ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Thursday, December 12, 1996 TAG: 9612130001
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-11 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: DAVID A. BOSITIS
AGAINST THE trend of falling voter turnout in the United States, record numbers of black men and Hispanics cast ballots for president last month. In the case of black men, the sharp increase appears to be linked to the Million Man March organized in Washington last year by the black Muslim leader Louis Farrakhan.
For the Hispanics, the growth resulted from a spurt of newly naturalized citizens of Hispanic origin and the prod of legal and political measures seen by Hispanics as aimed at them. Both groups voted heavily Democratic, and if the present trend continues, they could prove decisive in states with large blocs of electoral votes.
For the United States as a whole, according to Curtis Gans of the Committee for the Study of the American Electorate, who monitors these things, the total number of voters declined from 104.4 million in 1992 to 95.8 million in 1996, even though there were 5 million more registered voters than four years ago. Turnout fell to 48.8 percent of the voting-age population from 55.2 percent in 1992. This was the lowest rate since 1924.
At the same time, Voter News Service exit polls found that the proportion of black men in the total voting population increased from only 3 percent in 1992 to 5 percent this year.
The change represents approximately 1.5 million more black men who voted in 1996 than in the last general election. The same polls found that Hispanic voters also increased from 3 to 5 percent of the total with similar numerical gains.
The black-male turnout is all the more remarkable when it is noted that almost half a million fewer black women voted this year than in 1992.
Another interesting aspect is that the rise in the black men's vote made the overall black vote more Republican than otherwise: There is a political gender gap among African Americans just as there is among whites.
Black women were 11 percentage points more Democratic in their presidential vote than black men, 89 to 78 percent. The comparatively large black Republican congressional vote - 18 percent - is likewise undoubtedly attributable to the increased number of black male voters.
Most interesting, perhaps, is the genesis of the rise in the black men's vote. Throughout 1996 there were many efforts to increase the black vote, including those by the Democratic Party, labor organizations and civil-rights groups. So if there had been a general rise in the number of all blacks voting, it would be easy to attribute the change to those efforts.
How then to explain the outcome? There was only one major relevant event of note in the past year or so that focused primarily on black men, and that was the Million Man March on Oct. 16, 1995, at which Farrakhan exhorted black American men to take more responsibility for their lives by registering to vote and by voting.
In reviewing a variety of possible alternative hypotheses to account for the sharp increase in the black-male vote, I find it highly implausible that there was another factor that rivaled the Million Man March in bringing about this change.
The reasons for the increased Hispanic presence at the polls were, of course, quite different. Between 1992 and 1996 there were a record number of new naturalized citizens in the United States, primarily persons of Hispanic origin. In addition, for reasons unfathomable to me, the Republican Party chose to alarm Hispanic Americans through a variety of legal and political measures pointed at Hispanic interests.
These measures included the welfare-reform bill, which cut off benefits to legal immigrants; English-only legislation, which, while only passing in the House, left a clear picture of partisan intent; and immigration-reform legislation, where the debate frequently smacked of nativism.
Further, Republicans supported ballot initiatives in California in 1994 and 1996 that were opposed by Hispanic leaders in the state, and Pat Buchanan's harsh primary campaign also represented something of a wake-up call in the Hispanic community.
The Hispanic vote not only increased in size between 1992 and 1996, but became more Democratic, with President Clinton's share of the Hispanic vote increasing from 62 percent in 1992 to 72 percent in 1996. (According to a 1992 census study, Hispanics were 5.1 percent of voting-age citizens. By 1996 that figure was larger - probably between 6 and 7 percent.)
The 1996 electoral map suggests the increasing importance of black and Hispanic voters in a national election.
Clinton carried five of six states that have both large black and Hispanic voting-age populations, including three of the four largest states. Of these six states, California (30 percent black and Hispanic, 54 electoral votes), Texas (34 percent, 32 electoral votes), New York (24 percent, 33 electoral votes), Florida (17 percent, 25 electoral votes), Illinois (21 percent, 22 electoral votes) and New Jersey (23 percent, 15 electoral votes), Clinton lost only Texas. Clinton carried two states that have a significant Hispanic but not a large black vote - Arizona (8 electoral votes) and New Mexico (5).
In some respects the 1996 election represented something of a watershed for the black and Hispanic vote, suggesting their future importance as voting groups. Clinton should reflect on their importance as he plans his second term; I have no doubt that Al Gore is doing so as he looks forward to the year 2000.
David Bositis is senior political analyst at the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies in Washington
- The Washington Post
LENGTH: Medium: 98 linesby CNB