This is i think, as you all know, a place where Public Policy and research meet. I bring together the world of ideas with the world of policy action. Very happy that tim johnson, the director of the Latin American Program is here this morning. And also want to acknowledge sal low star who had a lot to do with the planning, and this is an event were cosponsoring with immigration works, to tamar a jacoby, and Arizona State university, working on the issues. I want to acknowledge cardenas, a former governor and distinguished mexican colleague and many other good friends. And mane others back at the Woodrow Wilson system. And dan, who is out of government and into this civilian life. Theres no doubt the latino vote was important in this past election. When we put this together we didnt foe how important. This was an event that ambulanced ahead of the elections themselves and we started with a question mark, and decided to keep the question mark on there only because there are many people that will claim that Election Outcomes were the result of different factors, but i dont think theres any doubt, and for anyone who watched endless hours of talk tv and talk radio, the days after the election, like me, knows there was probably no theme that came up more often than the importance of the latino vote. For many of us that followed these issues from some like roberto with great expertise, others like me, with much more general recall generality, for the past couple of decree okayed we said the latino vote is going to matter in the national elections. This is the year the latino vote comes home. I think after a while we stopped believing it. We figured some day it bill be divisive factor. The you can can make a plausible argument that in this election it really was a decisive factors, and we can ask, how much of a decisive factor was it . How much did it matter in the outcome. Not just the president ial rateraise but the congressional races and state races. Why was it such a decisive factor . Why now and not other teams times. How much was immigration policy factor in this . I think well hear from the panelists. These are actually different things, immigration policy has a different set of constituency, and to what extent did immigration policy play into this and are there effect ops immigration policy, and also ways that candidates approach issues that may affect the way different groups vote. Thats a specific question. The assumption is that immigration policy drove the latino vote in a lot of the general media. There may be much indirect correlation there which is how candidates and parties talk about immigrants overall, and latinos for the most part at this point have closer ties to an immigrant past or an immigrant present within families than other groups in u. S. Society, sow how can it approach immigrants rather than immigration policy may be decisive. There was a great commentary, a republican analyst who said, the Republican Party did really well on latino leaders but not on latino followers, and if you look at it in fact the two governors were latino in this country are both republican. Who of the three senators who are latino are republicans. Republicans have not down so badly on recruiting latino politicians. We could not have said ten years ago democrats were on their ware but the republicans have caught up. And its catching up relative the support they have gotten from the latino electorate. So is there a difference between latino leaders and supporters. Does this look forward the fact that the Republican Party is getting ahead of the game and will do better in the future, othe fact the republicans have made inroads and still unable to attract latino votes and the converse for democrats. Can the feel its a strong base of latino voters or should democrats be worried that in the long term republicans may eat their lunch. And i think these are things youll hear different perspectives from the group. Now that i have made time for some of you to arrive, let me turn it over to the real host here, and before i do that, let me acknowledge those who came in actually. Good to see you. Thank you so much, thank you for coming and thank you for being on time. Im tam mar jacoby, president of immigration works u. S. A. A National Federation of employers, mostly Small Business owners, working for better immigration law. Were the advocacy side of this trio but not wearing our advocacy hat today. Very pleased to cohost this with Woodrow Wilson center and Arizona State university. So thank you to sin thea, or all lies at asu who are not here, were grateful to general consul jose card necessary and Vice President jim obryan who made this happen on asu, and very grateful to my team. So, i think the andrew framed the issue very nicely for us. We dont need too much more of that. The frame that says it all in my view is 7127. 71 and 27 , the president ial vote margin, and its not just incredibly lopside, president ial vote margin. Its a president ial vote margin in in nations Fastest Growing votingblock, voting bloc likely to double in size over the next 20 years ump you heard me right. Double in size by 2030. Anybody who didnt realize, a lot of republicans out there anybody who didnt realize the latino vote was important before november 6th, probably knows by now. Although i think its true, what andrew said. Many of white house knew it would be important didnt really know how important and how significant and how stunning in effect it would be. No matter what the numbers were, how it would make an impression on the public and the Political Class this time. Certainly when we planned this event, as andrew said, we had no idea how much attention the issue would get in the days after the election, and i think we thought we would come on kind of a blank slate and talk about how many people voted where and we would kind of say its going to be important Going Forward. Obviously our job is harder now because you have already read those stories in a way that gives us and our panelists room to dig a little deeper, to look into the future, to think about significance and to talk about choices that lie ahead that we might not have done if the issue hadnt gotten so much attention in the last couple of weeks. So, the morning is divided into two sessions. The first is a conversation about arizona, narrowly focused on arizona. What exactly happened in arizona. And that needs a. Built of an explanation or disclaimer. Arizona was a little bit of an anomaly this time. Latinos made up 18 of the people who voted in arizona, so one of the states with the biggest latino vote, but obama didnt carry the state. In fact, romney won big. The latino Democratic Senate candidate, richard carmona, didnt win. And sheriff joe arpaio, surge of immigrants, legal and illegal, did win reelection comfortably. So not exactly what you expect with the latino vote, didnt translate into votes. We think theres a lot to be said about arizona and i wont steal the fire of the people who are going to say it. We obviously are looking at it in particular because of the asu connection but theres a lot to learn. Its a very interesting microcosm. So the first panel is about arizona with that kind of just to be aware of that disclaimer, somebody not saying arizona is typical. The second section will zoom out, pull back from arizona and look at the big picture, the scope and significance of the latino vote nationally. And ill say more about that when the time comes. But for now, i want to thank you all for being here and lets get going. Im going to hand the stage over to steven dinan, who is going to conduct the conversation about arizona with rudolpho espino, an associate professor in the school of politics alta at asu. So the. Thank you. So, good to have you here. Im stephen dinan, politics editor at the washington times. I believe what if she said. You can learn a lot about in the National Stage from immigration conversations and the latino voter in particular, from what went on in arizona, particularly the counterfactual explosion of the limits of test the limits of what we can learn about latino voters and their effect on electoral politics and on policy. So, i guess id like to start with just sort of a basic question. If somebody were to ask you what a the white voter is, i would have no clue how to actually answer that question. So, lets start with the very tough one, which is what is the latino voter . What is a latino voter, in particular, what is the latino voter in arizona . Who is he or she . How much of the electorate, how much of the population, the citizenry, who is that person . Okay. As many in the audience already know, the latino population in the its is very diverse. Various origin, Mexican American primarily, also cubans and Puerto Ricans. In america the latino population is primarily mexican origin. But one thing that is unique about the latino population in arizona, a lot of them are recent arrivals. Not necessarily foreignborn but have might grated from, say, california, texas, new mexico, because of Job Opportunities in arizona over the last decade or so. But thats not unlike perhaps the white population, too. Its very hard to find native arizonans. So, a lot of the people there are transplants from elsewhere and i think that explains a lot as to why the latino voters are still the Sleeping Giant in arizona. We saw them surge in new mexico and of course colorado and nevada, but in arizona theyre still asleep some people ask why. I think in part its because they have not established rooting, the roots in the Community Like in, say, california or texas. Go into the numbers a little bit. What percentage of the population we heard the percentage of electorate. Give us a sense of the percentage of the population, what they growth rate, expansion. In arizona, approximately onethird of the population are hispanic background. But when we take into consideration the qualifications to vote, the voting age population, only have 25 eligible to vote in terms of being over 18. But of that population, onethird are disqualified from participating because of their citizenship status. So that whittles the numbers down dramatically so you really only have 15 of the electorate being registered of registered voters being hispanic. What are the projections for, say, the next two decades or so . Well they double . What are they going to do . Yes, demographic trends in arizona suggest that latino populations will theyll be a much large share of the electorate in elections to come. But one thing thats important to keep in mine in arizona is not just what the latino population is like but who is the white population in arizona . The white population in arizona is a much older population than, lets say, white populations in other states you. Have a lot of snow birds, retirees coming there. So one thing you have to take into account is the electoral population is aging, you have an older white population not replacing itself and is dying off. So that replacement of latinos into the electorate will, i thinkprobably happen a lot fastener arizona than we have seen in other states. Lets get into who the what the latino voter in arizona cares about. I guess, give me a sense for we heard from andrew theres been this latino voters theres definitely at lot of nuance. What are the issues for arizonans and do we believe what they tell pollsters . I guess deal with both of those. Theres question about polling and particularly among latino voters in particular. With respect to latter question i refer to any members of the audience that want to get good insight into the mind of latino voters, i refer them to latino vision. Com, that does polling of la latinos in arizona and a lot of the numbers come from there now, with respect to the concerns of latino voters. Latino voteres are not unlike other vetters in the country. Over the last couple years one of their primary concerns has been the state of the economy. Of course, their position on how to fix the economy is different, and its along partisan lines but choice related is Immigration Reform and in arizona latino voters show more concern over Immigration Reform than, say, latinos in other states, in part because of what has been happening in arizona. Arizona is famous for or infamous for the passage of sb1070 and that has remain passed in the spring of 2010 but the drum beet of sb1070 remained in the news over the last couple years and was helped with the recent Supreme Court ruling and latino activists on the ground, speaking to get latino voters registered and turned out to vote and they used the issue of sb1070 as a galvanizing lightning rod to get them mobilized. I think the we were talking earlier about the comparisons of polling from a number of states. Latino polling looked a was it preelex polling . Looked at a number of states and arizona and North Carolina both were the ones that had that distinction, i guess, of immigration versus the economy and whatnot. Do you draw any significance from that versus the other states they looked at . I think that presents an opportunity. As tamar mentioned there was expectations on latino votersor, gore going to get a latino elected to u. S. Senate from arizona and perhaps arpaio will be gone now. That did not transpire but you look at the coaches latino voters in arizona, and theyre split 5050, 47 , 48 , are saying the economy is important. 47 saying Immigration Reform is important. Thats at the forefront and that is going to remain up there because the latino activists on the ground registering latino voters are still going out there and using that as a talking point to get them out to the polls. Ive been dancing around this question. Why did arpaio win . What happened in arizona this year . What was the difference between arizona and other places where we believe latino voters and particular issues they promoted carried elections. When it comes down to it, why did arpaio win . It was money. He raised approximately 8 million for his campaign. For a county sheriff seat. Blew all records out of the water. Do we know what the previous record was . Maybe two million. Im not sure, but it was hand over fist money and he used almost all of it for campaign ads, and now phoenix is not an expensive media market. His opponent, democratic opponent, had about six to eight hundred thousand dollars on hand. So it was unfair for the democratic candidate. The other thing that signals the latino vote did make a difference was how arpaio changed his campaign ads. In the past he talked. How he was tough on the border, tough on immigration. Hi added shifted tone, what political scientists refer to as rather than issue oriented it became warm, fuzzy biographical ads. They featured him with his wife, who we have never seen before really, talking about his 50 years in law enforcement, how he is a grandmother, grandfather, cares about children. Who doesnt care about children. So very much shifted the tone. I think the recall of russell pierce sent a signal to a lot of elect republicans in arizona that if you continue to march down the road of scapegoating latino voters they can turn out and vote you out of office, as we saw of russell pierce who. Who was the author of sb10700 . Do we know anything about the votes in the that election. What im hearing from people who are active in mobilizing latino voters, they did break records in terms of getting more latinos registered. There was a 40 increase in the number of latinos registered from 2008 to 2012. And, of course, that results in more latinos turning out for the vote. So one this thing these activists did was educate latino voters, educationing them on how to vote and how to vote in arizona because we have a mailin ballot process and a voter i. D. Law in place so a lot of organizations were educate latino voters, it may be easier to sign up on the mailin list so you dont have to deal with identification if you dont have the proper i. D. And choose to vote in person. I think that explains why there were so many mailin ballots cast in the general election in 2012. I want to get back to the senate race but stick with the voter i. D. Requirements. Talk about the restrictions, what exactly the requirements are, and in particular theres been this discussion at the National Level about republicans are using voter i. D. Requirements to tamp down on voter turnout from certain areas. What are the concerns . How is the latino populationlatino voters in arizona how are they dealing with that . Are there problems . Is there going to be a battle over trying to tight the voter i. D. Requirements . Is it a photo i. D. Requirement . Really quickly. Arizonas voter i. D. Law was put voted on by the citizens of arizona back in 2004 with proposition 200. It was challenged in federal court. And it was shot down at the district level and it was going to be put on appeal but the Marion County indiana case rendered that moot. The decision in which indiana has a tougher i. D. Voter law than arizona so challenge to arizonas voter i. D. Law were dropped. Basically requirements you have to have a picture i. D. Not a state drivers license, for instance, and the important thing is that your address youre registered to vote at has to match the address on the identification. So this hits populations that are more mobile than others, younger than others, and thats latino voters. Is there a sense that this was targeted towards latino vote or a sense it will be used to try to tamp down on latino votes in the future . Well, the initial challenge is you had challenges being filed by the Navajo Nation bought is faked them. They actually settled out of court with the state of arizona and there were exceptions given to them about Navajo Nation i. D. They could use to vote but latino voters the lawsuit was filed and the evidence they were bringing to bear was showing there was a dropoff in latino Voter Registration following the implementation of prop 200. But as