Posted by
CCBlogger on Friday, October 12, 2007 11:55:30 AM
I was on
NPR's Tell Me More with
Michel Martin this morning talking about the GOP Debate, and the "No Child
Left Behind" program.
You'll
be able to listen to the podcast later today right here.
Michel asked
how I thought the GOP line-up was doing in courting the Hispanic vote. Frankly,
considering the political climate with a large portion of the GOP base, it seems
to me they are taking a more low-key approach to Hispanic voter outreach. The
one candidate that seems to be doing the best is Romney, but its nothing
noteworthy. Overall, I thought the debate was a "safe" one with no one going to
deep.
We touched lightly on unions, and I mentioned how I thought all
the candidates seemed to be treading lightly with the unions, talking all about
how great they are. No one had the guys to point out the unions role in bringing
the auto industry to its knees as a result of HUGE expenses and costs. Oh,
well...that's politics, I guess.
Overall, I get a sense that most voters
of Hispanic heritage are going to respond to value issues, just like any other
voter. I didn't get a chance to mention this, but I certainly don't think
skipping the Univision forum did any damage.
I found some interesting
data from Pew that highlights what I think has the
potential to swing a lot of voters of
Hispanic heritage -- the moral, faith and family values issues. Considering
the threat from social conservative leaders to break ranks and go third-party if
Rudy wins the nomination, I suspect 2008 could be a bad year for the GOP as far
as the Hispanic vote. The one thing that can unify the Hispanic vote (Catholic
or evangelical) is strong stance on family, the defense of life, and the defense
of marriage. [bold is mine]
Hispanics
and the 2004 Election: Population, Electorate and Voters
...Religion appears to be linked to President
Bush’s improved showing among Hispanics in 2004 over 2000, when he
took 34 percent of Latino votes. Hispanic Protestants made up a larger share of
the Latino vote last year (32% in 2004 compared with 25% in 2000), and 56
percent of these voters supported the president in 2004, compared with 44
percent in 2000. The president’s share of the Hispanic Catholic vote remained
essentially unchanged
between 2000 and 2004.
I didn't get to talk about this, but I think its important to mention that not
all voters of Hispanic heritage are going to be against measures or candidates
considered to be in favor of more restrictive immigration policy.
2006 Election:
… almost half of Latino voters (48%)
in Arizona
also backed the referendum that made English the state’s official language.
Among all voters in Arizona,
that measure drew overwhelming support from those who said illegal immigration
was extremely important and from those who said illegal immigrants should be
deported. Again, almost one out of every two Latinos sided with an issue that
was heavily promoted by those in favor of a more restrictive immigration
policy.
On No Child Left Behind, I have to go with the expert opinion of those that
have studied the issue carefully.
According to a Heritage report by
Dan Lips and Evan
Feinberg, The No Child Left
Behind Act of 2001 dramatically increased federal spending on and authority over
public education in America.
Frankly,
when you consider the benefits when compared to the cost, its just not worth it.
I've been paying attention to the issue of education for many years, and it
seems the automatic solution to all education problems is "throw more money at
it." But, despite the billions spent on education in this country, our public
schools are getting worst.
As I told Michel, I like the
accountability aspects of No Child Left Behind, but not at the cost of more BIG
GOVERNMENT control and spending. [underline mine]
But with these Federal funding
increases has come an increased administrative burden on state and local
authorities.
Just in Virginia, it is estimated that the state
implementation costs totaled approximately $20 million per year.
I'll have to second Dan and Evan:
What we need is to
restore federalism in education, allowing state leaders to address local
needs and priorities while increasing accountability. Maybe this is a step forward?
Senators John Cornyn (R-Texas)
and Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) and Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-Mich.) are proposing to make
this option available to states in a plan called "Academic Partnerships
Lead Us to Success," or "A PLUS." It would give states the
opportunity to use federal resources on locally directed programs without the
administrative burden of federal program requirements. More resources would be
available for classroom expenditures and other education programs.
I always enjoy being on Tell Me More. Make sure to download the podcast.