GUEST COMMENTARY: Democrats redefining 'Hispanic'
It is now possible to conclude that some people born in a Spanish-speaking country who came here as immigrants speaking little English are in fact not Hispanic.
More specifically, you are not Hispanic if you were born in Honduras, came here as an immigrant who spoke little English, graduated from Harvard Law, and became a conservative candidate to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals whose nomination is blocked by Senate Democrats.
That's the problem with Miguel Estrada, who was born in Honduras, came here as an immigrant who spoke little English, graduated from Harvard Law, and became a conservative candidate to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals whose nomination is being blocked by Senate Democrats.
He's just not Hispanic enough. At least, according to Democrats.
Angelo Falcon, head of the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund, spoke of a "Latino Horatio Alger story that's been concocted" and said, "It's not good enough to simply say that because of someone's genetics or surname that they should be considered Hispanic."
New Jersey Rep. Robert Menendez is another Democrat who supports this ethnic litmus test. "Being Hispanic for us means much more than having a surname," he said the other day. "It means having some relationship with the reality of what it is to live in this country as a Hispanic-American."
Bob, my old buddy from high school -- you should know better.
There sure are legitimate grounds for liberals to oppose the nomination of a conservative judge, just as there are legitimate grounds for conservatives to oppose liberal judges. In fact, it would be hypocritical for liberal Hispanics to support the conservative Estrada solely because he is a fellow Hispanic.
But this is an effort to define "Hispanic" in political terms.
It is a particularly American absurdity. People in the Spanish-speaking world -- in other words, "Hispanics" -- span the ideological spectrum, from Pinochet and Franco on the right to Castro and nutty Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez on the left. But when Hispanics come to the United States, we find we are required to be liberal, on pain of losing our ethnic identity.
No better example of this absurdity than Estrada himself. One could argue that, say, a white farmer from Nebraska who happens to have the surname "Perez" because of a Mexican great-great-grandfather is not Hispanic. Fine. But that's not the case with Estrada. The man grew up speaking Spanish in Honduras and came to the United States as a teenager. And that's enough. Whatever political ideology he developed as an American is utterly irrelevant to his ethnicity.
Falcon's implication was that Estrada did not come from a poverty-stricken family and therefore did not qualify as a true Latino struggling to overcome barriers of race and social class. But Bob Menendez did not come from a desperately poor family either, and neither did I. Doesn't make me or Bob any less Hispanic.
There is something else at play here: the Hispanic vote in 2004.
Republicans want it, and the Estrada nomination puts them in position to tell Hispanic voters, "Hey, don't pay attention to our policies, even if some of us are anti-immigrant racists -- look, we nominated one of your people for a top judgeship!"
This worries Democrats. Their decades-long lock on the Hispanic vote endures in part because most Hispanics see themselves as the heirs of generations of Democratic voters. Now, Estrada's appearance on the national political scene endangers that perception by suggesting, "You, too, can be Hispanic and at the same time a conservative."
Not surprising that some Democrats are replying, "No, you can't."
Syndicated columnist Roger Hernandez can be reached via e-mail at rogereh@optonline.net.