Centro Journal ISSN: 1538-6279 [email protected] The City University of New York Estados Unidos
Cruz, José E. Barriers to Political Participation of Puerto Ricans and Hispanics in Osceola County, Florida: 1991- 2007 Centro Journal, vol. XXII, núm. 1, 2010, pp. 243-285 The City University of New York New York, Estados Unidos
Available in: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=37721077011
How to cite Complete issue Scientific Information System More information about this article Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal Journal's homepage in redalyc.org Non-profit academic project, developed under the open access initiative CENTRO Journal
Volume7 xx11 Number 1 s p r i n g 2010
Barriers to Political Participation of Puerto Ricans and Hispanics in Osceola County, Florida: 1991–2007
Jo s é E. Cr u z
a b s t r a c t This paper examines Puerto Rican/Hispanic political participation in Osceola County, Florida, focusing on the attitudes Puerto Ricans/ Hispanics bring to the process, the general features of their participation, and the conditions in which they register, vote, and run for office. The paper offers a theoretical characterization of Puerto Rican/Hispanic political participation that includes the elements of racialization, inequality, reliance on external resources, and a type of identity politics that mixes elements of minority and white political behavior. The paper suggests that, so long as Puerto Ricans/Hispanics continue to face socioeconomic and political inequality while simultaneously enjoying discrete opportunities to choose between Puerto Rican/Hispanic candi- dates, their political behavior will be both minority and white; minority to the extent it focuses on descriptive representation and white to the extent it takes descriptive representation for granted. [Key words: political participation, Puerto Ricans, Hispanics, Osceola County, discrimination, identity]
[ 242 ] [ 243 ] In the spr ing of 2006, I traveled to Osceola County in Central Florida to determine how the distinctive characteristics and experiences of Hispanics—a majority of whom are Puerto Rican—affected their opportunity to participate equally in the political process. The research looked at the conditions in which Puerto Ricans and other Hispanics registered, voted, and ran for office between 1991 and 2007, including linguistic, educational, and socioeconomic conditions, as well as racial and ethnic factors. To do this I examined a wide range of materials, from secondary sources to newspaper articles published in The Orlando Sentinel, The Osceola News-Gazette, and El Osceola Star from 1990 to 2006, with a special emphasis upon political events and circumstances involving Puerto Ricans and other Hispanics. I reviewed depositions from a federal lawsuit taken from individuals knowledgeable about county politics;1 minutes from Osceola’s board of county commissioners (1990–2005); and data from the U.S. Census Bureau. In addition, I conducted nineteen interviews with a wide range of individuals—Republicans, Democrats, Hispanics, non-Hispanic blacks, and non-Hispanic whites—knowledgeable about the politics in Osceola County and of the conditions in which Puerto Ricans and other Hispanics participate in the political process in the county. Informants were selected from newspaper articles and from plaintiff and defendant initial disclosures lists provided by the U.S. Department of Justice. I selected individuals who could be placed in more than one informant category. These individuals were former political candidates as well as members of Democratic or Republican committees who had critical information about the political process and the place of Hispanics in Osceola County politics. Selection from disclosure lists began with the first name on the list and then choosing every third name. I identified more informants than I could possibly interview given time limitations, but, in my estimation, those interviewed offered me a well-rounded picture of Puerto Rican and Hispanic political participation. Some of the initially targeted informants turned out not to be available but through the snowball method—one contact led to another and then to another in succession—I was able to fill the gaps. I start with a brief history of the county and a short account of its governmental form and functions. Then I provide a description of the demographic context in which Puerto Ricans and other Hispanics participate in the county, followed by an account of attitudes of the majority population toward them. I then proceed to examine Puerto Rican/
[ 244 ] Hispanic political participation, focusing on the attitudes they bring to the process, the general features of their participation, and the conditions in which they register, vote, and run for office. A brief description of institutional and structural changes the county was forced to adopt between 1991 and 2006 is also included. By way of conclusion, I offer a characterization of Puerto Rican/Hispanic political participation.
A Brief History If you’ve been to Disney World in Florida, you’ve been to Osceola County. What was once a cowboy county is now dominated by the tourism and services industry. Created in 1887, the county is spread over a 1,506 square mile area bounded by the Kissimmee River, crossed by a number of partially accessible creeks, and encompassing the Kissimmee Chain-of-Lakes, which includes some of Florida’s largest fishing and recreational attractions. Osceola sits on the south/ central boundary of the central Florida region and the greater metropolitan area. The city of Kissimmee, the county seat, is 18 miles south of Orlando with about 48,000 residents. County officials refer proudly to Kissimmee as the Gateway to Disney World.2 St. Cloud, with a little over 20,000 residents the second-largest city in the county, sits 9 miles east of Kissimmee, and approximately 45 miles west of the city of Melbourne on the Atlantic Coast. Ranch lands, undeveloped prairie, woods, marshes, and Disney dominate the county. The most urban and most populated area of the county is located in its northwest quadrant, adjoining Polk and Orange counties. In that quadrant lie the incorporated areas of Kissimmee and St. Cloud, the unincorporated communities of Poinciana and Buenaventura Lakes, also known as BVL, where most Hispanics live, and unincorporated subdivisions ranging from Narcoossee in the northeast to Campbell City and Intercession City in the southwest to Deer Run and the St. Cloud Manor areas in the south3 (see Map 1). if you’ve been to Disney World in Florida, you’ve been to Osceola County.
Osceola County is named after one of two Native American chiefs who resisted being removed from the lands of central Florida from 1835 to 1842, during the second Seminole War. Out of the two original Florida counties of Escambia and St. Johns, created in 1821, sixty counties developed over time. Osceola was one of these and it was carved out from Orange (originally known as Mosquito County) and Brevard counties, created in 1824 and 1844, respectively.4 According to the county’s webpage: “When counties in Florida were first set up during the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, they were viewed as arms of State government. Back then, counties were mostly rural and performed a limited number of government functions. They were largely controlled by the State Legislature.”5 Today, Osceola County provides multiple municipal-type services and has a home rule charter, adopted by voters in 1992, after the Florida constitution was amended in 1968 to allow counties to exercise the full powers of home rule.6
[ 245 ] Map 1
Article II of the county’s charter describes the organization of government as follows:
Osceola County shall operate under an elected County Commission and appointed County Manager form of government with separation of legislative and executive functions in accordance with the provisions of this Home Rule Charter. The legislative responsibilities and powers of the County shall be assigned to and vested in the Board of County Commissioners. The executive responsibilities and powers of the County shall be assigned to and vested in the County Manager, who shall carry out the directives and policies of the Board of County Commissioners and enforce all orders, resolutions, ordinances, and regulations of the Board, the County Charter, and all applicable general laws, to assure that they are faithfully executed.
[ 246 ] The executive power in the county is in the hands of a county manager who is hired by and responds to the county commission. The commission also hires the county attorney and the commission auditor. Two additional sets of elected officials govern the county. They enjoy administrative discretion even though they are fully funded by the commission: five constitutional officers—the property appraiser, the supervisor of elections, the clerk of the courts, the tax collector, and the county sheriff—and a number of judicial officials. Two city governments and a school board, each run by its own set of elected officials and government staffs, complete the governmental apparatus of the county. Racially, the top echelons of the county’s power structure—the commission and the constitutional officers—are homogeneously white, including the sole Hispanic commissioner, John Quiñones, more commonly know as John “Q.”7
Demographic Context
Population According to the U.S. Census, during the 1980s, the Hispanic community of Osceola County grew in numbers by an astonishing 1,081 percent, from 1,089 residents in 1980 or 2 percent of the total, to 12,866 residents in 1990 or 12 percent of the 107,728 total. By 2000, Hispanic numbers were 50,727 or 29 percent of the total 172,493 county population. The 2000 population represented an increase of 294 percent from 1990. The Hispanic voting-age population in 2000 was 34,267 or 27 percent of the county’s total. Whites were 79,150 or 63 percent and blacks were 7,392 or 6 percent of the county’s total voting-age population. At 61 percent, Puerto Ricans were the largest Hispanic group, numbering 30,728 residents.
At 61 percent, Puerto Ricans were the largest Hispanic group, numbering 30,728 residents. Of these, 20,476 or 67 percent were born in Puerto Rico. Of the other Hispanic groups in the county for which the Census Bureau had discrete data for 2000, Mexicans had the greatest numbers at 3,400, followed by Dominicans with 2,313, Cubans with 2,178 residents, and Colombians with 2,071. In 2000, Commission Districts 1 and 4 had the largest Hispanic concentrations in the county with 13,523 and 12,336 residents, respectively. These two districts comprised 51 percent of Hispanics in the county. District 5 had the smallest Hispanic concentration with only 3,424 residents or 7 percent of Hispanic county residents (see Tables 1 and 2). Currently, Hispanics concentrate in District 2, which is represented by Commissioner John Quiñones, the sole Hispanic within the county board of commissioners. According to the U.S. Census of 2000, Osceola County had 24,110 foreign-born residents, representing 14 percent of the total population. Of these, 15,648 or 65 percent were from Latin America, and a total of 7,183 or 46 percent were United
[ 247 ] TABLE 1: Population, Voters, Nationality, Median Age, and Nativity of Hispanics in Osceola County, 1980-2007 1980 1990 2000 2007 est.
Hispanics 1,089 12,866 50,727 103,608 Hispanic % of County 2 12 29 41 % of County Voting Age Population White - - 63 46* Black - - 6 9* Hispanic - - 27 - Hispanics by Nationality (% of Hispanic total) Puerto Rican - - 61 59 Mexican - - 7 6 Dominican - - 5 - Cuban - - 4 4 Colombian - - 4 - Median Age White - - 37 - Black - - 29 - Hispanic - - 28 - Nativity % County Residents Foreign-born - - 14 19 % Latin Americans of Foreign-born - - 65 - % Residents since 1990 - - 46 - % Citizens - - 40 42 % Naturalized by year of entry Entry before 1980 - - 78 - Entry in and after 1990 - - 13 - % Puerto Ricans in County born in PR - - 67 -
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, USA Counties 1998, Population, Total and Selected Characteristics Table; Census 2000 Summary File 1 - 100 Percent Data, Table QT-P9, Hispanic or Latino by Type; Table P6, Hispanic or Latino and Not Hispanic or Latino by Race for the Population 18 Years and Over; Tables P13A, B, and H, Median Age by Sex. For data on foreign-born see Census 2000 Summary File 4 - Sample Data, Table QT-P14, Nativity, Citizenship, Year of Entry, and Region of Birth. For data on island-born Puerto Ricans see Census 2000 Summary File 3 - Sample Data, Table P21, Place of Birth by Citizenship Status. Puerto Ricans born in Puerto Rico are not foreign-born. 2007 estimated Hispanic population, U.S. Census Bureau, USA Counties, http://censtats.census.gov/cgi-bin/usac/usatable.pl
States residents since 1990. Of the total foreign-born residents, only 40 percent were citizens in 2000. Data on naturalization suggest that the foreign-born with the longest record of residency were the most likely to naturalize. In 2000, of those entering the country before 1980, 78 percent were citizens, while only 13 percent of those entering the country in 1990 and thereafter had naturalized. Census Bureau estimates for 2007 suggest phenomenal growth of Hispanic numbers in Osceola County, totaling 103,608 out of 255,815 residents or a 104.2 percent increase since 2000. If these estimates are correct, Hispanics in 2007 were 41 percent of the total county population. Puerto Rican and Cuban numbers nearly doubled to 61,219 and 4,324, respectively. Mexican numbers increased by 76 percent, but their proportion of Hispanics decreased by one point to 6 percent. Other Hispanics were estimated to comprise 31 percent of all Hispanics in Osceola. The foreign-born population also increased by five percentage points, but, at 42 percent, the proportion that had naturalized remained pretty much the same (see Table 1).
[ 248 ] TABLE 2: Population By Commission District, Osceola County – 2000 district t o t a l w h i t e b l a c k a m e r i c a n a s i a n n a t i v e o t h e r hispanic i n d i a n h a w a i i a n a l a s k a pacific n a t i v e i s l a n d e r 1 34,667 24,551 2,721 164 1,517 25 4,065 13,523 2 37,989 28,576 3,816 181 582 37 3,229 11,415 3 26,100 17,082 3,265 131 803 25 3,619 10,029 4 37,776 39,581 2,224 131 627 27 3,928 12,336 5 35,961 33,379 676 183 273 28 790 3,424 t o t a l 172,493 143,169 12,702 790 3,802 142 15,631 50,727 % 100 83 7 * 2 * 9 29
Source: Population data received from Osceola County as compiled by Applied Mapping, Inc., from U.S. Census Bureau data. * = Less than one percent.
Occupational and Socioeconomic Status Data from the U.S. Census of 2000 demonstrate that Hispanics in Osceola County are a predominantly working-class population. A full 56 percent of the population 16 years and over are employed in service, construction, and production occupations. Another 28 percent work in sales and office occupations. A smaller proportion—15 percent—work as managers, professionals, and in related occupations (see Table 3). To put these proportions in perspective, it is important to note that the rate of state and local government employment for Hispanics in the county is quite small. Even though the proportion more than doubled from 1991 to 2005, from 6 to 15 percent, Anglos were overrepresented with a 75 percent rate in 2005. Similarly, the percentage of Hispanic officials, administrators, and professionals in state and local government in 2005 was six times higher than in 1991, but Anglos dominated those echelons with a rate of 79 percent (see Table 4). The unemployment rate for Hispanics in 2000—4 percent—was only slightly higher than the rate for whites—3 percent. Both groups were about equally represented in the labor force, with a labor force participation rate of 62 percent for Hispanics and 64 percent for whites (see Table 3). Despite having similar labor force participation rates, in socioeconomic status Hispanics were well below whites. Household income data for 1999, for example, shows that 35 percent of white households in the county had incomes below $30,000 annually. For Hispanics, it was 47 percent. White households had the highest median household income in the county at $39,782. In contrast, Hispanics had a median household income of $31,538. In 1999, only 10 percent of whites in Osceola County were below the poverty level, as compared with 16 percent of Hispanics (see Table 5). Educational attainment data for persons over 25 years of age reveal a similar disparity. Hispanics, both male and female, had higher proportions of persons with less than a 9th grade education in 2000—12 and 11 percent, respectively, compared to 6 percent for white men and 5 percent for white women. Only 30 percent of Hispanic men and 28 percent of Hispanic women 25 years and over had completed high school, compared to 33 and 37 percent for white men and women, respectively. Among college graduates, Hispanic males were only 8 percent of those over 25 years of age, as contrasted with 12 percent of white males. On the other hand, among both Hispanic and white females over 25 years of age, 10 percent had bachelor’s degrees (see Table 6). Lastly, another indicator of socioeconomic status and opportunity in the United States that is related to educational attainment, English proficiency, also suggests disadvantage. According to the 2000 Census, 48 percent of voting- age Hispanics in Osceola County spoke English “less than very well.”8 The estimate for 2007 is also 48 percent but for the population 5 years of age and over (see Table 7).
[ 249 ] TABLE 3: Occupation, Unemployment, and Labor Force Participation Rates for the Hispanic Employed Civilian Population 16 Years and Over, Osceola County — 2000
Total Hispanic Employed Civilian Population 16 Years and Over 20,739 Management, professional, and related occupations Male 1,295 Female 1,837 Total 3,132 (15.1%) Service Male 2,968 Female 3,287 Total 6,255 (30.1%) Sales and Office Male 2,023 Female 3,822 Total 5,845 (28.1%) Farming, Fishing, and Forestry Male 49 Female 33 Total 82 (0.39%) Construction, Extraction, and Maintenance Male 2,489 Female 118 Total 2,607 (12.5%) Production, Transportation, and Material Moving Male 2,142 Female 676 Total 2,818 (13.5%) Unemployment Rate White 3% Black 5% Hispanic 4% Labor Force Participation Rate White 64% Black 64% Hispanic 62%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 Summary File 4 - Sample Data, Table PCT 86 for occupations; Census 2000 Summary File 3 - Sample Data, Tables P150A, B, and H for unemployment and labor force participation rates.
The statistics cited above indicate that Hispanics in Osceola County rank lower than Anglos in all of the major socioeconomic categories. By the time this paper is published, the 2010 census will be under way. The results should show the extent to which the indicators presented here have changed. For now, suffice it to say that the 2006–2008 census estimates suggest an insignificant reduction in Latino numbers in the county and not much improvement in socioeconomic status since 1999. For example, the poverty rate for Latinos decreased by about one percentage point, and their median household income was 81 percent of that of non-Hispanic whites.9 One of most widely accepted propositions among political scientists is that lower socioeconomic and educational status tends to result in a feeling of detachment from the political process and depresses political participation among that specific ethnic group (Wolfinger and Rosenstone 1980).10 The comparative data on Tables 3, 5, and 6, which includes blacks, show that, in Osceola, the ethnic group most affected by this dynamic is Hispanics. Census data for 2006–2008 suggest that this is still the case.
[ 250 ] TABLE 4: Anglo and Hispanic State and Local Government Employment, Osceola County — 1991–2005
a n g l o s % hispanics % a o a p * % h o a p ** % 1991 846 88 60 6 150 92 4 2 1993 897 87 53 5 168 92 6 3 1995 543 89 36 6 88 94 4 4 1997 966 89 60 6 97 96 2 2 1999 815 83 91 9 144 87 11 7 2001 808 79 130 13 143 82 22 13 2003 842 74 174 15 138 78 30 17 2005 962 75 195 15 178 79 32 14
Source: Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, State and Local Government Information (EEO-4) for Osceola County. Data do not include school systems and educational institutions. *Anglo officials, administrators, and professionals. **Hispanic officials, administrators, and professionals. TABLE 5: Socioeconomic Characteristics of Hispanics in Osceola County
% With Household Income Below $30K 1999 White 35 Black 44 Hispanic 47 Median Household Income 2000 White $39,782 Black $33,785 Hispanic $31,538 % Persons Below Poverty 1999 Whites 10 Blacks 17 Hispanics 16
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 Summary File 3 - Sample Data, Tables P152A, B and H for median household income; Tables PCT75A, B, and H for poverty rates; Tables P151A, B, and H for household income.
Residential Segregation Residential segregation of Hispanics is a significant feature in the Orlando metropolitan area, which includes Osceola County.11 Hispanics were more likely to live in a neighborhood with other Hispanics in the metro area in 2000 than in 1990. This was at a time when residential segregation for blacks was on the decline in the metropolitan area (Kunerth 2002). The same is true for Osceola County. For Puerto Ricans, who are the largest Hispanic group by far, the index of dissimilarity in 2000, that is, the proportion of residents who would have to move to achieve an even racial distribution in the county, was 44 percent. This was nine percentage points higher than in 1990. Puerto Rican isolation, that is, the likelihood that they would reside with other Puerto Ricans, increased even more between 1990 and 2000 in the county, from 12.2 to 26 percent. Finally, the index for exposure, or the likelihood that Puerto Ricans would have members of other groups as neighbors, went down between 1990 and 2000, from 74 to 45 percent (Vargas Ramos 2005: Tables 6, 8, 10). Census Bureau maps provide a visual representation of residential segregation at the census tract as well as at the county subdivision level. The maps clearly indicate a residential separation between Hispanic and Anglo communities. The census tract level maps show that in the areas where whites concentrate, Hispanics are virtually absent and vice versa (see Maps 2 and 3). The Kissimmee subdivision also conforms to this pattern (see Maps 4 and 5).
[ 251 ] Map 2
TABLE 6: Educational Attainment of Hispanics in Osceola County 2000
% Educational Attainment for Population 25 Years and Over w h i t e l e s s t h a n 9t h g r a d e h i g h s c h o o l b a c h e l o r ’s d e g r e e Male 6 33 12 Female 5 37 10 b l a c k Male 7 33 7 Female 6 34 9 hispanic Male 12 30 8 Female 11 28 10
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 Summary File 3 - Sample Data, Tables P148A, B, and H.
[ 252 ] Attitudes Towards Puerto Ricans and Hispanics Hispanic persons in Osceola County were treated with indifference at first because there were not many of them. This began to change as their numbers increased; of particular concern was their speaking of Spanish. In 1988, the executive director of the Kissimmee/St. Cloud visitors and conventions bureau ordered her Hispanic employees not to speak Spanish in front of their co-workers because this made the latter uncomfortable (Villalva Lijo 1988). Hispanic groups in the county reacted angrily to this, and a bureau manager resigned in protest of the policy (Villalva Lijo 1988). Other incidents involved a school bus driver warning Hispanic students that if they spoke Spanish they would not be allowed to ride the bus, as well as employers monitoring the use of Spanish in the workplace (Villalva Lijo 1988). This concern grew as the Hispanic population grew. In 1992, Osceola’s Hispanic population was “growing at breakneck speed, faster than almost anywhere else in the nation. That’s worrisome to segments of the non-Hispanic population, who simply aren’t sure how to react when it seems most of the people in K-mart are speaking Spanish. They don’t like bilingual instructions on automatic teller machines or the fact that grocery store clerks wear pins announcing Se Habla Español or that a Hispanic column appears in this newspaper each Thursday” (Lafferty 1992b). Employees at a McDonald’s restaurant in Osceola have been told by the manager not to speak Spanish at work. José Hoyos, a former vice-chairman of the 2001 Osceola redistricting advisory committee, reported that he himself had witnessed language-based discrimination. He felt that it stemmed from a fear among the Anglo community that Hispanics may “take over and are not willing to learn English.”13 Employees at a McDonald’s restaurant in Osceola have been told by the manager not to speak Spanish at work.
The perceived threat is not limited to language. Hispanic advances in the political arena have been viewed with apprehension. In the 1990s, elected officials in Osceola were worried that Hispanics might gain a foothold in politics (Lafferty 1992a, 1991).14 In 1991, Luis Román, a leader in the community, was active in pushing for a change to single-member district elections. Puerto Ricans, Hispanics, and blacks emphasized the importance of adopting single-member districts because it “would give minorities more clout” (Jacobson 1992). Just as some of these changes began to take root, Luis Román, was convicted of bank fraud. His trial and conviction in 1993 was a public perception nightmare for the Hispanic community.15 His case was used by some to create the impression that the Hispanic community was “no good.” Others used Román’s conviction as an opportunity to denigrate the community.16 The incident made an already self- conscious Hispanic community more anxious about its image. This was an example of using the case of one individual to legitimize negative attitudes toward a group.17 Outright hostile forms of prejudice and racial animus also appeared in Osceola. In 1993, a county commissioner admitted privately that a program that provided
[ 253 ] TABLE 7: Language Ability of VAP Hispanics in Osceola County 2000 and 2007
2000 2007 Speak Spanish 33,644 85,505 Speak English Very Well 17,365 – Speak English Well 8,288 – Speak English Not Well 5,878 – Speak English Not at All 2,113 – Speak English Less Than Very Well 16,279 (48%) 40,849 (48%)
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 Summary File 3 - Sample Data, Table P19. 2007 estimate of language ability, U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, http:// factfinder.census.gov/servlet/ADPTable?_bm=y&-context=adp&-qr_name=ACS_2007_1YR_ G00_DP2&-ds_name=ACS_2007_1YR_G00_&-tree_id=307&-_caller=geoselect&-geo_ id=05000US12097&-format=&-_lang=en
TABLE 8: Registration and Turnout in Osceola County By Race and Ethnicity
1998 2000 2002 2004 Prim Gen Prim Gen Prim Gen Prim Gen % of VAP Registered White 76 76 78 80 83 77 * * Black 59 60 70 78 91 87 * * Hispanic 42 43 50 54 67 66 * *
% of VAP Voting White + + + 53 + 43 * * Black + + + 46 + 40 * * Hispanic + + + 28 + 26 * *
% of Registrants Voting White + + + 65 + 56 22 70 Black + + + 59 + 46 11 60 Hispanic + + + 53 + 39 9 53
Source: Turnout data provided by Osceola County and compiled by Dr. Ted Arrington. +Data on ethnicity of those who voted is not available. *2004 data is not meaningful due to estimated population changes. services to Hispanics was not welcome in Narcoossee because Narcoosee was “redneck country” (Romero 1993). In 1996, in St. Cloud, a Klan-affiliated group, the Florida Black Knights, dressed in full KKK regalia and waving confederate flags, picketed below the community’s water tower (Hansen 1996a). This action was not directed at Hispanics. Yet, even though the time when the Ku Klux Klan was said to “pervade politics in Florida” (Dickinson 2001) is long gone, the presence of the notorious group is menacing and symbolically powerful. Another earlier example of open hostility and prejudice occurred in 1991, when a swastika and the words “White Power” were painted on the back wall of a market frequented by Hispanics (Conway and Fernandez 1991). Also in 1991, a letter was published in the Osceola News-Gazette, the local newspaper, which questioned “the manners, intelligence and cleanliness of Hispanics.”18 In the mid-1990s, Hispanics also experienced problems in employment. In 1996, an informal survey conducted by El Osceola Star suggested widespread discrimination against them. “Here is where discrimination is more noticeable,” the paper indicated, referring to Hispanic employment in the managerial and professional sector. “We heard so many stories and complaints [about discrimination] that it will take
[ 254 ] Map 3 this whole edition to write about them.” In the area of mortgage applications, not only were Hispanics typically required to provide more documentation than was usually required, the percentage of rejections of Hispanic applicants was notably high (Osceola Star 1996a, 1997b). The views of the elected officials at this time are also relevant. Former County Commissioner Chuck Dunnick, in discussing how Puerto Rican leader Robert Guevara acted as a bridge between the Hispanic and Anglo communities in Osceola during Guevara’s term on the board of county commissioners, stated that there was “an almost hostility or outright frustration” within the Anglo community regarding things they did not understand about the Hispanic community. When asked for an example, Dunnick replied that “you can’t raise goats and chickens in your backyard
[ 255 ] TABLE 9: Cross-tabulation of Race/Ethnicity and Voter Registration on 21 December 2005 in Osceola County
w h i t e s hispanics Democrat 24,107 (34%) 18,994 (46%) Republican 31,314 (44%) 8,701 (21%) Other 16,496 (23%) 13,346 (33%) t o t a l 71,917 41,041
d e m o c r a t r e p u b l i c a n 0t h e r Whites 24,107 (46%) 31,314 (73%) 16,496 (47%) Blacks & Others 9,499 (18%) 2,612 (6%) 5,365 (15%) Hispanic 18,994 (36%) 8,701 (20%) 13,346 (38%) t o t a l 52,600 42,627 35,207
Source: Registration data provided by Osceola County and compiled by Dr. Ted Arrington. +Data on ethnicity of those who voted is not available. *2004 data is not meaningful due to estimated population changes.
TABLE 10: Hispanic Membership in Osceola County Boards and Commissions — 2006 b o d y m e m b e r s hispanics hispanic % o f m e m b e r s Parks & Recreation Committee 17 1 6 Board of Codes & Appeals 10 – – Children’s Home Commission 7 – – Affirmative Action Committee 7 2 29 Industrial Development Authority 5 – – CDBG Advisory Task Force 7 1 14 Fire & Rescue Advisory Comm. 7 1 14 Housing Finance Authority 5 – – Tourist Development Committee 9 1 11 Board of Adjustment 7 1 14 Planning Commission 10 1 10 Library Advisory Board 8 1 13 Lakes Mgmt. Advisory Commt. 15 – – W192 Redevelopment Commt. 7 – – Code Enforcement Board 7 1* 14 t o t a l 128 10 8 *One Hispanic alternate
Source: Lists of Members of County Boards, Commissions, and Committees in Defendants’ Rule 26 Disclosures, United States v. Osceola County, 6:05-CV-1053-ORL-31DAB. in the middle of town...that certain cultures in the Hispanic community had certain religious rites involving some animals, that was fairly shocking to some people... a lot of times they [Hispanics] don’t understand why. Land of the free, home of the brave, you know.”19 Dunnick also described differences in perception about how the two communities conducted business affairs. Additionally, he made it clear that the Anglo community did not understand the Hispanic ways and vice versa.20 Again, just as Hispanics thought they might be getting a footing in county government after electing Robert Guevara, his death in 2000 jolted the community. An Anglo, Tom Franklin, was selected to replace Guevara. In addition, one of Guevara’s associates, María Álvarez, was fired from her position as Buenaventura Lakes community coordinator a couple months after his death. Álvarez had a positive job evaluation and Hispanics thought the firing was driven by ethnic prejudice rather than performance (Mercer 2000).
[ 256 ] Prejudicial and racially insensitive statements can be found repeatedly in local newspapers, including comments published while I was conducting my research.
Prejudicial and racially insensitive statements can be found repeatedly in local newspapers, including comments published while I was conducting my research. A 2004 letter to the editor of El Osceola Star from county resident Gene Marciniak reflects not only the existence of prejudice against Hispanics but also its often unwitting nature. In his letter Marciniak first professed support for the election of Hispanics to public office and then proceeded to disparage them because, in his view, they were unqualified. To support his claim he questioned whether Hispanics knew the Bill of Rights, whether they read or not, and whether they loved the United States. No evidence of their inability was offered. Perhaps most troubling about these comments was that Marciniak was not an uneducated individual, but someone with a sociology degree from Loyola University in Chicago, an editor of a local publication, and an aspiring politician; he ran for county commissioner district 4 in 2004 (Marciniak 2004).21 Other similarly hostile messages include the statements that “God speaks English” (Montalvo 2006) or that “Here, we are lying down and becoming Puerto Rican, Dominican, South American...I am not against Hispanics. I am against giving up America for anyone” (Peek 2005) as well as characterizations of Hispanics as a “lazy, sidestepping, minority who refuses to allow the American way to continue” (Gonella 2005). Consider also the sentiments of Democratic Party executive committee member, Bill Hunt. In 2005, he publicly complained to a fellow party member that there was too much Spanish spoken in the county, too many Puerto Rican flags, and not enough interest by Hispanics to truly “become Americans and assimilate into society.” “This is America,” he further stated, and “I further resent ballots being printed in any language other than English.”22 The reference to bilingual ballots was used to brand Hispanic citizens in Osceola County as foreigners unwilling and uninterested in being Americans, even though bilingual ballots are mandated by federal law. Most troubling may be the tongue-in-cheek attitude toward racially offensive things in Osceola County. St. Cloud has the distinction of having an establishment by the name of the Koffee Kup Kafe. The symbolic significance of the spelling of the name with a “K” so that its acronym would be KKK, is difficult to ignore. At least one of my informants specifically mentioned the curious name as an illustration of the kind of racial environment that Hispanics confront in the county.23 According to Peter Olivo, a past candidate for the
[ 257 ] Map 4 board of county commissioners, when he found out about the Koffee Kup Kafe, he went there several times. He met the owner, who asked about Olivo’s disability. Olivo shared that he was a Vietnam veteran. The owner had also served in Vietnam, so they took a liking to each other. One day Olivo received a call from the owner: “Hey Peter, you never told me you were Hispanic.” By then, said Olivo, who is not identifiably Hispanic by appearance or accent, the owner had realized that Olivo was “just one of us.” Olivo also shared with me a story of a white man who despite being known for his racial prejudice became his friend. After having Olivo over to his house, the man told him that he was “the first Hispanic to enter his house and probably the last.”24 To Olivo, the changes in attitude of his acquaintances demonstrated the
[ 258 ] Map 5 capacity of whites to overcome their prejudice. But a key to their willingness to get to know him to the point of realizing that he was “one of us” was the fact that Olivo was not easily identifiable as Hispanic, that he could pass. The above examples of sometimes subtle, sometimes overt prejudice and discrimination in Osceola County are evidence of a disconnect between the Anglo and Hispanic communities and also a stark reminder of the lower social status some in the Anglo community attribute to Hispanics. The attitudes and events recounted above reveal an environment in which racial prejudice and xenophobia persist.
[ 259 ] Puerto Rican/Hispanic Political Participation in Osceola County
Community Perspectives and Participation The political participation of Hispanics in Osceola County has been marked by a deep sense of frustration in the Hispanic community. Between 1990 and 2000, Hispanics saw their numbers grow dramatically with no corresponding presence in the power structure of the county. This resulted in feelings of frustration, detachment, and an expectation that Hispanics must live by a higher set of standards than Anglo candidates to get any attention politically.25 Hispanics have found more acceptance as consumers. The business community wants to reach out to the large market of Hispanic persons (Osceola Star 1996b, 1996c). There is not the same acceptance in politics.26 The theme of an entrenched power structure, closed-off to Hispanics, was repeated by many Hispanic leaders. Hispanic candidates for office play by the rules, make themselves palatable to powerbrokers and to the general community, and still get nowhere.27 Casmore Shaw, a black, 19-year resident originally from the West Indies, described the attitude of powerful Anglos towards Hispanics this way: “I can’t say whether it is hatred or fear, not wanting to lose their power base. There’s a fear of Hispanics taking over.”28 Another resident remarked, “The rules of the game for Hispanics are not the same [as for everybody else].”29 For some it comes back to the language issue. Carmen Carrasquillo, a local non-profit organization administrator and a 15-year resident, alluded to language issues as a barrier when she stated, “People see us as outsiders, we speak a different language.”30 The theme of an entrenched power structure, closed-off to Hispanics, was repeated by many Hispanic leaders.
This frustration affects political participation. If the Hispanic community believes that its candidate can win, then participation increases. When Robert Guevara ran in 1996, under the single-member district method of election, there was much excitement in the community.31 The campaign was typical of campaigns in Puerto Rico—cars driven throughout neighborhoods with loudspeakers on top, door-to-door canvassing, and caravanas (car parades snaking through city streets blaring political messages). There was a belief in the community that Guevara could win the county commissioner position in district 1. Guevara admitted that he would not attempt such a run under an at-large system (Bouma 1996). Once the county reverted to an at-large system, the level of excitement diminished in part because Hispanic candidates felt they had to de-emphasize their ethnicity to get elected.32 Hispanic candidates know that they must have a different strategy to appeal to Anglo voters in order to have a chance to win.33 They also see the indifference of political parties and are further discouraged. Lack of party mobilization also has a negative effect on voter turnout.34 There are other reasons for lower participation by Hispanic voters. Citizenship is an obvious factor. Not all of the 60 percent of non-citizen, foreign-born residents in
[ 260 ] 2000 were Hispanic, but even if only 20 percent were VAP Hispanic, the number of potential voters unable to participate in the electoral process would be significant. There are structural barriers where it is more difficult to participate in registration and voting because the process has been conducted in English only. Puerto Ricans come with an understanding of the electoral process in Puerto Rico, but they don’t necessarily understand county politics. That is an obstacle compounded by the lack of information and outreach in Spanish. There are also socioeconomic barriers that decrease participation.
Patterns of Registration and Turnout The official data on registration and voter turnout provided by Osceola County demonstrate that Hispanic citizens register and vote at substantially lower rates than whites. The percentage of the Hispanic voting-age population registered to vote in the 1998 general election was 43 percent, as compared with 76 percent for whites. By 2002, the percentage of the Hispanic voting-age population on the registered voter list had increased to 66 percent, but white registration was at 77 percent. Looking at turnout patterns, 53 percent of Hispanics who were registered actually voted in the 2004 general election, as compared with 70 percent of whites (see Table 8). While these proportions would be different if the baseline was the citizen voting-age population (CVAP), according to an analysis by political scientist Theodore Arrington, Hispanic voter registration lags behind Hispanic CVAP.35 Further, as of 2009, of a total of 137,514 county registered voters, only 36 percent were Hispanic, compared to 49 percent white, 8 percent black, and 7 percent classified as “other.”36 Because Puerto Ricans make up a majority of the Hispanics in Osceola County, the government of Puerto Rico and private groups such as Mi Familia Vota (My Family Votes), Latino Leadership, and the Florida Hispanic-American Voters League have undertaken significant voter mobilization drives. Increases in Hispanic voter registration levels may be, in part, attributable to these efforts. Another factor may be the proliferation of Hispanic candidacies for office in recent years.37 In 2005, among Hispanic registered voters, 46 percent were Democrats, 21 percent were Republicans, and 33 percent were not identified with either party.
In Florida, voters register either as Democrats, Republicans, or Independents. In 2005, among Hispanic registered voters, 46 percent were Democrats, 21 percent were Republicans, and 33 percent were not identified with either party. Among whites, however, only 34 percent were Democrats while 44 percent were Republicans,
[ 261 ] and 23 percent failed to register with one of the two parties. At the time, Hispanics made up a more significant proportion of the Democrats in Osceola County (36 percent) than of the Republican registered voters (only 20 percent) (see Table 9). Cubans lean more toward the Republican than the Democratic Party. Some Puerto Ricans see connections between Puerto Rico’s statehood party and the Republican Party in the United States. During one interview, John Cortés, a county community leader, said: “I made the association between the Partido Nuevo Progresista in Puerto Rico [the pro-statehood party] and the Republican Party here and therefore I was a Republican all my life.” In Osceola County, however, the parties have similar policy views. According to Sid Foulke, chair of the Republican executive committee in 1994, on issues like gun ownership, family values, and property rights, there is bi-partisan agreement (Millican 1994). This tends to weaken partisan ties.
Difficulties in Registration In spite of the policy accomplishments of the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s and by subsequent legislation, Hispanics faced difficulties in registering to vote in the county. As a result of enforcement of the minority language provisions of the Voting Rights Act and the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) in the 1990s, it is much easier to register to vote today than ever before, for Hispanics and for citizens at large. Problems do exist, but overall registration difficulties in the county are not as prominent as they used to be, especially since 2000, as a result of U.S. Department of Justice enforcement through a lawsuit in 2002.39 Prior to 1995, Osceola County used deputy registrars to register voters. This changed with the passage of the NVRA, and registration forms became more readily available in more places. However, availability of election materials in Spanish in Osceola County did not change with passage of the NVRA. The forms in the 1990s were still not in Spanish.40 Problems in registering Spanish-speaking voters remained after the NVRA was adopted. In 1996, persons associated with the Guevara campaign stated that because the information was not provided in Spanish, the campaign had difficulty registering some Hispanic voters.41 Spanish-speaking voters continued to experience registration problems in 2000. Not only did Hispanic voters have registration applications that were in English only, they also did not have persons at the supervisor of elections office with whom they could speak or ask questions of in Spanish.42 A few hundred additional voters may have been able to register had they not faced these obstacles.43 Some Hispanic voters said they did not receive registration cards, and those who received cards said they were only in English.44 The card indicates where the person needs to go to vote on Election Day. In 2002, the county signed a consent decree with the United States Department of Justice and was subsequently covered by Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act. The county was required to provide registration information and registration cards in Spanish beginning in that year.45 Significant private initiatives as well as efforts by the government of Puerto Rico have made a difference in registering voters. In 2002, the government of Puerto Rico mounted a massive, $6 million voter registration campaign in the United States, and in particular in Osceola, Orange, Seminole, and Volusia Counties in Florida, to encourage the political participation of stateside Puerto Ricans (Reed 2002; Osceola Star 2002c).
[ 262 ] Difficulties in Voting For Puerto Ricans and Hispanics in Osceola County, language difficulties have been a significant obstacle to voting. In 2006, the supervisor of elections acknowledged that other than some newspaper advertising in one Spanish language newspaper, the election process in the 1990s was publicized in English. Ballots, sample ballots, voters guides, letters, signs, forms were only in English in the 1990s.46 There was no effort to recruit bilingual poll workers or hire additional bilingual staff.47 The supervisor of elections recognized a need for Spanish language materials and bilingual poll workers with the growth of the Hispanic population, which is why she advertised in a Spanish language newspaper in 1998.48 However, she did not provide ballots or sample ballots in Spanish to Osceola Hispanic voters. Nor were the voter information publications or registration materials provided in Spanish. It is important to note that before 2000, advertisements sent to the Spanish newspapers by the supervisor of elections office were written in English. The supervisor of elections office did not translate advertisements into Spanish, leaving it up to the newspapers to do the translation.49 The supervisor of elections recognized that there was even greater Hispanic growth in 2000, but she failed to provide ballots, sample ballots, forms, letters, and other materials in Spanish.50 She admitted that she failed to recruit, appoint, train, and maintain an adequate pool of bilingual poll officials.51 Many Osceola Hispanics were not just refused assistance and turned away at the polls but were also sent to the wrong precincts as well.
Spanish-speaking voters had significant problems at the polls during the 2000 general election. Many of these voters were turned away from the polls without being allowed to vote, some poll workers were hostile to some Hispanic voters, and some Hispanic voters were asked for multiple forms of identification, whereas their Anglo counterparts were not.52 A frequent occurrence was the absence of signs identifying polling places and English-only signs providing instructions within polling places.53 Further, when voters took matters into their own hands and brought their own interpreters to the polling place, they were met with hostility and/or were not allowed to use them (De Luzuriaga 2004).54 Many Osceola Hispanics were not just refused assistance and turned away at the polls but were also sent to the wrong precincts as well (Verde 2005). Members of the election canvassing board, candidates, workers, poll watchers, voters, and the media all recounted serious problems faced by Spanish-speaking voters in 2000, but the supervisor of elections could not remember a single problem with any Spanish-speaking voter.55 This was not due to a lack of complaints, though. Candidates, voters, and party officials complained about these problems to the supervisor of elections.56
[ 263 ] The problem with the lack of Spanish-language materials at the polls was demonstrated by an analysis of the problems associated with the 2000 election. This revealed that one in every five votes in Osceola County was an overvote— meaning a ballot cast for two different candidates for the same position. The cause of this for Hispanics was their confusion of the last name of Al Gore’s running mate “Lieberman” with “Libertarian,” thus voting for Gore and for Libertarian Party presidential candidate Harry Browne. Overvotes in the county occurred with greater frequency in precincts with higher percentages of Hispanics, prompting concerns with the failure of the county to provide instructions in Spanish or Spanish-language ballots. Osceola has voter registration by race. The precincts with the heaviest concentration of Hispanic voters had the heaviest concentration of overvotes. The concern was dismissed by the supervisor of elections with the comment of “Who knows the mind of the voter?” (Damron 2001).57 The lack of bilingual assistance in 2000 was also the direct cause of 642 undervotes, with the problem occurring most often in Buenaventura Lakes and Poinciana precincts, where Hispanic voters concentrated (Ioza 2001; Story 2001). Osceola County failed to provide information in Spanish and did not have enough bilingual poll workers. The problem of voting irregularities with Spanish-speaking voters was so severe that the chair of Osceola County’s Democratic Party in 2000, Patti Wilson Haney, publicly expressed her intention to bring complaints about voting difficulties to a public meeting with U.S. Department of Justice officials in March 2001 (Higgins 2001). After the 2000 election, concerns about voting irregularities were brought to the attention of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights during hearings held in Tallahassee. One of the participants was the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund, now known as Latino Justice/PRLDEF. A principal problem facing Hispanic voters, according to PRLDEF, was insufficient numbers of bilingual poll workers in Orange, Seminole, and Osceola Counties and the fact that many Hispanics were not permitted to vote.58 In fact, according to news accounts, Central Florida counties, including Osceola, offered no meaningful bilingual assistance to voters, making it very difficult for many Hispanic voters to cast their ballots (Padilla 2001). Even after all of the problems faced by Spanish-speaking voters that occurred in the 2000 election, the county did very little to correct them. The translation problem in Osceola County persisted after 2000. In a 2001 special election, federal observers reported that poll workers were hostile to Spanish-speaking voters, and some insisted that they speak English if they wanted to vote (OrlandoSentinel.com 2002). As a result of the 2002 consent decree with the U.S. Department of Justice, the county agreed to translate all of its material into Spanish, conduct outreach to Spanish-speaking voters through Spanish language coordinators, insure that half of the poll workers were bilingual in areas where Hispanics were 40 percent or more of registered voters, and have at least one bilingual poll worker in areas where Hispanics were 5 percent or more. Of the estimated 650 poll workers needed, at least 103 were supposed to be bilingual. Precincts requiring half bilingual staff included polling places in Poinciana, Lakeside, and Buenaventura Lakes. All but about ten of the remaining precincts would need at least one bilingual poll worker (Oliande 2002).59 There appears to be general agreement in the Hispanic community that the consent decree made it easier for Spanish-speaking voters to participate in the election process. When bilingual assistance is available, not only is the environment friendlier but problems are less frequent as a result. Bilingual poll workers tend to help voters to make sure they cast their ballots correctly.60
[ 264 ] Frustrations remained, however. A deposition by the supervisor of elections and correspondence between the Department of Justice and Osceola County indicate that in 2004 the county was not meeting all of the requirements of the consent decree.61 Bilingual workers were not in all of the places they needed to be, and outreach to the Hispanic community was not sufficient.62 The supervisor of elections office’s Spanish website was not considered as user-friendly as the English site (Jacobson 2004). There is also some evidence in 2004 of difficulties in voting for Hispanics with hyphenated names who did not appear on registration lists.63 In July of 2004, there were complaints that the supervisor of elections office did not have enough bilingual staff to interact with the Hispanic community.64 Indeed, this was one of the many problems reported during early voting in October 2004 (Stratton 2004).65 Some believed that the disorganization of election workers in 2004 was pronounced, and there was confusion among Hispanic voters during that election (Mariano 2004). In the end, the Department of Justice decided to extend supervision over Osceola’s program because the existing Spanish language program did not appear to be equal to the English language program in scope and effectiveness.66
Difficulties in Running for Office The single most important difficulty facing Hispanics running for office in Osceola County between 1991 and 2006 was the at-large electoral system. This obstacle was faced not just by Hispanics but also by minorities in general. The political science literature is extensive and very clear about the impact of at-large electoral systems on minority representation, including Hispanics: whenever voting patterns are racially polarized, at-large elections dilute minority voting and impede descriptive representation (see Davidson and Korbel 1991; Engstrom and McDonald 1981, 1986; Heilig and Mundt 1983, 1984; Karnig and Welch 1982; Meier and England 1984; Meier, Stewart and England 1989; Polinart, Wrinkle and Longoria 1990; Robinson and Dye 1978). Campaigns are costly, and Hispanic voters, many of whom are retired, are not able to contribute much, even to Hispanic candidates.
Complaints about the role of the electoral system in facilitating or hindering the political representation of Hispanics in Osceola County go back at least as far as 1991 (Conway and Fernandez 1991). When the county adopted single-member districts in a 1992 referendum, many Hispanics hoped that they would for the first time have a chance to elect a candidate of their choice to the county commission (Tin 1993). The first successful Hispanic candidate, Robert Guevara, declared during his campaign for a district seat in 1996 that he would have thought it futile to run under the previous at-large system of election (Bouma 1996).
[ 265 ] Money was an important obstacle that Hispanic candidates faced, especially in countywide elections. Campaigns are costly, and Hispanic voters, many of whom are retired, are not able to contribute much, even to Hispanic candidates.67 As a result, Hispanic candidates had to finance a substantial amount of their own campaigns. For example, Anthony Suárez, who ran for circuit court judge for the Orange-Osceola circuit in 2000, contributed 65 percent of the $46,000 it took him to run out of his own pocket. In that year, Dalis Guevara contributed 100 percent of the $10,000 in her campaign chest. When James Auffant ran for state legislative district 35, he put up 77 percent of his campaign funds (Orlando Sentinel 2000). The same problem confronts candidates running citywide in Kissimmee municipal elections, as illustrated by the experience of Domingo Toro and John Cortés when they ran for city council in 2004 against Jeanne Van Meter and Jerry Gemske. Toro raised $4,820 compared to Van Meter’s $47,865; Cortés raised $2,287, as against Gemske’s $21,630 (OrlandoSentinel.com 2004). When better qualified than their white opponents, at least in terms of educational achievement, Hispanic candidates had little success raising money running at-large. In his 2004 race, college graduate Domingo Toro faced Jeanne Van Meter, an opponent with only a high school degree; not only did she raise ten times as much money, but she won the contest. John Cortés had only two years of college, but his opponent Jerry Gemske had not finished high school; nevertheless, Gemske raised ten times as much money and was victorious (OrlandoSentinel.com 2004). In 2004, Carlos Cayasso ran for the county school board on a platform emphasizing academics and meaningful after-school activities for students. Cayasso seemed perfectly qualified: a high school teacher in Poinciana for nine years with a B.A. in mathematics from the City College, City University of New York, and five years of experience working for the board of education of the city of New York (Osceola News-Gazette 2004). With only 21 percent of the votes, he came in third in the nonpartisan primary against Thomas E. Chalifoux, Jr., and Debbie Wemette. As columnist Mark Pino put it, when it comes to qualifications, “The bar is not that high when you look at some Osceola officeholders, who aren’t any more qualified than Hispanics who haven’t been elected” (Pino 2005). In the 2000–2004 campaigns, examples of discrimination and prejudice were prevalent. Peter Olivo is an interesting case—he is articulate and speaks with no trace of an accent; his complexion is such that he can pass as a non-Hispanic; and he is a disabled Vietnam veteran, which makes him a sympathetic candidate. He is also someone who on the record is clearly committed to a broad concept of representation (Scott 2005). Yet in 2000 and 2004, Olivo twice ran and lost. Even Olivo, an opponent of the single-member district system of elections, acknowledges that Hispanics face a near impossible task in getting elected countywide and maintaining their ethnic identity.68 He noted that in order to be successful as a candidate for office in Osceola County, Hispanics must not appear Hispanic.69 Olivo is partially right: Hispanics are pressured to deemphasize ethnicity, but deracialization does not lead to success. Mercedes León faced a similar situation when she ran for supervisor of elections in 2004—ethnic identity versus political success. Racially, León is white. Her hair is blond. She easily passes as non-Hispanic. Her biography is a classic Horatio Algers story (Jacobson 2001). She is also Cuban; however, even with favorable class and biographical features, she has not been politically successful. Some Hispanics faced open hostility from Anglos in the community when they ran for elected office. For instance, León, running for supervisor of elections, was initially
[ 266 ] warned not to campaign in areas where it was believed that a Hispanic would not be received well. Later on, during the campaign, one of her Anglo volunteers requested permission to place León’s campaign signs on the property of a St. Cloud resident. The lot contained signs from a multitude of candidates. The volunteer was granted permission but when León’s supporters tried to place the signs, they were surrounded by a group of Anglos, including the property owner, in pick-up trucks. Referring to her signs, the owner told León’s supporters to “take that piece of shit out [sic] of my property.”70 John Cortés, a 2004 candidate for Kissimmee City Commissioner, experienced overt racial insults during his campaign; people came right out and said to him, “another dumb spic running.”71 The only time a candidate was able to successfully overcome the race issue was when Robert Guevara ran for County Commissioner in 1996, and that was under the single-member district system. During the campaign, Guevara’s opponent, the incumbent Charles Owen stated that Guevara was running as a Hispanic, which Guevara felt he needed to deny. Owen played on the prejudices of some in the Anglo community by making a racial appeal. His campaign sent out a mailer with a picture of the light-skinned Owen under “Day” and the dark-skinned Guevara under “Night,” saying that the difference between them was Day and Night. Owen admitted that the ad was in poor taste and issued a private apology to Guevara: however, he never denounced the mailer in public.72 The honesty of Guevara’s campaign was also questioned. The supervisor of elections was asked to look into claims that Hispanic women were being coached to register both under their maiden and married names so they could vote twice. The allegations were made public, and the supervisor of elections found them baseless (Orlando Sentinel 1996). His campaign sent out a mailer with a picture of the light-skinned Owen under “Day” and the dark-skinned Guevara under “Night,” saying that the difference between them was Day and Night.
Hispanics are aware that without non-Hispanic support it is impossible to win countywide elections. This was a matter of general agreement among the group of Hispanics that gathered in 2005 to discuss electoral strategies at a local Cuban restaurant. Some, like Mercedes León, pointed out that even qualified Hispanics with a record of community service, visibility, and a countywide agenda had difficulties succeeding because they were unable to raise enough money to be competitive. As they saw it, the problem was the unwillingness of white voters in the county to vote for a minority
[ 267 ] candidate. This in turn discouraged sympathetic non-Hispanics from making campaign contributions they knew would have no payoff (Cortner n.d.; Hernández 2005). It is remarkable that despite these difficulties so many Hispanics still seek public office. From 2000 to 2004, a total of 23 Hispanic candidates ran for countywide office or for the Kissimmee city council. In these races at all levels of county government, all Hispanic candidates lost (Ortiz 2002c). One fact that is indisputable is that, since the return to the at-large method of elections in Osceola County in 1996, not a single Hispanic was elected to a countywide office. In light of the limited financial resources in the Hispanic community and the lower socioeconomic and educational levels among Hispanic voters in Osceola County, a substantial voter mobilization effort would be required for a candidate to become politically competitive in the at-large system.73 In the context of a single-member district contest, on the other hand, supporters of Robert Guevara were able to overcome the financial advantages of his opponent and did not have to de-emphasize Guevara’s ethnic identity.74 I interviewed a good number of Hispanics who have run for office between 2000 and 2004. All of them are educated, articulate, well informed, and knowledgeable about county politics. All have deep roots in the community. The most recent arrival had been a resident of Osceola County for five years out of twenty-six in Central Florida. All chose Osceola County as the place to spend their mature years. Why do they nevertheless find it so difficult to succeed politically? In León’s case, while money was an issue, it was not the sole explanation of failure. She ran for supervisor of elections in 2004, and people told her that they would not vote for her because she was Hispanic. She also stated that, “In general there is a lack of funding and a lack of credibility; a lot of people still think we are inadequate. When I went to ask for funding from my white colleagues, I was told time and again: ‘Osceola County is not ready to elect a Hispanic, why should we throw our money away?’”75 Some Hispanics did not entertain the possibility of running because of the funding requirements of countywide campaigns. “I’ve been called so many times to run,” said Zulma Vélez-Estrada. “I haven’t because of the [at-large] system. It is very expensive. You need a lot of money.”76 Those who run are forced to finance their campaigns largely with their own money. The political parties rarely if ever provide Hispanic candidates with any kind of monetary support. As for raising funds among Hispanics as an option, the problem is that many Hispanics have limited resources. Many are retired, living on fixed incomes that are in many instances minimal. As Domingo Toro put it, “Money is a big difficulty.”77 Raising money effectively, however, is not entirely out of the question for Hispanics. In 2000, Peter Olivo raised about $7,000 to fund his campaign. This was clearly minimal. However, in 2004, he was able to raise about $30,000.78 “I had the Hispanic vote,” he said, “so I knew I had to reach out to Anglos.”79 By his own admission he did, but neither money nor reaching out made a difference. Mercedes León put up $16,000 of her own money when she ran. This was not enough. “What Hispanic can raise $100,000?” she asked. She was locked out by resistance to change by the power structure and by the unwillingness of voters to support a Hispanic candidate. On this question she was confronted publicly: she was told she had to choose between being a Republican or a Hispanic.80 The experience of these two candidates suggest that, in addition to fundraising challenges, Hispanics have a difficult time persuading Anglos to give them the margin of victory, regardless of how appealing and qualified they may be.
[ 268 ] Guevara’s campaign during the single-member district interlude was instructive. The strategy of Guevara’s campaign manager, Germán Colón, was to persuade enough whites in District 1 that their dissatisfaction with the incumbent should translate into support for his Hispanic opponent. The success of this strategy hinged on reducing the funding requirements of the campaign as well as the number of whites needed for the margin of victory, two conditions that were made possible by the single-member district method of election. “Now the electoral system is the biggest obstacle because of the funding requirements,” said Colón. “When Guevara came up he was not only a good candidate, but there were single-member districts. Without that he would not have won.”81 Another “requirement” for political success that Hispanics generally meet is civic involvement. The individuals I interviewed were active at different levels within the county through membership in advisory boards, commissions, and a host of social, economic, and civic organizations. In 2006, meeting this “requirement” had yet to correlate with political success. Also, due to significant social distance between Hispanics and Anglos, a Hispanic presence in county advisory bodies is still low. As Table 10 indicates, Hispanics are only eight percent of the members of Osceola County’s boards and commissions. In 2006, six out of fifteen county boards and commissions had no Hispanic members.
Mandated Institutional and Structural Changes Up until 2006, the county government had not focused on issues of importance to Hispanic persons until, in many cases, litigation was threatened or had occurred. In 1990, Sally Herrera, from the League of United Latin American Citizens, complained to the board of county commissioners that the county needed to establish an affirmative action program because of the county’s failure to hire more minorities. Herrera stated that “unless follow-up action is taken to implement equal opportunities, she would have no alternative than to seek legal counsel.”82 Subsequently, Luis Román lobbied the county commission to add a minority affairs committee to “alleviate discrimination against minorities” (Jacobson 1991) and to address “problems [that] exist in mainly the Spanish-speaking population.”83 The nine-member committee was created in June 1991. Another mandated change was the adoption of single-member districts in November 1992. Luis Román requested in October 1991 that a referendum be placed on the ballot to decide whether Osceola County should elect its county commissioners by single-member district. Again, the community felt the need to resort to the possibility of legal action in order to have the matter heard. Román stated, “ If the Board will not cooperate with this request[,] he does have the option of bringing suit against the county in Federal Court.”84 In 1992, the county commissioners agreed to place the issue on the November ballot.85 In 2000, there were significant complaints about the lack of printed Spanish materials, hostility toward Spanish-speaking voters, and the lack of bilingual poll workers. The county could have provided Spanish-language assistance to Hispanics; it could have provided poll monitoring to insure that Hispanic voters were not subject to hostile treatment; and it could have consulted with Hispanic community leaders on steps to insure the effectiveness of bilingual assistance to Hispanic voters. The county only agreed to take these measures when it was forced to do so through legal action.86 The county supervisor of elections admitted publicly that she acted only when required to do so, and declared that she did not regret failing to act on her own initiative (Damron 2001).
[ 269 ] In 2004, the county created a community liaison position but only after repeated requests from Hispanics spanning a period of almost ten years (Jacobson 1991; Leal Unmuth 2002; Arrington 2002; Hunt 2004; Rojas 2004b; Osceola Star 2002a, 2002b). However, less than a year after the county hired Isaac Rodríguez as the first community liaison, some community leaders were calling the position irrelevant to Hispanics. This left Hispanics “baffled and disconnected” from government, without “voice [or] access” (Pino 2004). County officials tried to give the appearance of being responsive. They exploited photo opportunities during electoral campaigns, as well as attendance at Hispanic events (Ortiz 2002b). In 2004, Osceola County Sheriff Charlie Aycock posed for the cameras playing dominoes with business executives from Puerto Rico, and, in 2006, Commissioners Atlee Mercer, Wade Davis, and Jerry Gemske dressed as the Magi during a Three Kings Day celebration (Rojas 2004a). Former county commissioners have acknowledged differences between the Anglo and Hispanic cultures and how those differences translate into different needs for the population.87 But such acknowledgement triggers action mostly under compulsion by threat. The typical attitude is “there are some things that unless it’s brought to my attention, I’m not going to think of.”88 less than a year after the county hired Isaac Rodríguez as the first community liaison, some community leaders were calling the position irrelevant to Hispanics.
In 2006, the United States district court for the Orlando division of the middle district of Florida found that Hispanics in Osceola County were a sufficiently large and geographically compact community to constitute a majority in a single-member district; that they were politically cohesive; and that the county’s white majority voted consistently as a bloc to prevent the election of Hispanic candidates. For these reasons, the court ordered an end to the at-large system of election at the county level.89 Once again, the county was forced to act in favor of Hispanics. The immediate reaction of elected officials was to try and nullify this legal victory. In November, the county commission proposed a system that included two at-large seats.90 Opposition to the commission’s subterfuge was loud and clear. The plan that was finally adopted by the county created five single-member districts “designed to give Hispanics more influence at the polls and make it easier for candidates without connections or money to get elected” (Sashin 2007a).
[ 270 ] The 2007 Election In 2007, running in the newly adopted single-member district system, community notable Armando Ramírez was challenged in a Democratic primary by political newcomer Brandon Arrington. Ironically, from the platform of the system designed to elect a minority candidate, Arrington campaigned “to get over this idea of race.” The underlying assumption of his message was that only whites could bridge the divisions between Hispanics and non-Hispanic whites.91 In a March editorial, The Orlando Sentinel endorsed Ramírez as the more experienced and stronger advocate for the newly created District 2.92 Ramírez won the primary with 65 percent of the vote, but in April, voters elected his Puerto Rican Republican opponent, John Quiñones. In 2004, Puerto Rican support for the Republican presidential incumbent, George W. Bush, was 44 percent statewide. In 2008, Osceola County went 59 percent for Obama, while electing Republicans to three out of eight statewide and one county constitutional office.
In 2002, Quiñones was elected to the Florida State Legislature to represent Osceola’s district 49, after defeating another Democratic opponent, José Fernández. How did he do it in a district where Republicans were only one- third of registered voters? By going “door to door, waving the Puerto Rican flag at the homes where it mattered and touching on conservative family themes that resonate with many in the blue-collar area he will now serve. (…) Spanish-speaking Gov. Jeb Bush helped tremendously, too. Quiñones made the case that it would be better for his district (…) to have him working with the party in power in Tallahassee,” and the voters accepted his argument (Marquez 2002). How unusual was this? In 1998, Puerto Ricans voted for Republican Jeb Bush for governor of Florida, yet in 2000 they supported Al Gore for President (Stein 2003). According to the Associated Press, “a top swing vote district in the State, heavily populated with voters of Puerto Rican origin, went for Al Gore by 60 percent in 2000.” The same district supported Governor Jeb Bush’s re-election in 2002 (Puerto Rico Herald 2004). In 2004, Puerto Rican support for the Republican presidential
[ 271 ] incumbent, George W. Bush, was 44 percent statewide. In 2008, Osceola County went 59 percent for Obama, while electing Republicans to three out of eight statewide and one county constitutional office.93 The conflation of the island’s statehood and Florida’s Republican party, the policy similarities between Democrats and Republicans, and ethnic identity and pragmatism, are factors that help explain the willingness of Puerto Ricans to support Republican candidates. In addition, the absence of a tradition of strong affiliation to the Democratic Party among Puerto Rican migrants who move to Florida directly from the island, strong courting by Republicans, and the Puerto Rican style of campaigning mentioned earlier, all contribute to swings in electoral support (Campo-Flores 2008). Of these variables, however, the two least important seem to be the perceived identity between island and county parties because the conflation is rare, and campaigning Puerto Rican style because this tactic works when adopted by Democrats as well. According to Armando Ramírez, none of the above explains his 2007 loss. Instead, he claimed that after his strong showing in the primary, the county’s power elite recruited John Quiñones to run against him with the promise of a judgeship “down the road.” According to Ramírez, his candidacy was also sabotaged by bomb threats in the precincts where he was strong.94 Ramírez’s theory may be baseless since in March a local activist made public a copy of a racist e-mail against Quiñones allegedly sent by a Republican Anglo (Sashin 2007b). Also, Quiñones was not a shoe-in candidate. He declared his candidacy early in February, and in order to run he had to win a primary. A reported threat during the April election did cause the brief closing of two polling places in the county, but it is highly doubtful that Quiñones had anything to do with disruptive activity that would keep potential supporters away from the polls (Sashin and Pinto 2007). So, what explains his victory? Running in a single-member district rather than at-large was critical. But also, even though after the election he was indignant at the suggestion that he may have been elected for reasons other than issues and qualifications,95 from the onset of the campaign it was clear that he was pinning his chances as a Republican on being a “popular Puerto Rican” (HispanicTips 2007). From the newspaper trail, it does not seem that he waved the Puerto Rican flag as vigorously in 2007 as he did in 2002. Nonetheless, he did target his message to appeal to Hispanics by pledging to give Buenaventura Lakes, where the bulk of Puerto Rican voters reside, more attention, to have office hours in the community, and to work with the community to build a bigger community center with after- school programs (Sashin 2007c). Quiñones was clearly the more qualified candidate. Ramírez admitted during the campaign that he was less a politician than an advocate and openly declared himself to be more interested in raising issues than in governing (Orlando Sentinel 2008).96 One thing is certain—if given the opportunity, Puerto Ricans will tend to support a co-ethnic running for office; in Osceola, if the co-ethnic is well-connected to the prevailing network of power, so much the better. This jibes with a long-standing feature of Puerto Rican and Hispanic political behavior and also with the political dynamics in Osceola County, where the majority of voters are a mix of Republicans and Independents. Such diffusion in partisan affiliation invites pragmatism and partially explains why in 2000 Al Gore received 51 percent of the ballots while in 2004 George W. Bush garnered 52 percent of the vote in the county.97 It also helps explain why Quiñones ran successfully in 2002, 2006, and 2007.
[ 272 ] The Character of Puerto Rican/Hispanic Political Participation Between 1991 and 2006, Hispanics in Osceola County did not have the same opportunity as Anglos to participate equally in the political process. They experienced lower socioeconomic status, lower educational attainment, and residential segregation. They lacked adequate information and services in Spanish. These structural barriers prevented equal participation by Hispanic voters. Such barriers also kept Hispanics and Anglos separate from each other, making it difficult for Hispanic candidates to benefit from the social and political networks that facilitate political advancement. Attitudes towards Hispanics in the county have run the gamut from indifference when their numbers were small to outright hostility when the possibility of their political advancement was evident. Hispanics have confronted racism, prejudice, and xenophobia in Osceola County. Their distinctive cultural characteristics have been denigrated in us-versus-them fashion. They have been unfairly accused of being foreigners unwilling to assimilate, despite the fact that the majority of Hispanics in the county (Puerto Ricans) are citizens by birth, and almost half of the foreign-born have naturalized. Negative traits of individuals have been generalized to the group to discredit the Hispanic community and to prevent its political advancement. Most troublesome is the fact that even in the face of repeated complaints from Hispanics and Anglos, elected officials were unwilling to even acknowledge the existence of problems.
Hispanic voters have faced difficulties in registration and voting as a result of linguistic barriers. In 2006, it was easier for them to register and vote in Osceola County mostly as a result of federal legislation, private efforts, and enforcement pressures on county officials who were otherwise unwilling to serve Hispanics. Hispanic voters were systematically discouraged from voting due to inadequate language resources, by attitudes of hostility and resentment of poll workers, and by elected officials who failed to provide the electoral services they needed. Most troublesome is the fact that even in the face of repeated complaints from Hispanics and Anglos, elected officials were unwilling to even acknowledge the existence of problems. Spanish-language services for registration and voting were unequal in scope and effectiveness compared to English-language services. Hispanic candidates for political office wrestled with open hostility and racially offensive comments. They confronted an entrenched power structure that at best
[ 273 ] was inconsistent in its attitude towards political newcomers. More often than not the political parties welcomed them as voters and as party members but not as leaders. Hispanic candidates spent considerable effort playing by the rules of the game and making themselves palatable, often by de-emphasizing their ethnicity, with little gain. Social distance and prejudice made their success more difficult even when their qualifications for office were good. In this atmosphere, the financial obstacles they faced running against better-funded Anglo candidates were doubly significant. These difficulties were compounded by the at-large method of election. Hispanics leaders complained about the at-large electoral system in Osceola County since the 1990s. Despite multiple and repeated candidacies, no Hispanic was ever elected at-large. The only Hispanic elected to the county commission between 1991 and 2006, Robert Guevara, did so under the single-member district system briefly adopted in 1992. Guevara was a well-respected and successful member of the community who was considered a “bridge” between Anglos and Hispanics. Yet Guevara himself declared publicly that he would not have run in 1996 under an at-large system. More specifically, the Puerto Rican/Hispanic political experience in Osceola County belies notions about a post- racial, post-ethnic politics in the United States, which in regard to race have acquired new resonance with the election of Barack Obama to the U.S. presidency.
The political experience of Hispanics in Osceola County has been marked by inequality. Despite this, Hispanic voters have participated in the electoral process and have been even more active when mobilized. Political parties rarely, if ever, perform this function. It is remarkable that so many Hispanic candidates have vied for office. Citizenship and the socioeconomic disparities between Hispanics and Anglos explain some differences in turnout between the groups. Two key factors that also explain lower registration and turnout among Hispanic voters are: Osceola County’s failure to offer a program of Spanish-language services for registration and voting equal to the existing English-language program; and an electoral system that provided Hispanic voters with little opportunity to elect their preferred candidates. In a context of racial polarization, deracialization strategies were frustrating and fruitless.
[ 274 ] Thus, a theoretical characterization of Puerto Rican/Hispanic political participation in Osceola County would include the elements of racialization, inequality, reliance on external resources, and a type of identity politics that mixes elements of minority and white political behavior. More specifically, the Puerto Rican/Hispanic political experience in Osceola County belies notions about a post-racial, post-ethnic politics in the United States, which in regard to race have acquired new resonance with the election of Barack Obama to the U.S. presidency. To be sure, Puerto Ricans and Hispanics have scored significant electoral achievements in areas of traditional settlement such as New York and Chicago. But in new destinations significant difficulties persist and these are related to ethnicity and race, among other factors. To be sure, the past political experience of Puerto Ricans/Hispanics cannot be used to refute a claim about present developments. However, the account provided here is about events that took place precisely when race was supposed to be declining in significance and post- ethnicity was supposedly coming into being. The political experience of Puerto Ricans/Hispanics in Osceola County suggests that race and ethnicity are enduring categories, for better or for worse. The election of Robert Guevara and John “Q” was driven by race and ethnicity rather than being a post-racial, post-ethnic phenomenon. For Puerto Ricans/Hispanics in Osceola County, “post-racial” and “post-ethnic” do mean invisibility of race and ethnicity, but only of their race and ethnicity. As of November 2009, they represented only 5.6 percent of county- elected officials (compared to an estimated 41 percent of the population in 2007) and 0 percent of officials running the county’s major political parties.99 but when Hispanics are the demographically dominant group, they tend to place a greater premium on substantive representation regardless of partisanship.
While in the political science literature deracialization has been suggested as a useful electoral strategy, the Puerto Rican/Hispanic electoral experience in Osceola County suggests that such an approach frustrates and discourages candidates from running, especially under conditions of racial polarization.100 In the county’s racially polarized environment, this was the case before the election of Guevara and John “Q” was facilitated by the adoption of single-member districts; conversely, the exploitation of ethnic identity was politically useful for both Quiñones and Guevara. Running in a single-member district where the majority of voters was Hispanic allowed them to take advantage of their ethnic identity without raising the red flags usually associated with identity politics. This research suggests a corollary to the proposition that Hispanics are more likely to vote for a co-ethnic when they are provided with the opportunity to do
[ 275 ] so (see De La Garza et al. 1992: 136, 138).101 In Osceola County, this is true, but when Hispanics are the demographically dominant group, they tend to place a greater premium on substantive representation regardless of partisanship. In this sense, their political behavior approximates the political behavior of whites, whiteness being understood as taking descriptive representation for granted.102 My concept of whiteness is narrowly tailored to electoral behavior. It does not refer, as does the whiteness literature, to assimilation, to pressures to assimilate, or to the adoption of a white racial identity.103 For minorities, descriptive representation has become synonymous with “preferred candidate,” and it is often the gateway to substantive representation. White voters, in contrast, seldom have to worry about descriptive representation because they can take it for granted as the majority group. In this case, it is easier to downplay race and ethnicity or to claim that they are, at best, unimportant or, at worst, embody repulsive factors. In 2007, Puerto Rican/Hispanic voters did not have to worry that John “Q”’s resignation as representative for Osceola’s state district 49 to run for district 2 county commissioner would translate into a loss of ethnic representation: in the Democratic primary for the state seat four out of six candidates were Puerto Rican/Hispanic, and in the general election the major party candidates were both Hispanic; the primary winner, Democrat Darren Soto, also won the general election against erstwhile Democrat Anthony Suárez. Similarly, in county district 2 their choice in the general election was between two Puerto Ricans. Not having to worry about descriptive representation, they chose a candidate based on issues, experience, and connections; therefore, they elected Republican John “Q.” Thus, so long as Puerto Ricans/Hispanics continue to face socioeconomic and political inequality while simultaneously enjoying discrete opportunities to choose between Puerto Rican/Hispanic candidates, their political behavior is likely to encompass a mix of minority and white elements; minority to the extent that it seeks descriptive representation to achieve incorporation and redress for social disadvantage, and white to the extent that it takes descriptive representation for granted.
[ 276 ] APPENDIX A: Profile of Informants n a m e o c c u p a t i o n y e a r s in a g e h i g h e s t d e g r e e r a c e /e t h n i c i t y * c o u n t y Carmen Carrasquillo agency Administrator 15 62 assoc. Degree non-white/Puerto Rican Jeanette Coughenour Manager 20+ 47 assoc. Degree White Casmore Shaw trainer for Time Share Co. 19 52 M.A. Black Zulma Vélez-Estrada self-employed 14 60 B.A. Non-white/Puerto Rican Ana María Méndez labor Organizer 9 50 assoc. Degree White/Puerto Rican Mark Addison engineer 13 44 M.A. White Armando Ramírez retired policeman 16 71 B.A. Non-White/Puerto Rican María Alvarez social Worker 9 49 M.A. White/Puerto Rican Beulah Farquhason real Estate Broker 15 47 High School Black Carlos Irizarry technician 18 50 assoc. Degree non-white/Puerto Rican Mercedes León attorney 5** 42 J.D. White/Cuban Peter Olivo core Trainer 13 56 High School non-white/Dominican Evelyn Rivera - 20 59 B.A. Non-white/Puerto Rican Germán Colón retired 20 77 High School White/Puerto Rican John Cortés small Business Owner 8 - High School White/Puerto Rican
Isabel Rosado Housewife 2 1/2 30 High School non-white/Puerto Rican Domingo Toro retired Business Manager 26 74 B.A. White/Puerto Rican José Hoyos loan Officer 5 38 High School White/Puerto Rican Vicky Arenas catering Services 28 59 High School non-White/Colombian
* Hispanics can be of any race. I did not ask informants how they identified themselves racially to the Census Bureau. Instead I assigned white or non-white classifications based on observation during the interview. ** Has resided for 26 years in Central Florida.
notes 1 United States v. Osceola County, No. 6:05-CV-1053-ORL-31DAB (M.D. FLA, October 18, 2006). Disclosure: I was an expert witness for the plaintiff in this voting rights case. Staff from the U.S. Department of Justice provided access to court depositions and disclosure lists, on site logistical support, and research assistance gathering primary sources. 2
[ 277 ] 11 The counties that comprise the Orlando Metro area are Orange, Osceola, Seminole, and Lake. 12 Isabel Rosado interview, January 12, 2006. All interviews were conducted by the author. 13 José Hoyos interview, January 10, 2006. 14 While Lafferty (1992a) refers to “minorities” generally in his article, the advances he mentions refer specifically to accomplishments by Hispanics. 15 Germán Colón interview, January 11, 2006; Carmen Carrasquillo interview, January 13, 2006; Ana María Méndez interview, January 9, 2006; Armando Ramírez interview, January 10, 2006. 16 Germán Colón interview, January 11, 2006. 17 For a discussion of the dynamics of this phenomenon see Fainstein (1995). 18 Reporter Michael Lafferty cited in Orlando Sentinel (1992: 6). 19 Charles Dunnick, Jr. Deposition, February 15, 2006 at 157. This and all subsequent depositions cited are from United States v. Osceola County, No. 6:05-CV-1053-ORL-31DAB (M.D. FLA, October 18, 2006). 20 Ibid at 162. 21 For Marciniak’s credentials and short bio see Osceola Star (2004a). 22 E-mail communication from Bill Hunt to Armando Ramírez, November 28, 2005. Author’s collection. 23 Ana María Méndez interview, January 12, 2006. 24 Peter Olivo interview, January 11, 2006 25 Mercedes León interview, January 11, 2006; Ana María Méndez interview, January 9, 2006; Domingo Toro interview, January 10, 2006; Armando Ramírez, interview, January 13, 2006. 26 Domingo Toro interview, January 10, 2006; Armando Ramírez interview, January 13, 2006. 27 Mercedes León interview, January 11, 2006; Ana María Méndez interview, January 9, 2006. 28 Casmore Shaw interview, January 9, 2006. 29 Ana María Méndez interview, January 9, 2006. 30 Carmen Carrasquillo interview, January 13, 2006. 31 Germán Colón interview, January 11, 2006; Zulma Vélez-Estrada interview, January 9, 2006. 32 Peter Olivo Deposition, February 7, at 62, 150; Peter Olivo interview, January 11, 2006; José Hoyos Deposition, February 8, 2006, at 82-83. 33 José Hoyos Deposition, February 8, 2006, at 82-83. 34 John Cortés interview, January 11, 2006. 35 See Supplemental Declaration of Theodore S. Arrington, Ph.D., United States of America v. Osceola County, No: 6:05-CV-010 53-GAP-DAB, August 18, 2006, p. 2. 36 Osceola County Supervisor of Elections. 20 November 2009
[ 278 ] 11, 2006; Casmore Shaw interview, January 9, 2006. In her deposition Donna Bryant said that Rosa Cruz, who is bilingual, was in her office staff in 2000. Donna Bryant Deposition, February 17, 2006, at 43-44. 43 Peter Olivo Deposition, February 7, 2006, at 65–66. 44 Ibid., at 65; Donna Bryant Deposition, February 17, 2006, at 100. 45 Consent Decree in United States v. Osceola County, 6:02-CV-738 (M.D. Fla July 22, 2002); Letter from Ralph F. Boyd, Jr., Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights, to John B. Ritch, Osceola County Attorney, and Donna Bryant, July 26, 2002. 46 Donna Bryant Deposition, February 17, 2006, at 27–28, 33, 37, 48, 99–102. 47 Ibid., at 68. 48 Ibid., at 68–9, 71. 49 Ibid., at 70–1. 50 Ibid., at 99–102, 125. 51 Ibid., 2006, at 124. 52 Mary Jane Arrington Deposition, February 20, 2006 at 149–51; Peter Olivo Deposition, February 7, 2006 at 53, 72–6; Domingo Toro interview, January 10, 2006; Mercedes León interview, January 11, 2006; John Cortés interview, January 11, 2006; Evelyn Rivera interview, January 11, 2006; Isabel Rosado interview, January 12, 2006; Beulah Farquhason interview, January 12, 2006; Schneider (2001). 53 Evelyn Rivera interview, January 11, 2006; Mercedes León interview, January 11, 2006. 54 María Álvarez interview, January 13, 2006. 55 Donna Bryant Deposition, February 17, 2006, at 103–4, 110–3. 56 Peter Olivo Deposition, February 7, 2006 at 75–6; Mary Jane Arrington Deposition, February 20, 2006 at 149–151; Armando Ramírez, interview, January 13, 2006. 57 In total, voters in precincts with more than 20 percent Hispanic registration cast a third of the ballots county-wide on Election Day. Yet they accounted for more than half of Osceola’s overpunched ballots. 58 United States Commission On Civil Rights, Testimony of Mr. Jackson Chin, Associate Counsel, Puerto Rican Legal Defense & Education Fund, Inc., New York City, before the United States Commission On Civil Rights, January 11, 2001, 1:30 PM Session, Holiday Inn Select, Tallahassee, Florida.
[ 279 ] 71 John Cortés interview, January 11, 2006. 72 Charles Owen Deposition, February 16, 2006 at 99–103. 73 John Cortés interview, January 11, 2006; Zulma Vélez-Estrada interview, January 9, 2006. Velez-Estrada, a 14-year resident, knows from her experience with the “Que Nada Nos Detenga” voter registration campaign how effective proactive voter mobilization can be. Political science research also suggests that contact increases the likelihood of turnout. See Ramírez (2005) and Michelson (2005). 74 Zulma Vélez-Estrada interview, January 9, 2006. 75 Mercedes León interview, January 11, 2006. 76 Zulma Vélez-Estrada interview, January 9, 2006. 77 Domingo Toro interview, January 10, 2006. 78 Peter Olivo Deposition, February 7, 2006, at 106. 79 Peter Olivo interview, January 11, 2006 80 Mercedes León interview, January 11, 2006. 81 Germán Colón interview, January 11, 2006. 82 Osceola Board of County Commissioner Minutes, May 14, 1990, p. 20. 83 Osceola Board of County Commissioner Minutes, June 3, 1991, p. 4. 84 Osceola Board of County Commission Minutes, October 14, 1991, p. 2. 85 Charles Owen Deposition, February 16, 2006, at 151. 86 Consent Decree in United States v. Osceola County, 6:02-CV-738 (M.D. Fla July 22, 2002). 87 Chuck Dunnick Deposition, February 15, 2006, at 156–62; Charles Owen Deposition, February 16, 2006, at 100. 88 Chuck Dunnick cited in Schneider (2002: 2). 89 United States v. Osceola County (2006), at 11 and 25. 90 “Armando Ramirez’s Speech To Osceola Commissioners Nov.13th/Revision,” e-mail communication with author, November 18, 2006. Author’s collection. 91 Ibid. 92 `Armando Ramírez, e-mail communication with author, March 4, 2007. Author’s collection. 93 Osceola County Supervisor of Elections, Election Summary Report, Official General Election, Osceola County, Florida, November 4, 2008. 20 November 2009.
[ 280 ] 99
References Arrington, Mary Jane. 2002. Letter to the Editor. El Osceola Star 10–16 May: 6. Bouma, Katherine. 1996. Osceola Counts Many New Voters. The Orlando Sentinel 1 September (Osceola Sentinel Section): 1. Campo-Flores, Arian. 2008. A New Latino Mix. Newsweek 30 September. 11 October 2008
[ 281 ] Gallagher, Kirsten. 1992. Hispanics Run Voter Drives to Gain Clout. The Orlando Sentinel 16 April: I1. Gonella, Steve. 2005. Letter. Osceola News-Gazette 17 September. Hansen, Guillermo. 1996a. KKK Protest in St. Cloud. El Osceola Star 29 March–4 April: 4. ______. 1996b. Hispanic Vote Decides Election. El Osceola Star 8–14 November: 1. Heilig, Peggy and Robert J. Mundt. 1983. Changes in Representational Equity: The Effect of Adopting Districts. Social Science Quarterly 64: 393–7. ______. 1984. Do Districts Make a Difference? Urban Interest 3: 62–75. Hernández, Julián. 2005. Hispanic Candidates Meet. El Osceola Star 3–9 June: 1. Higgins, Michael S. 2001. Residents Will Have Chance to Complain About Vote. OsceolaNewsGazette.com 24 March. HispanicTips. 2007. Quiñones takes leap back into new spotlight — running for Osceola County Commission seat in Central Florida. 2 February. 28 October 2008.
[ 282 ] Meier, Kenneth J. and Robert E. England. 1984. Black Representation and Educational Policy: Are They Related? American Political Science Review 78: 392–403. Meier, Kenneth J., Joseph Stewart, Jr., and Robert E. England. 1989. Race, Class and Education: The Politics of Second Generation Discrimination. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press. Michelson, Melissa R. 2005. Meeting the Challenge of Latino Voter Mobilization. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 601 (September): 85–101. Millican, Anthony. 1994. Latino Vote Blurs Already Fuzzy Party Lines. The Orlando Sentinel 7 August: 1. Montalvo, Eduardo. 2006. Column. Osceola News-Gazette 17 February. Oliande, Sylvia L. 2002. Voters Will Face Lenghty Ballot Nov. 5. Osceola News-Gazette 12 October: A1. Orlando Sentinel. 1992. It’s Time We Defuse Language Debate. 9 February: 6. ______. 1996. It’s Decision Time for Voters. 3 November: 1. ______. 2000. Hispanics Give Little Money to Candidates, Hispanic Candidates, Who Often Must Campaign Using Their Own Money, Think That Needs To Change Soon. 8 October: B1. ______. 2001. Central Florida News to Note. 15 July (Osceola Sentinel Section). ______. 2008. Advocate, Not Politician. 4 May: B3. OrlandoSentinel.com. 2002. Voting Failures. 27 May. ______. 2004. Kissimmee City Council. 5 December. Ortiz, P. J. 2002a. Hispanic Candidates. El Osceola Star 23–29 August: 1. ______. 2002b. Wooing the Hispanic Vote. El Osceola Star. 18–24 October: 1. ______. 2002c. Quiñones Wins. El Osceola Star 8–14 November: 1. Osceola News-Gazette. 2004. Q&A of Candidates for Osceola County School Board District 2. 25 August 25. Osceola Star. 1996a. Hispanics Working: Jobs and Discrimination. 1–7 March: 3. ______. 1996b. Osceola Changes. 1–7 March: 5–6. ______. 1996c. Chamber of Commerce Launches Minority Council. 29 May–6 June 6: 1. ______. 1997a. Interview with Guevara. 4–10 April: 4. ______. 1997b. Work & Discrimination. 4–10 April: 7. ______. 2002a. County Lacks Hispanic Liaison. 26 April 2–May: 1. ______. 2002b. The Making of a Hispanic Liaison. 14–20 June: 1. ______. 2002c. Puerto Ricans Encouraged to Vote. 19–25 July: 1. ______. 2004a. 2004–Osceola Candidates. 15–21 October: 12. ______. 2004b. The Hispanic Vote Did Count. 5–11 November 5–11: 1. Padilla, Maria. 2001. Election Help on Way for Hispanics. OrlandoSentinel.com 27 February. Peek, Janice. 2005. Letter. Osceola News-Gazette 15 October. Perry, Huey L. 1991. Deracialization as an Analytical Construct in American Urban Politics. Urban Affairs Quarterly 27(2): 181–91. Pino, Mark. 2004. Leadership Should Reflect Its Community. The Orlando Sentinel 17 December. ______. 2005. Compromise Can Head Off Turbulent Suit. The Orlando Sentinel.com 24 July. Polinard, J. L., Robert D. Wrinkle, and Tomas Longoria. 1990. Education and Governance: Representational Links to Second Generation Discrimination. Western Political Quarterly 43: 631–46. Puerto Rico Herald. 2004. Associated Press, ‘Puerto Rican Vote May Determine Presidential Election… Presidential Candidates Disappoint Most Puerto Rican Leaders So Far… El Diario/La Prensa: Puerto Rico’s Lack of Votes ‘Outrageous.’
[ 283 ] 5 March. 12 October 2008
[ 284 ] Wise, Tim. 2009. Between Barack and a Hard Place, Racism and White Denial In The Age of Obama. San Francisco: City Lights. Wilson, William Julius. 1978. The Declining Significance of Race. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ______. 1990. The Truly Disadvantaged. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ______. 2009. More than Just Race, Being Black and Poor in the Inner City. New York: W.W. Norton & Co. Wolfinger, Raymond E. and Steven J. Rosenstone. 1980. Who Votes? New Haven: Yale University Press. Woodson, Robert L., Sr. 2008. Obama and a Post-Racial America. Washington Times 12 April. 18 November 2009
[ 285 ]