and that's obviously extraordinarily important. two is provide volunteers. three is make contributions.
and four is turn out and vote. and that i think is the one where, as the professor said, you know, if republicans continue to lose elections because they're getting lower numbers of hispanic voters, that's where republicans are going to learn their lessons. at the same time, as ms. martinez said, republicans have done well with hispanics in a number of different races and when they've campaigned for it. so the latino vote is open for republicans to go out and, you know, do better than, you know, kind of the mitt romney low point of 29%. if you look at top 10 states in the country in terms of percentage of latinos, seven of them have republican governors. and those seven governors have done very well with the latino community. so in terms of, you know, focusing on increased turnout, i think that the g.o.p. enthusiasm that we've so far in
the total number of votes cast in this primary compared to other competitive primaries in the past have been significant. if trump is the nominee, democratic enthusiasm won't come from their burning love for hillary clinton. it's more likely to come from -- and i think you'll see hillary and the democrats run a very negative campaign to try and juice enthusiasm among latinos and among african-americans and among what's left of their white voter support as well. james: david, would you like to add anything or should we go to the audience? david: i think i agree with what everyone said. just quickly, i want to just add one thing. neri is right, the latino community has spread throughout the country and it's not just concentrated in a handful of states. that's a double edged sword because on the one hand now their vote is potentially more
important in more states. however, the politics of imfwration have changed. in the 1980's when ronald reagan was and the republicans were using racial backlash, it was much more focused against african-americans. reagan, as people say, was more supportive of immigration. but at that point, latinos were really not on the radar screen of people in iowa and -- white voters in north carolina and georgia and iowa and places like this. now they are. and now the backlash to immigration that the wave that trump is surfing on is in places like this and so the issue is more salient. it's a double edged sword. james: thank you, david. let's go to the audience and we have a microphone. please wait until you get the microphone. tell us who you are. it will be nice if you have one question rather than the european approach of four questions. [laughter] james: no offense to the
europeans but they also do that. let's have your hand up. please tell us who you are and what your question is, please. >> hi. i'm here in the a.u. school of commouncation. my question is -- focuses on the r.n.c.'s databases and digital outreach strategies. i'm curious what kind of perceptions and/or sort of value judgments about latino voters and hispanic voters are being sort of baked into the code and the sort of outreach strategies when it comes to, like, ted cruz's mobile app or their database of voters and what are sort of -- how are they using those, you know, perceptions of hispanics when they train their volunteers to go and talk to voters, etc.? i don't know who can answer that. but it's kind of open for anybody. james: go at it. neri, would you like to answer it? neri: that's probably a best granual question. i work for the republican state
leadership committee. i'm separate. i'm aware of the work they do. they make no secret. i can't tell you specific because that's someone someone in the committee would answer. think ell you that i data collection works both ways. i think when you collect data you do function off some assumptions. i think everybody does when they collect data. and when you receive data, you're probably surprised by some results. if you're doing it right, you have some assumptions before you collect the data and you have some surprises after you collect the data. so exactly what those are i couldn't tell you, but i can tell you that the more you do that and the more work and the more effort that you put into something like that, the more efficient your strategy is going to be in the end. james: glen, would you like to gat it? glen: sorry, i couldn't add -- it's a good question. neri: great question. if i can find someone to answer
that question for you i will. so come see me. james: another question. hand up. >> wait. you need to speak in the microphone. >> hi. just interested in the -- james: joe. >> joe eldridge. thank you very much for this illuminated panel. having a hispanic or latino on the ballot has on turnout? james: the question. neri: i think it's going to be positive. i don't think we have a -- well, i do think we have models for that in terms of the governors of latino dissent that we've had. for example, governor sandoval and governor martinez, two co-chairs of the future majority project and they were enormously successful and in many cases lean democrat state
and they were very successful with the latino community. but i believe one of the reasons why they were successful is because we assume when we have a really awesome candidate that represents, you know, the emerging communities or when we have a very inclusive message, that only affects minority communities, i think nonminority communities, you know, i think angelos, caucasians, if you will, get excited about that kind of candidate and that kind of messaging as well. so i think a couple things. like, if you look at iowa, for example, and you look at the great percentage of largely non-hispanic voters that voted for hispanic candidate, those voters were not hispanic but they still got excited about somebody that was of diverse ethnicity. and so in the cases of sandoval, in the cases of martinez, say in the cases of nicky haley, although she's not latina, the voters are getting
excited approximate those kinds of candidates, it's not those that represent hispanic communities that get excited, it's other folks as well. i think anytime you have a strong candidate with a strong message, it's a recipe for winning. james: so is it -- do you think with the policy positions of these candidates, a clear strategy around policy rather than their ethnicity in these cases? neri: it's always a combination of both. i mean, you can't always determine what every single voter is motivated by at the ballot. but you can determine just on your knowledge of humanity and the way we make decisions and the way we approach things that some folks are going to be interested in policy initiatives, some folks are going to be interested in their personal story and their background. say, their ethnicity. some people will be motivated because somebody knocked on their door and somebody talked to them and actually communicated a message. and so you can't really tell exactly what it is that drove that voter to the ballot to an exact science for each individual but i think a
combination of many positive influences help the overall campaign. james: you could control for the impact of the stand of a party on immigration policy. i know, glen, you polled on this. how important is immigration policy to the hispanics compared to other voters you're surveying? glen: well, it's one of multiple issues. it's certainly not a stand-alone, by itself way at the top issue. there are concerns about the economy, jobs, national security, concerns that other ethnic groups have as well. obviously the hispanic voters are very sensitive when candidates talk dismissively about immigrants. that does not rebound well, but just going back to the question, i do want to add two things to that. number one is i think it is amazing to me that democratic party is all about diversity except when it comes to
republicans and then they try and get it out there that people like marco rubio and ted cruz and brian sandoval and susannah martinez, they're not real hispanics because they don't agree with what the democrats agree with and that to me is a pretty bad indictment of the democratic party quote-unquote diversity. and the other observation is and reinforcing what ms. martinez said that republican voters, they want to be able to vote for minority candidates provided those minority candidates share their views on issues. marco rubio, brian sandoval, those are all good examples when you -- ben carson, one of the reasons he did so well until he showed he couldn't stay awake through a debate and when he was awake he didn't understand national security issues, one of the things he was doing so well in the polls was, there were a lot of
republican voters, mostly -- most of were white, because he's conservative i could easily support him and then, of course, the less he was up to the job. i've seen this in many, many campaigns. james: thank you. another question, please. >> i have the mic. i'm the aforementioned wilma goldstein. others can weigh in. there's always this talk in the latino community that they're different than the puerto ricans and the guatemalans and on and on. for a non-latino, that's where the conversation stops. that's a big question that would need a big question. can you give us an example of some of those differences? neri: yeah. cubans don't eat spicy food. [laughter] big difference. chicanos do. chicanos do.
i think there are certainly cultural differences within the different -- the different folks in the united states that identify as latino or hispanic or both that maybe their parents or they themselves came from another country just like you would find differences of folks from different countries. the hispanic community in the united states comes from many different countries. so many we have many, many differences. we have different words for hings. some of those differences are music. some of it is food. some of it is communication style. some of it is actually cultural. i mean, i think that's not
really the most important issue when we talk about the community in the u.s. i think one of the very important lessons that i have learned is that i don't identify as cuban. i am not cuban. i am an american, you know, and i think even though my parents are cuban, my culture is cuban, you know, i speak spanglish, i dance salsa, i love pitbull. he's great. i am american and i vote american. in the work i do i represent americans. we can get into the nuances of culture. i myself have also been able to travel to the desert southwest and interact with many mexican american communities. now i love spicy food, you know, so i -- now i love the spicy food and i love different aspects of that culture as well. and i just don't think that's the most important thing. i think the most important thing is to understand that within the full range of cultural diversity in the
community, at the end of the day the community identifies as american. and i think when we approach voters in american elections we have to understand that that is ultimately the thing that binds us all. james: so let me say at our next panel we have one of the nation's leaders on this topic of variation of attitudes by different kinds of latinos, hispanics in america, matt bareto and also gary at stanford who's been here frequently. surveys latinos and his websites gives you differences of different kinds of populations including second and third generation of cubans is different than first generation of cubans, as you well know. let's go to another question. >> my name is carlos vera. i'm in the school of public affairs. this question is for neri and glen. what i got from this is republicans can do a good job
statewide now so much in the federal level because you mention that susannah sandoval and -- sorry, the governor sandoval and has done a good job within the latino population. he's modern. you see someone like marco rubio who was a gang of eight leaders and he's done a 180. it kind of says, ok, maybe statewide you can be for immigration reform but when you're at the national level you're clashing against the base. you're talking about the to the tea party base. so what do you do there and just to glen, you mentioned that it's annoying when democrats say, oh, well ted cruz is not a real latino. for me it's kind of insulting because your name is rafael and you're changing it to ted. you say you love latinos and then one of your campaign co-chairs is steven king who compared us to dogs. so do you want to answer that? glen: i'm not sure i heard the last question. the question i heard about --
that i heard was, why do republicans have challenges more on the federal level, what the challenges facing the party are. and i think professor karl did a pretty good job -- karol did a pretty good job laying those out. look, i don't think that king's right. i mean, he's wrong. and that kind of rhetoric has no place in american -- not just politics but culture or decency whatsoever. just, you know, one person saying something stupid doesn't brand an entire party. but the party has to fight back against that kind of rhetoric. >> i'm agreeing with you. if i'm ted cruz, i'm latino, right? i'm trying to win latino votes. i was -- he spoke in front of the hispanic chamber of commerce. saying words in spanish and four months later you decide to -- steven king is one of your
campaign co-chairs. what many does that say? that's my-month-point. glen: it's a good one. in terms of him changing his name, i don't know the history of that. look, there are tons of americans from all walks of life who've changed their name. i don't know about that either. >> or nicky. thank you. neri: your question exactly is at kind of message does -- can you -- explain your question. >> what will it take for the republican party to actually win in terms of the federal level, not just statewide? neri: ok. well, on the federal level, ted cruz and marco rubio are u.s. senators so they would have won statewide but at a federal level. in terms of the presidential, you know, i mean, that's another story. we haven't won these past couple presidential cycles and i think the republican party
has really done a deep dive and analysis on why and i think to the degree they can reach out to the voters that they need to reach out, they're doing everything they can to do that. and i think to the degree we can recruit more women and minority candidates to represent the republican party and also represent their communities, we're also doing that. i cannot speak for the decisions of any one particular hispanic candidate or not on terms of how they identify themselves and i wouldn't pretend to represent all hispanics in this country either. you know, but i think it's important to remember that in the places where the republican party feels they have some opportunity for growth, they're making very strong effort and having strong initiatives and actually funding these initiatives. these initiatives are unique to the republican party. there is no direct initiative, for example, to recruit and support women and minority candidates to the level that the future majority project is
engaged and even the growth and opportunity project to the level which they are engaged. there isn't anything on the other side. and so i think it's not just a talking point. i think they're investing significant resources. i think the republican party feels very strongly that there's room for growth and feels very strongly that with the right message and the right messengers that we can continue making gains. james: david, do you have a couple remarks? david: yeah, a couple things on questions that have been brought up before. these divisions on the basis of national origin and the latino community, it seems they are politically relevant. the cuban american community is a small minority. it's very prominent in florida and new jersey but it's a small minority of the overall latino community in the united states and yet both of the republican presidential candidates who are hispanic are cuban american. i don't think that's an accident. i think -- i don't know that with mexican american voters that would be all that helpful
if either one of them was the nominee which appears to be unlikely right now. and the other thing is we can again look at past examples of parties running somebody from an ethnic group without embracing policies preferred by the ethnic group and it really doesn't work. so the republican party has run african-american -- not for president but has run african-american candidates for high office, for governor in michigan and ohio and pennsylvania. for senate in maryland. michael steele ran against ben cardin people may remember and lynn swan ran in pennsylvania. and ken blackwell. that didn't make a big impact because they were not seen as representing the interests of the community. so i'm not sure that ted cruz running on build a wall would have a big positive impact for
republicans among latino voters were he even to be nominee which, again, seems pretty unlikely right now. james: so we have time for two more questions. one here and another one. neri: sorry, if i could add on the african-american side. so just for where we are right now, tim scott has been elected by voters in south carolina. a very rich african-american state. lieutenant governor boyd rutherford, also african-american, is the only african-american lieutenant governor in the country. also from maryland, a very rich african-american state. and i think, you know, you're going to see this trending further and more positively as we move toward the cycle. james: sir, your name please. >> sure. hi. michael mccarthy from the center of latin -- latino and latin american studies. so my question i think every personal on the panel could address perhaps from a different perspective and it has to do with this question about what it means when we talk about being latino.
for neri, how did you actually recruit a latino? who do you identify who and who is not a latino at the street level and looking for candidates? what is it, last name, census data, how do you in fact find these people? similarly for glen and david, i'm curious what the demographics are telling us at the macro level, if it's harder to track who latinos are and whether or not the assumptions that go into the latino votes still apply as immigration, demographic trends change, thanks. james: neri, would you like to begin? neri: in terms of recruitment, i don't -- latino and hispanic is a self-identifying moniker. i think people self-identify as hispanic and latino. i don't identify people as hispanic and latino. they identify themselves as that and i identify good candidates. in terms of the political
strategy of identifying candidates. first, we look at top targets, top target seats and top target races in the chambers where we're going to invest the most amount of resources which we feel like we can take from the democrats and that is to say we don't just recruit candidates for the purpose of recruiting candidates. we're recruiting candidates in the places in the places where we're most likely to win. because that's really makes the difference. in terms of that political strategy, i work -- have a 50-state strategy. i've traveled to 35 myself. i've traveled to a number of states a number of different times and i work with the caucus leaders who are doing the recruitment in states to identify what are the biggest targets, where do we need to recruit candidates, how do we find the best candidate, let's go get them. it's simple as that, that's the political strategy. and i think it's really important to find someone from that community. now, when we find the person from that community that identifies as hispanic or latino, and i do recruit an
all-diverse community as well. i also recruit african-american, arab ap, native nation, etc. -- asian, native nation, etc. yeah, we look for the best candidate that represents the district and we try to bring more diversity to the ballot and we try to bring more diversity to the legislature and i think republicans and the states generally love this initiative and are very supportive of it. james: and do you get outside support from other groups in your efforts and resources like super p.a.c.'s and others? neri: no. the republican -- no. we do not coordinate. we're -- we are our own separate organization. james: david. david: i just want to say that i think the work that neri is doing is very important. what political science research tells us, including the work of my former colleague and eric and jennifer lawless is recruitment is very important n the decision of political --
to take the stand and be candidates. that's important for women than men. men with more willing to put themselves forward and actually to believe they're qualified when maybe they're not so qualified. at the same level of kind of educational credentials, women are less likely to think they're qualified. i think candidate recruitment is very important and i think as a student of parties, i've seen that -- the organization that neri's part of and democratic state focused groups are really modern developments. i mean, 30 years ago this really wasn't happening in a serious way and state party campaign committees have developed in a way that wasn't true decades ago either. so recruitment efforts exist and they are important. but i do want to emphasize this. that as long as a community believes that a party does not represent its interests on policy, it's not a question necessarily of whether these
individuals are authentic representatives of the community. if people can say they're unauthentic, it's because they don't think they represent the policies the community wants. so i believe these are laudable efforts and in the long term they will probably help the republican party by creating a farm team of potential candidates but i don't think that just having candidates of a certain ethnicity is the -- is going to be a solution, whether we're talking about reaching out to latino voters or african-american voters or any other group. james: thank you very much, panelists. i'm sorry we're out of time for another question. please ask our panelists a question during the break. we'll take a four-minute break between the next panel to set up here. it's the democrats and the latino advantage. matt wright is moderator. thank you. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] james: that's for the great questions. five-minute break, ok.
>> virginia is one of 12 states taking part in today's super tuesday voting and the "usa today" is reporting that hillary clinton and donald trump is leading in those states. hillary clinton leads bernie sanders in virginia by nearly 20 points. northerly 20 delegates are up for grabs holding democratic votering today. -- voting today. >> well, the house judiciary committee is looking into weather apple should unlock iphones and other devices for law enforcement investigations. apple's top attorney will testify along with f.b.i.
director james comey. c-span3 will have live coverage beginning at 1:00 eastern today. on c-span2, live coverage at 1:15 eastern of a memorial service for supreme court justice antonin scalia. he's being commemorated by family members, supreme court justices, ruth bader ginsburg and clarence thomas long with former law clerks. again, that's at 1:15 eastern over on our companion network c-span2. u.s. house gavels in at noon eastern. about 12 minutes from now. we'll have live coverage as legislative work gets under way today. until then a discussion from today's "washington journal," looking at the super tuesday primaries and caucuses taking place today. examiner, he is a sr correspondent. to talk about super tuesday, the biggest day on primary calendars. any republicans named donald trump, is it more about that less about winning and more about surviving? guest: pretty much. it is about amassing delegates
and surviving the psychology of losing. what happens in these provincial races -- in these presidential races, and we have not seen one like this in a while, is you can have money behind you and supporters that stick with you, but the more somebody wins, the more voters start to look at the winner as somebody that they will support, that they can havet and the numbers shown with donald trump, that ,he more he has won presumptions about what his ceiling is in terms of public and support, i do believe there is still a ceiling there, but you see the numbers start to change and rank-and-file voters look at a race were somebody is winning and think of themselves this person must be acceptable and there is nothing wrong with this person and they are winning, and they want to be with the winner. ted cruz and marco rubio -- ted cruz needs to win texas, even
though he was still amassed 20 delegates and will be in the game, psychologically, he needs to win texas and i think you should win texas, that is what i'm expecting, but it is not a given. marco rubio's problem is he will not win any state today, he has to come in second place in a lot of places ahead of crews to show that -- ahead of ted cruz to show that he has the fight. that he can still try to set himself up from 1 -- momentum in florida for march 15, that is where he has to either win or go home. because the is such an unusual front runner, one of the things that gives candidates to drop out of the race for the time we get to march is the money dries up. , and then the supporters right unusual, forump is both ted cruz and rubio, the money is not drying up and the supporters are not drying up but
at some point, you have to win and a massenet delegates to push this thing to a contested convention. host: david drucker with us for the next 45 minutes. if you want to call in, our phones are open across the country. democrats, (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002. what does bernie sanders have to do after two straight losses in nevada and outer lineup to get back into this race -- in nevada and south carolina to get back into this race? guest: bernie sanders is not as strong of a challenger as he might be after new hampshire. the way iowa ended, he practically could've been a jump ball and clinton got the victory, but who knows? that he completely beat her in new hampshire and the pressure was on clinton in nevada.
she won by about six points. south carolina, she crushed him. now we get into super tuesday states where she should be a lot stronger. we have seen her vivid to some general election messaging. sanders, yournie want to block that and pull out a surprise victory or hold her really close. when you look at the electoral map and this is what democrats have been telling me a well back before the voting started, she was going to have trouble in iowa and new hampshire, but the expected her to recover once the rate -- once the race moved to the south and if she does not recover by then, there would be a panic, but she has recovered. you win, you look strong, and despite the scandals over her head, she looks really good and the more she wins, the more democrats who may not necessarily have been thrilled about her candidacy start to look at her and say, not my first choice for which i would've had more choices, maybe
thinking of bernie sanders, but she is not doing too bad. i will stick with her and i think that is what we will see coming out of super tuesday is in terms of voting, she is in a much better position than we thought just a few weeks ago. host: you mentioned the electoral map, take us through the map that is being tightly to the campaigns. that these are winner take all states today, but some of these have a certain threshold that candidates have to reach in order to achieve delegates. guest: i don't have it all in the back of my brain, but remember, when he states matters because of the psychology of winning and people start to ask you if you can't win a state, why are you still in the primary? but the way the primary calendar is set up in particular, all of the winners today are not going to win every delegate from each state, which means they will win proportionally. winning second or third still wins delegates which means you
come out of super tuesday where the front runner, although far ahead of everybody is not in a position yet to wrap this thing up. it is not a defect of victory. -- not a de facto victory. in both the first-place finisher and second-place finisher in texas, which are likely to be trump and crews or crews and trump, andd cruz and rubio, who will finish in third would also have to finish above .0% to get a share of delegates the -- donald trump got the -- i believe there is a 20% vote threshold. host: these are the calculations
taking place in campaigns, even if you come in second, you have to come in a strong second to be on the board. guest: look at where they have been over the past couple of days, where they travel to. host: linda is up first, california, democrats. caller: good morning. i was thinking about this election, and i kind of remember when i was in college, that i had to write a turn paper regarding morals versus morale and when you look to the -- listen to the republicans and loan from, i question, is the country now running on morality versus morals? that cannot be any idea of morals when you think of the three wives and we have to remember, he had his children by not one woman and when you denigrate and talk about races of people, this is now getting
down to what i'm saying, are we morally american country or are we running on the hatred of the morale of -- the people are facing now. versus hillary, i grant she is not the cleanest, but she did not divorce her husband and this is the one thing that sheblicans keep running, did not divorce her husband after all that she went through assistantly, when her , aberdeen, went through her promise -- problems with her husband, she encouraged that young lady not to divorce her husband. i go back to morales versus morals. host: morals and trustworthiness, how it is factoring into voters. guest: a lot of assumptions about how these primaries are going to play out have been turned on their head, not all of them but a lot of them.
lieutenant happening on the republican side is this desire for strong leadership and worrying about the details, later and i think one of the reasons donald trump has been successful in the primary so far is because you have seen on the right side of the voting letter, a -- you've also seen this on the left with a strong bernie sanders -- how strong bernie sanders has been and how much money he has raised, a real loss of trust in government and institution.
when people argue that this one is not really a democrat in this one is not really a republican -- maybe all of the ways in which i just candidates before aren't -- haven't been so helpful and i should try something different and for some people, it is that sort of speculation and for some people, they are worried on the direction of the country that is kind of what i call throwing a political hail mary. what have i got to lose because the smart people messed it all up so why are you telling me to vote for the guy -- maybe he has let's go to just waiting in pennsylvania. jeff, good morning. caller: i have been a trump
supporter since day one. i think bernie and hillary are socialists. usa today or something, someone wrote that blacks do not love donald trump. i think that is inherently racist. isn't something like that inherently racist to say blacks -- all blacks think the same? to me, that is racist. this is nothing against black people or any type of people, but why can't wait people have pride in who they are also? it is just saying you are proud of who you are as well. guest: this is going to be a challenge for trump and maybe it won't the. if you look at the uproar in the past couple of days, one day, he duke, the foreign
leader of the ku klux klan, and then he says he had never heard of them. what you had were republicans and conservatives freaking out of this, and running around scared to death that somehow the guy who will represent their point of view in the political arena can just say, of course i disavow the kkk, that is the most ridiculous thing i've ever heard, why would you bother asking me that. a lot of >> and we'll leave this "washington journal" segment here as the house is gaveling in. ur chaplain, father conroy. chaplain conroy: merciful god of the universe, we give you thanks for giving us another day. we hunger for your wisdom and pray that there might be an end to all hunger in our world