GOP Seeks New Image Among Latinos

Five years ago, at the state Republican Party convention, Ernesto Feliciano presented a proposition that seemed about as controversial as confetti. It had nothing to do with abortion, trade or any other issue likely to inflame party passions.

Rather, Feliciano offered a resolution, rich in rococo language, urging the GOP to expand its outreach to California’s vast Latino community.

The resolution was summarily shot down.

Opponents “felt the party shouldn’t be pandering to one particular group,” Feliciano recalled.

Last month, Feliciano and his fellow Latino Republicans tried again. This time, the state GOP convention passed their resolution unanimously. Delegates made only one change: instead of devoting a single week to registering Latino voters, as Feliciano proposed, the party voted to commit two weeks.

California Republican leaders are desperately seeking to recast their party’s image. Whipsawed by a fierce Latino backlash in November and troubled by evidence of a broader distaste for the politics of categories and confrontation, a growing number of GOP candidates, consultants and party strategists are questioning the price Republicans have paid for pushing so-called wedge issues such as illegal immigration and affirmative action.

All their discussion of outreach could prove nothing more than talk. But GOP leaders are also pledging specific action. Most notable, senior Republicans have informally discussed how to keep any socially combustible issues from appearing on next year’s ballot--a striking contrast to the GOP’s heavy involvement promoting Propositions 187, the 1994 anti-illegal immigration initiative, and 209, last year’s measure to end state racial preferences.

“We need a couple of years off from controversial initiatives in the area of race,” said one Republican Party official, who vowed to “do whatever I can to sidetrack” any such ballot issues.

“It doesn’t matter whether they’re good on the merits. You have to weigh the effects it has on our society to have as much racial controversy as we’ve had.”

Without retreating on substance, many GOP insiders criticize the language and tone that prominent Republicans used to promote Propositions 187 and 209. “In some cases, we came across as mean-spirited and exclusionary,” said Republican consultant Ray McNally.

Moreover, many in the party fault the GOP and its candidates for doing a far better job of saying what they are against than stating what the party stands for.

“There has been a missing element in both the debates over illegal immigration and affirmative action,” said Dan Schnur, a Republican strategist. “If you talk about cracking down on illegal immigration, you have to act in support of legal immigration. If you criticize racial preferences, you have to outline what alternative programs are going to look like.”

Although few care to say it outright, the criticism amounts to an implicit repudiation of the strategy Gov. Pete Wilson used to help rescue his political career. Effectively, the new tone hastens the shift in focus away from the lame-duck governor to the next rung of state party leadership.

As one Republican tactician put it, “With a new generation stepping forward, it gives us a new opportunity to begin saying things differently.”

That new attitude, along with vows to target minority areas and the appointment of a new Latino liaison, are not altogether altruistic. The party has grown mindful of how inflammatory issues such as race and immigration can end up burning its candidates.

Latino voter turnout surged dramatically in November, as Latinos and Asian Americans flocked in droves to support Democratic candidates up and down the ballot. The mass exodus of Latino voters in particular cost the GOP seats in Congress and gave Democrats renewed control of the Assembly.

Ground zero was Orange County, where Democrat Loretta Sanchez pulled a stunning upset of Rep. Robert K. Dornan (R-Garden Grove).

Calling Sanchez’s victory “a blessing in disguise,” Feliciano said November’s results made Republican leaders realize, “Hey, there’s an opportunity cost associated with advocating wedge issues.”

As further evidence, others point to a recent Field Poll that showed Wilson continuing to suffer dismal approval ratings despite the state’s solid economic rebound. The biggest reasons cited were “immigrant bashing” and “ethnic divisiveness,” criticisms volunteered by 35% of respondents.

In 1994, Wilson seized on illegal immigration to revive his governorship and win landslide reelection. He was far less successful a year later when he sought to make the issue the centerpiece of his run for president.

Schnur, who served as spokesmen for both Wilson campaigns, said Republicans in Congress muddied what had been a clear-cut issue when they started pushing policies cracking down on legal as well as illegal immigrants.

“When you draw a distinction between legal and illegal, the argument’s about fairness,” Schnur said. “When you take away that distinction, it becomes an argument about race.”

Still, many Republicans hold Wilson chiefly to blame for the party’s current image problems--though, as Schnur points out, few spoke up in 1994 when his comeback strategy was hailed as a political masterstroke.

Even now, few wish to publicly criticize the governor. Instead, they invoke Jack Kemp, the party’s apostle of inclusion, or Ronald Reagan, whose sunny demeanor radiated good cheer, as role models the party needs to emulate.

Whatever changes they attempt, a deep and abiding antagonism toward the GOP has clearly taken root that neither soothing words nor assertions of good intent are likely to alleviate any time soon. It hardly helps that new party Chairman Mike Schroeder--one of the biggest public proponents of minority outreach--is leading the legal fight to overturn Sanchez’s victory.

“I’ve vowed that I’ve gone to my last meeting where everything’s been planned out and we’ve been given a printed copy of the strategy,” said the Rev. E. V. Hill, a black Republican activist in South-Central Los Angeles.

Feliciano voiced similar wariness. “In the past, Hispanic outreach has always been putting together a high-profile group of Latinos and calling it ‘Latinos for Candidate X.’ What we’re advocating today is running 30-second spots, going into communities at the grass-roots level. The past campaign tactics of negative, negative, negative are not going to do it.”