WARNING:  This post is one more data point by which readers can decide either this blogger sees things others do not or whether he lives in an alternate universe.

When someone says “power to the people,”  what they often mean is “power to my people.

Senator Joe Biden, Harrisburg, PA, 1974

When Biden secured the Democratic nomination for president, the question everyone asked was whether the moderate and progressive wings of the party would coalesce behind the former vice-president.  All the evidence from exit polling suggests this was never an issue and contributed to Biden’s carrying Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.  However, for me, the more interesting story is the two/two split among battleground states in the sun belt, which brings me back to then Senator Biden’s 1974 quote when he was the keynote speaker at the annual meeting of the Council of State Community Affairs Agencies.

Nine years later, when I was appointed director of housing and community development by Texas Governor Mark White, I learned first hand exactly what Biden meant.  The primary responsibility of the department I led was the annual distribution of more than $60 million in community development block grants and Section 8 housing subsidies among the 172 non-metropolitan counties across the state.  Many of these jurisdictions in East Texas had large African-American populations while those in South and West Texas, as one might expect, had largely Hispanic majorities.

Prior to relocating to Austin in 1983, I lived and worked in either Virginia, Maryland or Washington, D.C., all places where the term “people of color” was synonymous with African-Americans.  The Texas experience was an eye-opener.  The competition between black and brown Texans to see who stood on which rung of the social and economic ladder was fierce.  “Power to the people,” as Biden had observed, depended on who your people were.

Which brings me back to the 2020 electoral outcomes in Arizona, Florida, Georgia and Texas.  Here is my hypothesis.  During the campaign, the Democratic nominee was more closely tied to the Black than Hispanic community.  It started with South Carolina, where Black voters were rightfully credited with saving Biden’s candidacy.  During the summer, the distinguishing issue between Trump and Biden was their response to the Black Lives Matter movement.  And finally, the selection of Kamala Harris as Biden’s running mate was an affirming indication of Democrats’ stronger identification with African-Americans.

This is not a value judgment.  Whether real or perceived, the importance of Black voter turnout, especially in light of the lower participation rates in 2016, raised the question in some portions of the LatinX community, “What about us?  Maybe we need to look elsewhere for a champion.” (NOTE: LatinX now serves as the generic description for people of Hispanic ancestry regardless of gender or country of origin.)  The one exception in the sun belt battleground states was Arizona, a jurisdiction where the Hispanic population is seven times that of the Black population, and the lingering specter of Sheriff Joe Arpaio program of racial profiling and SB 1070 requiring police to demand papers of individuals suspected of being illegal immigrants pushed all people of color into the Democratic column.

Here is the empirical evidence that led me to that conclusion.

Arizona Population
Hispanic = 2,310,590/Black = 376.997
2020 Arizona Hispanic Vote
Biden = 63%/Trump = 36%
2016 Arizona Hispanic Vote
Clinton= 61%/Trump = 31%

Florida Population
Hispanic = 5,663,860/Black = 3,910,189
Florida Hispanic Vote
Biden = 52%/Trump = 47%
2016 Florida Hispanic Vote
Clinton= 62%/Trump = 35%

Georgia Population
Hispanic = 1,048,724/Black = 3,458,147
Georgia Hispanic Vote
Biden = 57%/Trump = 41%
2016 Georgia Hispanic Vote
Clinton= 67%/Trump = 27%

Texas Population
Hispanic = 11,529,578/Black = 3,739,221
Texas Hispanic Vote
Biden = 59%/Trump = 40%
2016 Texas Hispanic Vote
Clinton= 61%/Trump = 34%

One might argue that the narrow spread in Florida was due to the Cuban-American vote.  However, the same “Democrats are soft on Cuba” arguments were made in 2016 following reopening of the U.S. embassy in Havana, yet Hillary Clinton outperformed Joe Biden by 10 points among Hispanic voters.  The “Republicans care about us more than Democrats” mantra was made more credible when Governor Ron DiSantis chose Cuban-American Jeanette Nuñez as his running mate.

Bottom line?  In addition to threading the needle to keep both moderates and progressives in the fold, the Democratic Party has work to do in the LatinX community.  Of course, as I have said on numerous occasions, good governance equals good politics; therefore, programs and policies which benefit all people of color regardless of skin tone will go a long way toward achieving that goal.

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP