Though predicting the hot-button issues of the next presidential election can be more difficult than standing up an egg, I will venture to guess a few of the most popular items: Iraq, terrorism, immigration, and energy/environment. On each particular issue, it is hard to find a candidate who is more qualified on the issue than Bill Richardson, much less someone who can contend on all of them. Richardson, a veritable Benjamin Franklinesque jack-of-all-trades, is about as experienced as politicians come. He served in the House of Representatives for 14 years, as the United States Ambassador to the United Nations, as the Secretary of Energy, and most recently as Governor of New Mexico. As potentially important as Richardson's lengthy résumé is his heritage. Richardson is the only potential candidate from either major party to be Hispanic.
There is no doubt that the political clout of Hispanics is increasing rapidly. Hispanics accounted for half of all the population growth in the US over the past four years, now making up over 14% of the country. Just after 2000, Hispanics became the largest minority group in the United States. Their growth is substantial in many swing states, including Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, Nevada, Florida, and others. It is apparent why the Latino vote is becoming so important in American politics.
Capturing this emerging voting bloc will be a top priority for both parties in 2008 and beyond. Because Hispanic population will continue to grow, making in-roads now is critical for elections in the near future. In the current polarized electorate, it is not irrational at all to say that a Hispanic bloc, voting one way or the other, could tip the election. Here's how they voted in previous elections: in 2000, Latinos voted 62% for Gore, 35% for Bush. Bush then received a 9-point bump in 2004, capturing 44% to Kerry's 53%, though some say the actual numbers are closer to 40-60. Regardless, Bush made gains among Latinos, a fact that can not and should not sit well with Democrats. This was a significant number of votes Bush collected, considering the number of votes cast by Hispanics jumped 23% between 2000 and 2004.
The news is mixed for Democrats. Though part of the Hispanic vote slipped away from us in 2004, a critical mass of the Republicans' share came from the conservative-leaning Cuban-American population in Florida. Consider this: even though Kerry only won the Hispanic vote by 9 points, his share of the vote outside the Cuban-American-dominated Southern Hispanic vote was about 15-20 points higher, though still a loss of about 5-10 points from 2000. How do we make even further gains among Latinos and recapture our losses? Shortest, easiest answer is to nominate a Latino.
Nominating Bill Richardson would almost guarantee Democrats New Mexico, instantly put Arizona, a state that went to Bush by over 10 points, in the toss-up category, along with Colorado, Nevada, and Florida. All five states went to Bush in 2004, totaling 56 electoral votes. Perhaps even more importantly is the future these states hold. According to census trends, these states will collectively gain 4 electoral votes in 2012, 9 in 2024, and 16 in 2032. Putting these states in the blue column now and solidifying their support for the future would give a huge shot in the arm for potential Democratic nominees.
Along with being Hispanic, Richardson asserts a personality that, at its best, has been described as Clintonesque. As a large, boisterous politician, Richardson, a 58 year-old Roman Catholic, is heralded as a "throwback to an earlier political style, a back-slapping, wise-cracking politician who winks when he tells a joke and holds the world's record for most hands shook in a day: 13,834 (beating Teddy Roosevelt)." As much as Democrats may decry Bush's demeanor as smug, he is considered a charismatic, affable guy to millions upon millions of Americans, as evidenced by Bush's winning the presidential "Who would you rather have dinner with?" poll. Richardson, though his policies sharply contrast with Bush's, is not unlike Bush in demeanor, insofar as he is a genuine nickname-giving, life-of-the-party, captivating-leader type person.
However, Richardson's assets as a candidate reach far beyond his heritage and personality. His experience with foreign relations is unrivaled. Richardson, a four-time Nobel Peace Prize nominee, has been a chief negotiator for the United States, winning the release of Americans from countries like Iraq, North Korea, Cuba, and Sudan. In addition to constructing numerous international agreements as Ambassador at the UN, Richardson has kept up his international profile, particularly by meeting a delegation from North Korea in 2003 to discuss their nuclear weapons capabilities. Assuming that foreign policy is a big focus of the 2008 election, particularly if a major event like another terrorist attack happens or Iran develops nuclear weapons, Richardson's international experience will be worth its weight in gold. Imagine a former UN Ambassador debating a Republican about who is best qualified to repair America's imagine in the world and rebuild our alliances. Talk about your knockout punches.
Imagine further that oil prices have hit $75 per barrel and gas prices are breaking $3 per gallon in areas of the country. I would not want to be the Republican candidate who has to convince Americans that he is more qualified than former Energy Secretary Bill Richardson to address America's energy concerns. The fact is, Richardson puts potential opponents in this unenviable situation on a number of issues, based on his experience alone. His record as a politician is nothing to scoff at either. After being elected governor of New Mexico in 2002 by 17 points (17 points better than Kerry and Gore), Richardson, the only Hispanic governor in the US, garnered a reputation as a common-sense centrist Democrat, partly due to his pro-death penalty and pro-choice stances. Soon after taking office, Richardson turned a budget deficit resulting from one of New Mexico's worst governors, Gary Johnson, into a surplus. He then cut personal income taxes by over 3%, along with capital gains taxes, in order to spur growth and investment. This move helped Richardson earn the libertarian Cato Institute's highest rating of any Democrat on its fiscal-policy report card. Tax cuts weren't the only use of Richardson's new budget surplus; he also raised teacher salaries by 6% and invested in economic development in order to break New Mexico's reliance on federal funds. In addition to economic issues, Richardson has devoted considerable focus to causes such as environmental protection, health care (the perennial big-issue of presidential elections, yet little progress ever seems to be made), and education.
Though Richardson may at times seem like an ideal candidate, he has his share of drawbacks, too. He is not the most attractive guy, and though I've never personally heard him speak, he has not been described as a captivating speaker. Though again, I do not have personal knowledge of his oratory, as a matter of principle, I believe it is crucial for Democrats to nominate a charismatic speaker, someone more in the mold of John Edwards than John Kerry. Furthermore, Richardson does not seem to have a cult following like other potential candidates and he has yet to fire up the grassroots the way Howard Dean has done. Also, Richardson's seemingly endless résumé may not be of as much importance as it would appear as first glance. Perhaps one of the lessons of 2004 is that experience can be overrated (see Kerry's military service), particularly if it is the main asset a candidate is relying on, as opposed to his/her personality or plan for the future. Finally, some recent criticisms have been levied against Richardson, including his alleged imperial style of governing and a minor accounting scandal involving the construction of a new office.
While much has been made of Richardson's Hispanic background, some experts have argued against the presence of an emerging Hispanic political power. They claim that the large rise in Hispanic populations is misleading, because a great number are here illegally or are part of a Hispanic baby boom (neither group can vote). However, this fact alludes to another possible hot-button issue of 2008: immigration. As a governor of a border state, Richardson would have the immediate upper hand on the issue. His short-answer plan for immigration is to support Bush's guest-worker program and also enact an earned-amnesty program, whereby illegal immigrants would be able to meet certain criteria in order to be eligible for citizenship. Supporting a candidate like Richardson, even though the Hispanic-vote may not be as large today as it seems, would certainly solidify Democratic support among Hispanics, particularly for the next decade or two when Hispanic baby-boomers will become eligible voters. This is not solely reason enough to nominate Richardson for president, but it is worth keeping in mind when deciding which candidate to support. Furthermore, though only 18% of the Latino population went to the polls in 2004 (including those ineligible to vote), it is very likely that Richardson would mobilize Hispanics and their turnout would shoot up.
Richardson's strengths as a candidate are undeniable. He is a lock on many issues, from foreign affairs to energy, from health care to immigration, and his Hispanic heritage is not to be overlooked. Much of his viability in the primaries will depend on the result of his 2006 re-election race (he looks on pace to achieve a convincing victory after recently receiving a 63% favorability rating) and whether or not he is successful at pushing an eight-state Western primary early in the 2008 nomination schedule. However, as attractive his credentials may seem, his lack of oratorical charisma and his inability to inspire the Democratic grassroots makes it hard for me to support his candidacy during the Democratic primaries, largely because I believe he would serve the party better as a popular governor of a current red state or as a potential vice presidential candidate. He would be something of a Dick Cheney-type vice presidential selection; a knowledgeable, experienced man to balance out a potentially more likeable presidential candidate. Moreover, his Hispanic background would likely help out the Democratic ticket as much if he is the vice presidential nominee as if he is nominated for president. His heritage stays the same, his experience does not change, and yet his personal style would not be in the limelight. Sounds like a winning combination.
If you missed it, check out last week's profile of Virginia Governor Mark Warner.
Next week I will profile either Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer or Indiana Senator Evan Bayh. Anyone have a preference/request?