Why Blacks and Hispanics Should Not Vote for Trump - The Racial Divide between Democrats and Republicans

If you are Black or Hispanic and you think Trump will fight for you, think again.  Read on.

Historically, there has been a sharp difference in the racial makeup of those voting for the two parties.  During the last 4 federal elections (presidential and midterm) this was again the pattern.  On average during these 4 elections,  62% of Democratic voters were White, 18% Black, and 23% Hispanic ; 87% of Republican voters were White, 1% Black, and 6% Hispanic.

As a point of reference, the national demographic is 62% White, 12% Black, and 19% Hispanic.   So Whites are proportionately represented in the Democratic party, with Blacks and Hispanics overrepresented.  Conversely, Whites are overrepresented in the Republican party, with Blacks and Hispanics underrepresented.

This will be no surprise to most observers.  Pundits note this difference all the time.  But they only talk about it in terms of whether the numbers are changing in a particular election and how this disparity impacts whether a candidate wins election.

The more critical question is what this racial divide indicates in terms of the parties’ reason for  being, their mission, their emphasis.  

As background to answering this question, a little history is necessary.  Prior to 1964 and the passage of civil rights legislation by the Democratic controlled Congress under President Lyndon Johnson, every Congressmen from the southern states was a Democrat.  This was a holdover from Reconstruction days when the Democratic President Andrew Johnson supported Whites in the South and stopped the integration of Blacks into the political and social structure of the South after the Civil War.  These “Dixiecrats” stayed with the Democrats even as the party moved towards more support for Blacks, but they blocked any move for broader civil rights.  

The passage of the CIvil RIghts Act of 1964 was the straw that  broke the camel’s back.  The Dixiecrats defected to the Republican party, thus creating the current dynamic of the clash between the two parties on all racially-related matters (this includes support for the poor who are disproportionately Black).  Prior to the inclusion of the Dixiecrats, the Republican Party was not ideologically against support for Blacks; for example, most of the northern Republicans in Congress (House and Senate) voted for the Civil RIghts Act.

With that as background, it is not surprising that there is not just a racial divide in terms of who votes for the two parties, but there is a real difference in the focus of the two parties, their view of the role of government, and the legislative measures they support.  Even pre-Trump, the Republican party was opposed to any government action to improve the lives of Blacks and the poor in general.  When it came to White “rights” v Black “rights,” their focus was on White rights regardless the impact on Black rights and the greater common good.  

The current Republican stance under the leadership of Donald Trump has taken that perspective and applied it to broader matters such as immigration.  He has also turned this perspective into a battle cry.  

However, with regard to working men, Trump has seen the advantage of taking a vigorous public stance in support of righting their grievances, which would involve government intervention.  But he did nothing while in office to follow through with those promises.  In terms of action, the Republican Party remains the party of business and the rich.  

His public stance is so vigorous, however, his rage in support of the working man so powerful that he has convinced not just White working-class men, but also increasing numbers of Blacks and Hispanics to vote for him.  Interestingly, this despite the fact that he rarely mentions Black or Hispanic causes and just addresses the general fears of the working class.  He has made himself into a populist figure who can do no wrong.

The point of this post is to make Blacks and Hispanics, and even poor and working class Whites, aware that the Republican Party and Donald Trump are not the answer to your problems.  Your best hope of improving your opportunities and status in life is to vote Democratic not just for President but for Congress (Senate and House) and local races as well.  If you elect a Democratic President, but the Senate or House is in Republican control, any effort by the President to pass legislation to improve your lives will be stopped by Republicans in Congress. 

Correcting the Perception of Poverty

Studies show consistently that most people, liberals as well as conservatives, think that most people living in poverty are Black.  More recently Hispanics have been included.  

Given the extent of racism in this country, whether subtle or violent, (see my post, “It Always Comes Back to Race/Racism”), it’s not surprising that support for anti-poverty programs is thus non-existent among the new right-wing Republican conservatives (the past attitude of noblesse oblige has disappeared along with moderate conservatives).  Liberals of course support such programs, although often one feels somewhat begrudgingly.  I must note, however, the cause of economic justice is rising among younger progressives who have grown up in a different era and are more free of any racist taint.

But this perception of poverty is fundamentally wrong.  While Blacks and Hispanics do have much higher poverty rates, there were more white people living in poverty (17 million) in 2017 than either Blacks (9 million) or Hispanics (10.8 million).  Combined they accounted for just 51% of people living in poverty.  Minorities have also historically accounted for no more of the welfare caseload than White families.

So in fact, anti-poverty programs help Whites as much as they help Blacks and Hispanics.  Why does this misperception of poverty continue?  The fault lies mainly with the media.  When it presents images of poverty, they are almost always that of Blacks or Hispanics.  The images from the depression, think the photographs of Walker Evans and Dorothea Lange, showing white Americans living in poverty, have very few equivalents in contemporary media.

Both government and the media must address this misconception.  Especially in this polarized age, having the correct facts is very important.

But it is also important that poor white Americans became more vocal in arguing for government help in bettering their lives and the futures of their children.  That should indeed be the goal of existing anti-poverty organizations, they should advocate for both people of color and Whites, that would only make their case more compelling.  When I googled to find organizations advocating for poor Whites I found nothing.

This is actually what is fueling part of the Trump base.  They are supporting Trump because no one else listens to them and no one else advocates for them.  Even though he really doesn’t.  And they have the same perception as most that anti-poverty programs are geared to help people of color, not them, even though they in fact do benefit.  And so they are against such programs, even though such action is against their own self-interest.  

Poverty should never been seen as primarily a Black issue.  Hispanics and Whites may feel more shame in accepting government help, but their poverty must be brought visibly and audibly into the public consciousness in a positive way.  If poor Whites, Blacks, and Hispanics aligned themselves in this common cause, they would present a very potent political force.

The Case for Compulsory Language Education for Immigrants

The functioning of a healthy democracy and society requires that all members of that society feel a part of it.  They can have complaints, arguments, but they need to still feel part of it.

There are several things that indicate I believe that we don’t have a healthy democracy at this point in our history.  The one is the percentage of people who don’t vote.  Typically 40-45% of the eligible voters don’t vote, even in a presidential election which gets the highest voter turnout.  Why?  People often say they don’t feel their vote makes a difference; in various ways they indicate they are politically estranged.

But when you look at who doesn’t vote … 20-somethings, Hispanics, and those making less than $30,000/yr are much less likely to register and vote than others … the more fundamental reason is likely that they don’t feel part of the system, part of society.  Why?  Because they don’t see themselves as benefiting from it.  That has to change.  But that’s a topic for another post.

Another, which has reached I believe a true danger point in the 2016 election, is that half of the population feels that it has no commonality with the other half.  I do not believe this is an overstatement.  I do not know if there has been any point in time, with the exception of the Civil War era, when the country has been so deeply divided.  It’s not that we haven’t often been divided 50/50, but the division has never been so sharp, the passions so visceral.

But in this post, I want to address another problem area … the percentage of Americans who can barely speak English, if at all.  America has always been a nation of immigrants.  In all the waves of immigration in the 19th and first half of the 20th century, immigrants settled in areas of a city or the country where other immigrants from their country lived and their native language was freely spoken.

But whether it was because they wanted to be proud Americans or whether they felt it was necessary if they were to get ahead in life, they made it their business to learn English.  The older generation might only learn to speak English haltingly and with a heavy accent, but the younger people always became fluent English speakers.

For most immigrants, this pattern of assimilation still holds true.  But it is not true for many Hispanics.  Why?  The main reason I believe is that there is so many of them that they comprise a culture unto themselves.  To the point that if they don’t get more than a high school education and work in the jobs available to that cohort, they don’t need English, or barely, to meet the requirements of their jobs.

According to the 2011 Census, sixty-two percent of Hispanics (not just recent immigrants; they have no published data on recent immigrants) spoke Spanish at home; the next highest were Chinese at 5%.  The other percentages are miniscule.  While the data make clear that the vast majority of Hispanics in this country, even those who speak Spanish at home, are fluent in English, a large percentage (25%) of those Hispanics who spoke Spanish at home did not speak English well or not at all, 

The actual number of Limited English Proficiency Hispanics is large enough that this weakens the health of our democracy because if you don’t speak the common, native language, then you do not feel part of the larger society.  You only feel part of a separate society.  

For that reason, while I am as liberal and progressive as one can be, I have always supported the proposition that immigrants must learn English to become citizens and that English should be the only language officially used … for example, on signage of all types, instruction on ATMs, elections materials, etc.  Obviously one can’t implement this “English only” standard at the current time because we have not had this education requirement.

One of the things I’ve done as a volunteer is tutor adult immigrants in English.  I’ve seen how hard it is for them to learn English.  First, it’s not an easy language.  But more importantly, they typically live in a household where English is not spoken and they associate with friends who don’t speak English, at least amongst themselves.  Many have not worked or were in menial jobs with other same-language immigrants.  

So they have lessons for an hour or two a week, but then they are immersed not in an English-speaking environment but in their native language environment, and so they make very slow progress.  (Interestingly, I haven't personally seen Hispanics in the programs I’ve been part of.)

To break this pattern, I suggest the United States needs to introduce compulsory language education for all new or recent immigrants under the age of, say, 60 who have not yet obtained U.S. citizenship.  And it needs to be sufficiently robust that it works.  It needs to be for several hours, several days a week, so that the new language can begin to take hold.  And it needs to be available at enough times so that it does not interfere with an immigrant’s attempts to find employment.

Luckily, we have an infrastructure of schools in every neighborhood in every city.  These public buildings typically go unused after the regular school day is over.  They can and should be put to use in the new compulsory language education program.

Yes, this will mean an added expense for government budgets, but it is I feel a critically important expense if we are to maintain both the health of our democracy and the character of this country.  We are not, like Canada, an historically bi-lingual country.  However, we have in many respects already become a bi-lingual country, not by virtue of the number of Hispanics who have immigrated here, but because we have not had in place systems and requirements regarding their learning English.

This must change.  And while I would not make it a requirement for those who have already become U.S. citizens, the government should make English courses readily available so that if a citizen wants to learn English, there are as few barriers as possible.

During this transition period, how should the existence of English/Spanish signage, etc., be handled?  I would suggest that after a one or two year “warning” period, all signage should revert to English only.  That is an important way of making this new requirement work.

It is important to note that this program would be targeted at and aid all immigrants in becoming productive members of our society, not just Hispanics.  I have tutored Asian and Arab immigrants.  They have been very motivated, but the obstacles to their learning English, as I indicated above, are substantial.

This proposal is not anti-immigrant and should not discourage immigrants.  It is also not against retaining immigrant culture (as a child of immigrants, I value that culture very much).  Instead, it shows immigrants clearly that we welcome you and want you to become a valued part of our country.  But that means learning the language so you can prosper and partake fully of what the country offers.