Latinos in 2012: Vote out Loud!

With a new holiday season kicking in and facing a last push to get a vote on the DREAM Act, the November 2^nd midterm elections seems like a distant memory. The results show the growing influence of Latino voters in swing states like Florida and New Mexico. They also secured key races for governor and the U.S. Senate in California for the Democratic Party by repelling GOP advances in the state with most Latinos in the nation. Most notably, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) retained his seat by winning over Tea Party favorite Sharon Angle thanks to  “her inability to stop saying crazy things” like advising young rape victims to make “lemons into lemonade.”

Despite these important milestones, campaigns from grassroots organizations like the National Association of Latino elected and Appointed Officials (NALEO), the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), and the National Council of La Raza (NCLR) among others, left the aftertaste of being too little too late. They were effective, no doubt about it; however, they failed to motivate Latinos voters to achieve their true electoral potential. According with the Pew Hispanic Center, Latinos represented the same eight percent of all voters in 2010 as they did in 2006. However, the number of eligible Latinos to vote this year grew to approximately 19.2 million voters from an estimated 18 million in 2006.

As the national Spanish-speaking media started to turn up the volume and “banging the drum of [the] ‘you have to go vote, you have to go vote,’” the enthusiasm among voters picked up traction starting only until the first week of October, Latino Decisions reported. Once the campaigns were in full swing, social media also played a key role on reaching wider audiences. On November 28, Latinos in Social Media (LATISM) invited Univision’s Martin Berlanga to participate in a Twitter party on the importance of voting for Latinos. The tweetchat achieved an impressive 8.1 million impressions in one night, according to LATISM’s Vice-Chair Elianne Ramos.

(For the not social media savvy, impressions means how many times people saw tweets about the party’s hashtag.)

They all seem like successfully calculated efforts given the positive election results against the most radical anti-immigrant candidates. However, imagine what they could have accomplished if the media heavyweights had devoted their full resources to these campaigns way earlier in the game. This fast-and-furious approach didn’t spark enough interest among many freshmen citizens who may suffer psychological roadblocks thanks to years of discrimination and disenfranchisement. Let’s not forget that the naturalization process is long, hard, and expensive plus many have to deal with their own negative preconceptions on civic participation. Also, the high educational gap between Latinos and Whites remains disadvantageous against the former.

For the 2012 presidential elections, we should expect that the traditional political parties will diligently work to enfranchise Latinos. However, neither party seems to have even a remote idea on how to tally our votes. Right now, they are busy putting down their own fires rather than making a sincere effort to reach out. Democrats have lost their luster with the electorate and face an uphill battle to reelect President Barack Obama on 2012. On the flip side, Republicans remain overconfident between their trepid loses and surprising gains thanks to a new lot of conservative Latino politicians. For illustration, read the opinion from Representative (TX-R) Lamar Smith and a counter argument from columnist Edward Schumacher-Matos on the Washingtonpost.com.

So what to do next? As NCLR’s Director for Immigration Clarissa Martinez-De-Castro writes, a “meaningful outreach is essential.” For sure, both parties will make their best effort to win the Latino vote; at the same time, grassroots leadership must capitalize on their media partners’ increasing clout. Univision is already the number five national network in the nation and seem poised to “surpass the Anglo networks in seven years, even without the boost provided by growth in the Hispanic population,” AdWeek reports. What a better opportunity to rev up their campaigns starting today and entice every able Latino to go out and vote.

This article was originally published in the LatinoPoliticsBlog.com.

Obama and Uribe Talk Trade and Term Limits AS/COA Online 06/30/09

Presidents Álvaro Uribe and Barack Obama met at the White House on June 29. (AP Photos)

Colombian President Álvaro Uribe met with his U.S. counterpart Barack Obama June 29 to discuss the future of the stalled free-trade agreement and Uribe’s political future. At the meeting, Obama praised Uribe’s achievements on improving security and his fight against drug cartels. The U.S. leader even joked about how difficult it would be to match Uribe’s 70 percent approval ratings after two terms in office. Still, Obama advised Uribe against running for a third consecutive presidential term and used U.S. President George Washington’s experience as an example of statesmanship: “[A]t a time when he could have stayed president for life, he made a decision that after service, he was able to step aside and return to civilian life. And that set a precedent then for the future.”

Obama’s counsel for Uribe to avoid a third term through constitutional change coincided with world attention on Honduras. A day earlier, a coup occurred in the Central American country after Honduran President Manuel Zelaya, planned to go forward with a referendum deemed illegal by the country’s main institutions. Obama expressed his support for democratically elected Zelaya and described the overthrow as “not legal.” Colombia also rejected the coup.

In Colombia, a referendum to pave the way for Uribe’s reelection still faces hurdles in Congress and already shows signs of fatigue among supporters. Cambio magazine explains that the chances to approve the legislation are slim, even with Uribe spending his political capital to move it forward. But Semana magazine says, “Uribe has radicalized his position about the referendum,” and that he sees it “as a matter of pride.”

The pending bilateral free-trade pact was also a central conversation point for the two leaders during their White House meeting. Obama offered his support for the deal but explained that concerns linger in U.S. Congress over human rights violations against Colombian labor leaders. At the summit, Uribe said that “we are very receptive to receive any advice, any suggestion that help us see how we can achieve our goals of zero human rights violations in Colombia.” After an event co-hosted by the Council of the Americas at the Wilson Center on the morning of June 30, Uribe said he had found Obama “more disposed and interested” in the trade deal. COA’s Eric Farnsworth blogs for Americas Quarterly, the two leaders’ meeting shows “that the bilateral agenda with Colombia goes well beyond passage of one agreement, as important as that is, and that the U.S.-Colombia relationship is strong and enduring.”

Learn more:

• COA Vice President Eric Farnsworth’s AQ blog post about Obama’s meetings with Uribe and Chilean President Michelle Bachelet.
• AS/COA coverage of Uribe’s dilemma about his second consecutive reelection.
• Americas Quarterly’s web exclusive about whether Uribe will seek reelection.
• Transcript of Obama-Uribe press conference following their June 29 meeting.
• Colombia’s constitution.
• Text of the pending U.S.-Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement.
• Semana analysis of U.S.-Colombia relations.

To Run or Not to Run: Uribe’s Question AS/COA Online 05/21/09

President Uribe still ponders a possible third term. (AP Photo)

Colombia’s Defense Minister Juan Manuel Santos steps down from his post on May 23 to become a presidential candidate for the 2010 elections. But there’s a catch: He’ll only declare his candidacy if President Álvaro Uribe chooses not to run for his second reelection. In an interview with Caracol Radio, Santos said that “he had the hunch that Uribe may not run” but that the president may not make his decision until October. Moreover, Colombia’s Senate approved legislation this week allowing a public referendum on whether President Álvaro Uribe should be allowed to run for his second consecutive reelection. The president may be delaying his decision in order to make the opposition seem weak and divided, thereby giving his party a boost on election day.

When Semana picked Santos as Colombia’s 2008 person of the year in December, the minister was already acting like a candidate on the road, offering gifts in various communities and inviting journalists to follow. In an interview with Cambio magazine this week, Santos reiterated his loyalty to Uribe and to upholding his democratic security policies if elected. Still, Santos finds himself competing for second place in popularity standings with former Medellín Mayor Sergio Fajardo. Other presidential hopefuls include former Agriculture Minister Andrés Felipe Arias, Ambassador Noemí Sanín, and the leader of the Cambio Radical political party Senator Germán Vargas Lleras.

During a September 2009 AS/COA luncheon, Uribe stated that “Colombia needs to reelect policies, not people.” Yet, eight months later, he remains ambiguous about his intentions. His approval ratings run above 70 percent and polls indicate he would likely win reelection. The Senate bill approving a reelection referendum earlier this week was passed by a 62-5 vote, though more than two dozen members of the opposition refused to participate. The bill needs to be reconciled with one from the house, then evaluated by the Constitutional Court. After clearing those hurdles, the referendum may be scheduled for some point in the fall.

Uribe’s popularity appears to stem from the fact that his administration oversaw the significant weakening of the Armed Revolutionary Forces of Colombia (FARC) and a period of economic renewal. In contrast, his high ratings have not been significantly damaged by recent wiretapping scandals involving Casa de Nariño and the Supreme Court, a cooling economy, or the extrajudicial killings of civilians by members of Colombia’s armed forces. “It may just be that they’re drinking Uribe’s Kool-aid,” comments the Latin American Thought blog in an analysis of recent poll data. The blog also suggests that Colombians place higher value on their security and economic issues than on democratic freedoms.

The idea of a third term for Uribe is a source of controversy for many. The Christian Science Monitor raises the question of whether Uribe is “following [Venezuelan President Hugo] Chávez’s footsteps?” In response, “Uribe has said he is only interested in seeing continuity for his security policies, but he has also hinted that he is the best one to do it,” the Monitor adds. Miami Herald’s columnist Andrés Oppenheimer says that Uribe should not run because “he would lose all moral authority to criticize Chávez and other elected autocrats who see themselves as ‘indispensable men’ and who end up destroying their countries’ institutions. There is no such thing as a good dictator, and Uribe would not be an exception to the rule.” The Economist reflects on the good and bad of Uribe’s two presidential terms but says: “If he doesn’t quit while he is still ahead, history may judge that Mr. Uribe began to undo his own achievement.”

Read the article as originally posted at the AS/COA website.

Panamanians Seek Economic Boost at the Polls AS/COA Online 4/30/09

Panamanians choose a new president May 3. (AP Photo)

Updated May 4: Around 2.2 million Panamanians  registered to vote in the presidential and legislative elections on May 3. They chose businessman Ricardo Martinelli from the Partido Cambio Democrático (CD) over the candidate of the ruling party Partido Revolucionario Democrático (PRD) Balbina Herrera, a former housing minister. A sagging economy, rising crime, and corruption allegations weakened popular support for the PRD and bolstered Martinelli’s popularity ahead of Sunday’s election. As the clear winner, Martinelli will oversee the country as it faces economic challenges and a multi-billion dollar expansion of the canal.

His rival was the first female presidential candidate chosen by the PRD. She hoped to get a boost from the popularity of President Martín Torrijos, who enjoys a 57 percent approval rate. Torrijos won the 2004 presidential election with 47.4 percent of the votes. He also managed to win approval for a $5.25 billion expansion of the Panama Canal via referendum in 2006. Despite being more than 10 points behind Martinelli, Herrera assured in an interview with radio personality Dorita de Reyna that in the last month her campaign was better organized after a muddled start. But, as the Nica Times put it, Herrera’s “previous ties to incarcerated former Panamanian strongman General Manuel Noriega has raised more than a few eyebrows.”

On the other hand, Martinelli, a business tycoon who owns Panama’s largest supermarket chain Super99, is viewed as a more pro-U.S. candidate. In an interview with Miami Herald’s Andres Oppenheimer, Martinelli lays out some of his foreign policy proposals, from plans to press for U.S. Congress’ approval of the U.S.-Panama Free trade Agreement to aligning with Washington on Cuba and Middle East policy at the United Nations to strengthening ties with Colombia. Martinelli, who lost against Torrijos in the 2004 election, would seek approval of a flat tax rate, which would fall between 12 and 17 percent for individuals and between 18 and 22 percent for companies.

“Some observers have made the case that the population is growing restless for a return to economic growth and that, obviously, has political implications, including that the opposition candidate could win a decisive victory on Sunday,” says COA Vice President Eric Farnsworth, whose prior work with the State Department focused on Panama’s return to democracy. Echoing Farnsworth’s statement, Senior Brookings Institution Fellow Kevin Casas-Zamora writes that “the level of political discussion seen throughout this campaign simply does not befit a country with bright development prospects. More seriously, the [PRD] campaign has evinced the lack of institutionalization of political parties, the fickleness of political alliances, the chronic nature of corruption, and the disturbing, and mostly unchecked, role of money in the electoral process.”

Torrijos’ administration has overseen stellar economic growth rates with 11.5 and 9.2 percent in 2007 and 2008 respectively. But the UN Economic Commission for Latin American and the Caribbean forecasts that economic growth will only hit 4 percent this year. Still, that projection makes Panama the hottest prospect in the entire region.

The key for the country’s economic recovery remains tied to the future of the Panama Canal. In the first three months of 2009, total Canal transit declined by 1.4 percent while tonnage movement dropped by 3.3 percent compared to the same period a year ago. The waterway’s income represents 19 percent of Panama’s GDP and 28 percent of the government’s tax revenue. As the former Chair of the Panama Canal Authority, Martinelli is also seen as a safe bet to steer direction of the canal’s continued development.

More than 50 international observers have arrived in Panama to monitor the transparency of the vote. Panamanian newspaper La Prensa provides complete coverage of the election. Angus Reid Global Monitor offers a backgrounder of the vote.

COA’s Eric Farnsworth guest blogged about the Panamanian elections for Americas Quarterly. Read his analysis of what the election could mean for that country’s trade policy prospects.

Read the article as originally published at the AS/COA website.

Interview: COA’s Eric Farnsworth on Panama’s Presidential Election AS/COA Online 04/29/09

“Some observers have made the case that the population is growing restless for a return to economic growth and that, obviously, has political implications, including that the opposition candidate could win a decisive victory on Sunday.”

In an interview with AS/COA Online’s Carlos Macias, Council of the Americas’ Eric Farnsworth lays out what the results of Panama’s May 3 presidential election could mean for the country’s economy and for bilateral relations with Washington. He explains that Ricardo Martinelli, who leads in polls, “has always been able to navigate the very complicated relationship with the Unites States.” As an officer in the Department of State beginning in 1990, Farnsworth was involved with work focused on the reestablishment of democracy in Panama after Operation Just Cause.

AS/COA Online: Given the popularity that President Martin Torrijos enjoys as his term ends, why is the opposition candidate Ricardo Martinelli ahead in the polls over the candidate from Torrijos’ party, Housing Minister Balbina Herrera?

Farnsworth: I think for a couple reasons, not the least of which is that Panama’s growth has stalled dramatically. Over the past several years Panama enjoyed growth at 8, 9, or 10 percent annually, which was at times the highest in all of Latin America. Panama’s population enjoyed that and began to get a little bit used to it. But now with the economic crisis that’s impacting the entire world and Panama’s reliance on international trade for its own well being, growth figures for Panama have decreased quite a lot. Some observers have made the case that the population is growing restless for a return to economic growth and that, obviously, has political implications, including that the opposition candidate could win a decisive victory on Sunday.

AS/COA Online: If Martinelli wins on Sunday, what does it mean for the future of the U.S.-Panama Free Trade Agreement?

Farnsworth: It’s a promising sign because Martinelli has said publicly that he wants good relations with the United States and his record bears that up. He was a former government minister, he was a former chairman of the Panama Canal, and so he’s worked with the United States quite closely in the past. He understands the historical relationship with the United States and he is somebody who is business-oriented and has always been able to navigate the very complicated relationship with the Unites States.

I’m optimistic. I think that he has the right vision for relations if, indeed, he is elected. If he’s elected, I think it’s a promising sign for the bilateral relationship.

AS/COA Online: What would a possible Martinelli administration mean for further Panama Canal development?

Farnsworth: Again, I think it’s a positive, and the reason why is Martinelli understands very clearly the needs of the Canal and the needs of global commerce because he has been so directly involved with Canal issues for a long time. He is sensitive to the needs of the Canal and sensitive to the entire expansion project that’s going forward. Of course, the Canal is the goose that lays Panama’s golden eggs. He understands that it really is a key to Panama’s future. I don’t have any hesitation to think that if he is elected president that the Canal project would continue to go forward and would be a big success.

AS/COA Online: Where does Panama stand in terms of its relations with other Central American countries?

Farnsworth: Well, it’s an evolving relationship. Panama remains unique in many ways. One is the historical relationship with the United States. And traditionally it’s been a crossroads. It’s a crossroads for Latin America and it’s also a crossroads from east to west. So you don’t have the same type of economy or the same type of history as the rest of Central America or, indeed, South America. Panama has not yet worked out its own self-identity to understand if it really is part of Central America yet or if it’s more of an independent actor in the Central American context.

And that issue has real implications, for example, in the context of Central American trade. If Panama saw itself more as a Central American country it would already have a free-trade agreement already with the Unites States through the DR-CAFTA. So these self-image issues have practical implications for Panama’s position in terms of not just global politics, but global economics.

AS/COA Online: And what about its relationship with South America?

Farnsworth: I think the relationship is generally good. The relationship with South America at this point tends to be almost purely economic. Ecuador, Peru, and Chile are sending their products through the Canal to get to Europe and vice versa. You don’t have the same sort of political issues that you used to have, for example, when the United States controlled the Panama Canal Zone, or Panama was seen as some sort of imperialistic extension of the United States. At that point, the South Americans were skeptical of Panama, let’s put it that way. But since the turnover of the Canal in the end of 1999 the relationship has been built on economics and built on Panama as a maturing democracy and the relations with the rest of South America are generally pretty good.

There is one other aspect that needs to be addressed and that’s the narcotics relationship and that goes directly to Panama’s relations with Colombia. There’s law enforcement cooperation between the two countries as Colombian guerrillas have at times been across the border and taken sanctuary in Panama. But cooperation between those two countries in particular continues, and I think it’s a very good sign.

AS/COA Online: On a different note, what kind of growth prospects do you see for the tourism industry in Panama?

Farnsworth: I think the prospects for tourism in Panama are really quite good. Obviously with the global downturn, tourism generally worldwide has decreased but Panama has something that will always be of interest to international tourists—the Canal. To the extent that you have a strong cruise ship and tourist industry based on global economic conditions, I think Panama will always have a special place in the tourist trade. I think the government has really taken steps to try to build Panama as a tourist destination, not just a pass through. That will allow for even greater tourist revenues and an even stronger position for Panama in the global services economy. That’s really what the basis of Panama economy is of services, and tourism is certainly a part of the overall strategy.

Read the interview originally posted at the AS/COA website.