Now that the primary’s over, however, Gingrich suddenly wants to sing a different tune. In an interview with Meet the Press’ David Gregory last Sunday, Gingrich claimed that by emphasizing his economic and education policies — which include massive cuts to education in order to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy — Romney can erase nearly all of his deficit among Latinos:

GINGRICH: The question is, if you campaign on those issues…does that overcome whatever the Democratic attack is? And I think he’ll probably get the same percent that George W. Bush did, which will be up in the 40s.

Watch here:

It’s unlikely that Latino voters, or any voters, for that matter, will embrace Romney’s less-education-and-more-tax-cuts-for-Donald-Trump polices if Romney campaigns openly on what he stands for. Such an open campaign appears unlikely, however. Romney has already attempted to obfuscate his views in the general election by trying to Etch-A-Sketch away the hardline immigration policies that he espoused during the GOP primary before he needed to woo moderate voters.

Back in January, Romney said his immigration plan would be to make undocumented immigrants “self-deport.” And he proudly accepted the endorsement of Kris Kobach, the anti-immigrant author of Arizona and Alabama’s immigration laws, who is still advising the Romney campaign about immigration. Since he effectively locked up the nomination, however, Romney tried (and failed) to distance himself from Kobach and a Republican Party official even tried to claim that Romney is “still deciding what his position on immigration is.”

Listen:

Cruz responded to Dewhurst’s ad by immediately accusing his opponent of racism — claiming that it’s real purpose is to communicate to Texas Republicans that “anyone with a ‘Z’ in their name is unelectable.” Cruz, however, would have much more credibility as a crusader against anti-Hispanic bigotry if he had not launched his own television campaign with a racially charged ad touting his efforts to ensure that Texas could execute an “illegal alien”:

When the UN and World Court overruled a Texas jury’s verdict to execute an illegal alien for raping and murdering two teenage girls, Ted Cruz fought all the way to the Supreme Court, and he delivered. . . . Politicians cut deals, principled conservatives deliver.

Watch it:

As ThinkProgress previously explained, the case Cruz flags here had nothing whatsoever to do with whether Texas is allowed to kill Mexican nationals who commit capital offenses. Rather, the case presented the very narrow question of whether Texas must comply with America’s then-existing treaty obligation to inform foreign nationals who are arrested in the United States of their right “to request assistance from the consul of his own state.” What Cruz won in the Supreme Court is Texas’ right to ignore an international legal obligation that even North Korea has honored.

Nevertheless, Cruz chose to open his campaign with an ad suggesting that he was all that stood between poor, vulnerable Texas Republican families and a marauding Mexican “illegal alien.” He hardly has the moral high ground to protest against someone else’s attempts to inject race into this campaign.

Dolores Huerta speaking at the 2009 National Conference on LGBT Equality.

At the Huffington Post, legendary civil rights and labor activist Dolores Huerta has quashed speculation that President Obama’s support for marriage equality will somehow alienate Latino voters. Instead, she says, the fight for immigrants’ rights and workers’ rights has helped many understand “the core American value of equality under the law”:

As a community that has fought and continues to fight against bigotry and discrimination , we understand how dangerous it is to pick and choose who deserve equality and respect. Those of us who have dedicated our lives to working for immigrants’ rights and workers’ rights understand the core American value of equality under the law. A better country for immigrants is a better country for all. A better country for gays and lesbians is a better country for all. We’re all in this together. [...]

The gay rights movement is working for many of the same basic rights and dignities that those of us in the immigrants’ rights and labor movements have been fighting for decades: workplace rights, economic security, access to opportunity. The gay community has been a strong ally for us in the quest for public policy that treats all people with respect and dignity. We will continue to do the same for them.

Huerta also took time to recognize the important intersections between race, sexuality, and gender that are often ignored, noting, “There are just as many LGBT people in our communities as there are throughout the country. We too have gay and lesbian hermanos y hermanas, friends and children.”

The 82-year-old activist is best known for working with César Chávez to found what would become the United Farm Workers. She also originated the slogan “Sí se puede,” which Obama adapted as his campaign motto, “Yes We Can.”

Eagle Forum founder Phyllis Schlafly

Yesterday, the New York Times reported on new census data which showed, for the first time, that non-white births made up over 50 percent of all births in the United States last year.

It marked an important milestone, indicative of a changing United States that has long been considered the world’s melting pot. Or, if you’re the conservative, Phyllis Schlafly-backed Eagle Forum, it’s a clarion call that America is in grave danger of being overrun by uneducated, un-American brown people:

It is not a good thing. The immigrants do not share American values, so it is a good bet that they will not be voting Republican when they start voting in large numbers.
[...]
Instead, the USA is being transformed by immigrants who do not share those values, and who have high rates of illiteracy, illegitimacy, and gang crime, and they will vote Democrat when the Democrats promise them more food stamps.

Setting aside for a minute the offensive way in which the Eagle Forum dismisses all of “the immigrants” as thoughtless criminals, it’s telling that The Eagle Forum views this as simply a political problem. The Eagle Forum’s political allies have long insisted on treating immigrants as second-class citizens, and rather than pivot their policy proposals to better accommodate the nation’s shifting demographics, the group seems instead to want to curb minorities’ procreation.

The Eagle Forum doesn’t dwell on the fringes of the conservative movement either. The group still wields considerable influence in conservative circles, and has achieved more than a few legislative victories, like derailing the Equal Rights Amendment in the 1970s and staunchly opposing bills aimed at protecting a women’s right to choose.

The post goes on to accuse immigrants — and, for reasons passing understanding, The New York Times for reporting on this — of seeking to “destroy the American family,” arguing that immigrants do not share American values. Of course, this is hardly the first time The Eagle Foundation has pushed xenophobia.

(Source: al.com)

The provision scaring children away from schools is not the only harsh provision left intact by the new bill leaves. Unchanged provisions include one that bars undocumented aliens from renting property and another that allows law enforcement to check immigration status based on a “reasonable suspicion.” It also preserves a section that proscribes a variety of penalties, including permanent loss of license, for businesses that hire undocumented workers. Plus, the new bill piles on by adding another harsh provision requiring the state Department of Homeland Security “to post a quarterly list of the names of any undocumented alien who appears in court for a violation of state law, regardless of whether they were convicted.”

The one bright side of the bill is that it clarifies which “business transactions” undocumented immigrants are prevented from entering into with the state. The new bill only requires proof of citizenship for getting car tags and driver’s, business, and commercial licenses — a change that clarifies a provision that has been used to deny water to immigrants in their homes.

Because the regular session of the Senate ends at midnight tonight, the House and Senate much reach a compromise today for these changes to go into effect. Opponents of the law protested before and after the vote by the Senate, and protests are expected to continue. Four of seven protestors who blocked a Senate hallway were led away in handcuffs.

–Alex Brown

New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez (R)

In an interview with the Daily Beast’s Andrew Romano, Martinez acknowledged the problem. “I have no doubt Hispanics have been alienated during this campaign,” she said. Indeed, one recent poll found a startling 68 point gap between Romney and President Obama among Hispanics. “But now there’s an opportunity for Gov. Romney to have a sincere conversation about what we can do and why,” she added.

Part of that may be softening his immigration stance, which was among the harshest in the GOP primary. Romney said his immigration policy would be to make life so miserable for undocumented immigrants that they would choose to “self-deport.” But Martinez balked at this. “‘Self-deport?’ What the heck does that mean?” Martinez “snap[ped] at Romano.

Martinez also called for he GOP to “outflank the president–on the left–by proposing its own comprehensive plan” — something that is highly unlikely for Romney to support considering that he’s vowed to veto the DREAM Act and his immigration adviser, the controversial activist behind Arizona’s anti-immigration law, said his candidate will not support any legislation that opens a path to citizenship for immigrants.

But perhaps Romney-Martinez 2012 is not meant to be anyway, as Martinez has repeatedly said she’s not interested in being vice president and Romney is supposedly looking for an “incredibly boring white guy” — criteria which excludes Martinez at least twice over.

1. Forcing Women To Sleep In Their Own Menstrual Blood: In Arpaio’s jails, “female Latina LEP prisoners have been denied basic sanitary items. In some instances, female Latina LEP prisoners have been forced to remain with sheets or pants soiled from menstruation because of MCSO’s failure to ensure that detention officers provide language assistance in such circumstances.”
2. Assaulting Pregnant Women: “[A]n MCSO officer stopped a Latina woman – a citizen of the United States and five months pregnant at the time – as she pulled into her driveway. After she exited her car, the officer then insisted that she sit on the hood of the car. When she refused, the officer grabbed her arms, pulled them behind her back, and slammed her, stomach first, into the vehicle three times. He then dragged her to the patrol car and shoved her into the backseat. He left her in the patrol car for approximately 30 minutes without air conditioning. The MCSO officer ultimately issued a citation for failure to provide identification.”
3. Stalking Latina Women: “In another instance, during a crime suppression operation, two MCSO officers followed a Latina woman, a citizen of the United States, for a quarter of a mile to her home. The officers did not turn on their emergency lights, but insisted that the woman remain in her car when she attempted to exit the car and enter her home. The officers’ stated reasons for approaching the woman was a non-functioning license plate light. When the woman attempted to enter her home, the officers used force to take her to the ground, kneed her in the back, and handcuffed her. The woman was then taken to an MCSO substation, cited for ‘disorderly conduct,’ and returned home. The disorderly conduct citation was subsequently dismissed.”
4. Criminalizing Being A Latino: “During raids, [Arpaio's Criminal Enforcement Squad] typically seizes all Latinos present, whether they are listed on the warrant or not. For example, in one raid CES had a search warrant for 67 people, yet 109 people were detained. Fifty-nine people were arrested and 50 held for several hours before they were released. Those detained, but not on the warrant, were seized because they were Latino and present at the time of the raid. No legal justification existed for their detention.”
5. Criminalizing Living Next To The Wrong People: “[D]uring a raid of a house suspected of containing human smugglers and their victims . . . officers went to an adjacent house, which was occupied by a Latino family. The officers entered the adjacent house and searched it, without a warrant and without the residents’ knowing consent. Although they found no evidence of criminal activity, after the search was over, the officers zip-tied the residents, a Latino man, a legal permanent resident of the United States, and his 12-year-old Latino son, a citizen of the United States, and required them to sit on the sidewalk for more than one hour, along with approximately 10 persons who had been seized from the target house, before being released.”
6. Ignoring Rape: Because of Arpaio’s obsessive focus on “low-level immigration offenses” his officers failed “to adequately respond to reports of sexual violence, including allegations of rape, sexual assault, and sexual abuse of girls.”
7. Widespread Use Of Racial Slurs: “MCSO personnel responsible for prisoners held in MCSO jails routinely direct racial slurs toward Latino prisoners, including calling Latino prisoners ‘paisas,’ ‘wetbacks,’ ‘Mexican bitches,’ ‘fucking Mexicans,’ and ‘stupid Mexicans.’”
8. Widespread Racial Profiling: “[I]n the southwest portion of the County, the study found that Latino drivers are almost four times more likely to be stopped by MCSO officers than non-Latino drivers engaged in similar conduct. . . . In the northwest portion of the County, the study found that Latino drivers are over seven times more likely to be stopped by MCSO officers than non-Latino drivers engaged in similar conduct. . . . Most strikingly, in the northeast portion of the County, the study found that Latino drivers are nearly nine times more likely to be stopped by MCSO officers than non-Latino drivers engaged in similar conduct.”
9. Random, Unlawful Detention Of Latinos: “MCSO officers stopped a car carrying four Latino men, although the car was not violating any traffic laws. The MCSO officers ordered the men out of the car, zip-tied them, and made them sit on the curb for an hour before releasing all of them. The only reason given for the stop was that the men’s car ‘was a little low,’ which is not a criminal or traffic violation.”
10. Group Punishments For Latinos: “In some instances, when a Latino [Low English Proficiency] prisoner has been unable to understand commands given in English, MCSO detention officers have put an entire area of the jail in lockdown—effectively preventing all the prisoners in that area from accessing a number of privileges because of the Latino LEP prisoner’s inability to understand English, inciting hostility toward the LEP prisoner, and potentially placing MCSO officers and other prisoners in harm’s way.”

The survey also tested attitudes toward dealing with young people brought to the U.S. illegally by their parents. Asked what should be done with young people brought here illegally who are attending college or have enlisted in the military, a 49 percent plurality agreed that Congress should allow them to remain in the country “and guarantee them that they can become American citizens if they complete their studies or military service.” Another 35 percent said that Washington should instead allow them to remain here and “apply for citizenship … but not guarantee them that they can become American citizens.”

The question did not identify the partisan sponsors, but the first option summarizes the Democrats’ existing Dream Act, and the second, the alternative that Republican star Rubio is drafting. Democrats strongly preferred the first option, while independents did so narrowly, and Republicans split almost evenly between the two. Hispanics heavily preferred the Democratic option, which also drew support from a slight majority of African-Americans and a narrow plurality of whites. Only one-in-10 of those polled (and even just one-in-seven Republicans) said that those young people should not be allowed to remain here. Similarly, just 17 percent said that the government should deport all of the illegal immigrants here “no matter how long” they have lived in the country; that’s down from 25 percent last December.

Mr. Romney, meanwhile, appears caught between his advisor and the watered down bill favored by Sen. Rubio. Rather than decide between these two unpopular options, Romney should do the right thing which, in this case, also happens to be the most politically popular thing.

Though his provisions do not go far enough, or match Democratic efforts to protect the undocumented, they may build support among Republicans, who are hoping to pass a version of VAWA that violates the confidentiality of undocumented people.

Poe, generally not a fan of the undocumented community in his home state, argued that protections for undocumented victims are necessary and humane:

POE: The concept and the law of VAWA is good public policy. It is also good public policy that we understand that in immigrant communities there is a lawless element that preys on immigrants, sometimes that lawless element is also immigrants– immigrant gangs in some instances. And they use intimidation and fear tactics and one they use many times is the concept that they can commit crimes against other immigrants–spouses, children– and if the victim dare report the crime to law enforcement, the immigrant criminal will make sure that there is a deportation proceeding that takes place.

Whether that is true or not, that they are able to succeed in that, victims fear that. They fear the deportation because of being a victim. Public policy should be, in this country, that if you are a victim of crime, that should be paramount to us as a nation, as opposed to allowing intimidation and fear from those who wish to prey on immigrants to keep them from reporting crime. When crime is committed it effects our entire community and it effects our social stability. So I’m a supporter of VAWA.

Watch it:

Poe has been an outspoken advocate for victims of domestic violence, and has previously sponsored an international Violence Against Women Act.

And FAIR, where Kobach continues to serve as “of counsel” of their legal arm, is opposing Rubio’s bill as well, deriding the idea as a political gimmick:

Although Rubio denies that his plan is amnesty, it would allow illegal aliens who arrived in the United States prior to age 16 to gain legal status and remain in the U.S. indefinitely. Rubio has also indicated that his DREAM Act would not preclude beneficiaries from gaining citizenship at some future time.

Rubio’s efforts have one clearly stated objective. Republicans believe that introducing their own version of the DREAM Act will help attract Latino voters.

There is an obvious split in the Republican party over immigration policy, and at some point, Romney will have to decide if he stands by his harsh anti-immigrant positions during the GOP primary or if he will try to Etch-a-Sketch them away to appeal to more moderate voters.

• Self-Deportation: At a debate in January, Romney announced that the centerpiece of his immigration plan is to make undocumented immigrants “self-deport” because they “decide that they can do better by going home because they can’t find work here because they don’t have legal documentation to allow them to work here.” A Romney spokesperson later confirmed that Romney would do far more than simply target undocumented workers: “You turn off the magnets, no in state tuition, no benefits of any kind, no employment.”
• Killing The DREAM: Last December, Romney promised to veto the DREAM Act, which permits undocumented immigrants who came to the United States as children to be placed on a path to citizenship if they graduate from college or serve in the military.
• Attrition By Enforcement: Former Arizona Senate President Russell Pearce (R-AZ), the lead sponsor of Arizona’s harsh immigration law, said that Romney’s “immigration policy is identical to mine.” Pearce said they both share the same goal of “attrition by enforcement.”
• The Kobach Connection: Romney proudly accepted the endorsement of Kris Kobach, the author of Arizona and Alabama’s immigration laws. In additional to serving as Kansas’ Secretary of State, Kobach is an attorney with the Immigration Reform Law Institute, the legal branch of Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), which the Southern Poverty Law Center has labeled as a “nativist hate group.” Yet Romney did not simply accept this questionable endorsement, he campaigned with Kobach in South Carolina — on Martin Luther King Day. Although the Romney made a failed attempt to distance itself from Kobach after the primary effectively ended, Kobach remains an immigration policy advisor to Romney and his campaign.

So the RNC’s claim that Romney does not know what he thinks about immigration is simply untrue. Romney spent many months campaigning on harsh immigration policies, and he took such firm and convincing positions on these issues that many of the nation’s leading anti-immigrant lawmakers and activists rallied behind him. It’s not at all surprising that the RNC wants to Etch-A-Sketch away Romney’s views in light of their stunning unpopularity with Latino voters, but Republicans simply cannot hide from Romney’s clearly articulated positions during the GOP primary.

Assistant Attorney General Thomas Perez

Last week, a U.S. Justice Department official added to the mounting criticism of HB 56, saying the harsh legislation has already had “lasting” negative effects on the state’s Hispanic students. Assistant Attorney General Thomas Perez, head of the federal department’s Civil Rights Division, addressed a strongly-worded letter to Alabama’s education department on HB 56′s consequences for school children:

Hispanic students absence rates tripled while absence rates for other groups of students remained virtually flat. [...] The rate of total withdrawals of Hispanic children substantially increased, with 13.4% of such children having dropped out between the beginning of the current school year and this February.

As Perez goes on to point out, the Constitution guarantees immigrant students’ right to an education — and even on top of that, nearly 99% of all of Alabama’s K-12 public school students are, in fact, U.S. citizens. After conducting interviews with students, parents, and teachers in the state’s public school districts, the DOJ official has determined that many school children of Hispanic origin feel “unwelcome in schools they had attended for years” regardless of their immigration status.

Just as Perez makes clear, the harmful HB 56 legislation has already begun to do its damage. In order to prevent even more negative effects on Alabama’s children — both immigrants and U.S. citizens — it has to go immediately.

Rep. Sandy Adams (R-FL) is the author of the House's version of VAWA

Visas offered to undocumented victims of domestic violence are called “U Visas” and the Senate version of the bill expanded the number of U Visas offered to victims. The House bill not only strips out the additional visas, it also contains a new provision enabling government officials to inform “the accused” that their victim blew the whistle on their abuse:

During the adjudication of each petition under this paragraph, an investigative officer from a local service center of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services shall conduct an in-person interview of the alien who filed the petition. The investigative officer may also gather other evidence and interview other witnesses, including the accused United States citizen or lawful permanent resident, if they consent to be interviewed.

Undocumented victims already fear calling the police because they risk deportation in doing so. This portion of the bill adds on another level of fear by alerting their abusers that they’ve sought help — under current law, immigrant victims enjoy a right to confidentiality that would be seriously undermined by this bill. Allowing perpetrators of domestic violence to play any role in the deportation or protection of their victims is a cruel fate, but alerting an abuser to a victim’s complaint adds yet another level of emotional abuse on top of the physical abuse that the victim already faces.

But despite the Senate’s ultimate passage of the bill — which included the support of 14 Republican senators, including all of the female Republicans — the House is ready to fight these provisions again. Their version of VAWA also removes the protections for marginalized communities. According to Congressional Quarterly, a watered-down bill, of which Rep. Sandy Adams (R-FL) is the lead sponsor, is likely to pass in the House:

The House bill also would eliminate Senate language that supporters say would do more to help victims of domestic violence including gays and lesbians, immigrants and American Indians. Adams considers those provisions unnecessary, a spokeswoman said. “The grants are available to all victims, and there is no evidence to conclude that victims are being turned away,” said spokeswoman Lisa Boothe in an email.

The backing of Smith, of Texas, and California’s McCarthy signals the House measure is on a fast track to passage — and a showdown with the Senate.

While Adams may think the provisions are unnecessary, there is ample proof that she is mistaken. Cases of LGBT domestic violence increased 38 percent from last year. Seven people died from domestic abuse. And of those who sought it, 44 percent of LGBT victims were turned away from traditional shelters. As for Tribal victims, Native American women face the highest rate of domestic violence in the US — three and a half times higher than the national average — and can currently not seek any protection if the perpetrator is non-Tribal.

And undocumented victims? Maybe they aren’t “turned away” in Adams’s definition, but that’s because they fear that if they call the police, they will be deported.

Members of Congress have already seen heated debate around VAWA, with one member even recounting her own experience of being raped as a girl. With the attempt to strip out provisions for particularly vulnerable communities, the fight is likely to get even more difficult.

Neo-Nazi Shooter J.T. Ready and Former State Sen. Russell Pearce (R-AZ)

Ready’s beliefs were extreme even among extremists. In 2007, for example, he wrote that illegal immigration occurs because “negroids screw monkeys and rape babies in afreaka [sic]. Then stupid white man who licks kosher jew rear lets negroids in.” Yet Ready traveled surprisingly close to the center of power in his state. Ready claims he was a protégé to former Arizona state Sen. Russell Pearce (R), the author of Arizona’s harsh immigration law who was recently removed from office in a recall election, and there is ample documentation that the two men knew each other and that Pearce once supported Ready politically.

Pearce and Ready’s relationship stretches back at least to 2004, when Pearce ordained Ready as an elder in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. By 2006, when Ready ran for Mesa City Council — a campaign that sputtered after the public learned that Ready was once court-martialed and kicked out of the Marine Corps — he received Pearce’s endorsement. Ready also claims that he was with Pearce’s son Josh when Josh Pearce got a tattoo of an iron eagle with a swastika on his neck and chest, but that he also talked Josh out of joining a skinhead group.

Pearce later tried to distance himself from Ready, but Ready insisted as recently as last year that Pearce was a seminal figure in his life. In an interview with a local Fox station, Ready called Pearce “a surrogate father” who “enlightened him,” that they spent time together at Pearce’s cabin, and that they were “around each other quite a bit.” In the same local news segment, Pearce admits that he had an association with Ready, but denies that it was as close as Ready suggests. Watch it:

Ready is dead, and Pearce obviously has an interest in downplaying his relationship with Ready if a deep bond did once exist between the men. So it may never be known with certainty whether Pearce was the father figure Ready claims he was. Ready, however, does admit to one divide between him and the former Arizona senator. He claims that Pearce taught him to stay “more covert” for “long term strategy aims,” but Ready ultimately chose to ignore this advice.