Immigration Debate Defines Race in California

Immigration Debate Defines Race in California
By ADAM NAGOURNEY
Copyright by The New York Times
Published: June 4, 2010
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/05/us/05calif.html?th&emc=th


IRVINE, Calif. — Meg Whitman was almost at the end of a 30-minute town hall-style meeting here, responding to questions about taxes and spending, schools and unemployment. But one topic had not come up, so Ms. Whitman, a Republican candidate for governor, raised it herself, serving up a stern attack against illegal immigration and a promise that she would protect California’s borders.

“I am 100 percent against amnesty,” Ms. Whitman proclaimed. “My Republican opponent says I’m for amnesty. That is absolutely not true.”

For almost a year, Ms. Whitman, the former chief executive of eBay, has campaigned on three issues: jobs, education and government spending. But as her contest for the Republican nomination for governor against Steve Poizner, the state insurance commissioner, enters its final days, she has found herself drawn into a loud and caustic argument over immigration policy. “It is the only issue,” said Stuart Stevens, Mr. Poizner’s chief campaign consultant.

The primary here on Tuesday will be the highest-stakes electoral contest since Arizona approved a tough immigration law, and that has allowed Mr. Poizner to reshape the campaign, focusing a series of stark attacks on Ms. Whitman. The extent to which immigration has, in the view of many Republicans, hijacked this contest has stirred worry that the nominee chosen next week will be weakened in the general election against Jerry Brown, a Democrat and former governor.

“There’s a difference between talking about a problem and trying to exploit the problem as a wedge issue to try to get scared white voters,” said Allan Hoffenblum, a Republican analyst here. “I’m not speaking as a lone wolf on this in the Republican Party. It’s concerning a lot of us.”

Hispanics are becoming increasingly influential in California politics. One in six voters this November is expected to be Hispanic — a proportion that is likely to grow in coming years — and Southern California has been at the forefront of efforts to boycott Arizona for enacting tough anti-immigrant legislation in late April.

In many ways, California’s primary race offers a worrisome preview of what many Republicans say are the political perils for the party nationally in being identified with tough immigration policies. Mr. Poizner has enthusiastically endorsed such policies in his campaign. His series of stark television advertisements portraying Ms. Whitman as an advocate of permissive immigration began three weeks ago.

The emphasis on immigration is striking in a state that is reeling from the economic downturn and saddled with what officials in both parties view as a dysfunctional government. At 12.5 percent, the unemployment rate here is far above the national average. The state has been hit hard by the foreclosure crisis, its public education system is a shambles, and disapproval of the Legislature and of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican barred by term limits from seeking re-election, are at near-record highs. The election is playing out against the backdrop of the latest battle in Sacramento over proposed cuts in spending to balance the budget.

One strain on the state’s finances is providing social services to a large population of illegal immigrants, which is one reason the issue has political resonance. Still, it is hardly clear that the tough-on-immigrants stance has universal appeal among Republican voters; in the Central Valley, for instance, many farmers use undocumented farm workers.

A Los Angeles Times/U.S.C. poll published on Sunday showed Ms. Whitman leading Mr. Poizner by 53 percent to 29 percent; other polls taken last month, after Mr. Poizner began his advertising assault against Ms. Whitman, showed that he had significantly tightened the race, until she started pushing back.

In an interview, Ms. Whitman — who has been running advertisements promising to be “tough as nails” on illegal immigration — said that she thought voters were concerned about other things besides immigration, and that she was raising the issue only in response to what she asserted were Mr. Poizner’s distortions of her record. She said Mr. Poizner had hurt himself as a general election candidate because of the tenor of his attacks.

“I think he’s damaged in the general because he’s only talked about one issue,” Ms. Whitman said. “And I think that’s a big mistake.”

Mr. Poizner said that illegal immigration was “part and parcel of our message from the get-go” and that he always viewed it as the No. 1 issue for Republican primary voters, and a point of contrast with Ms. Whitman.

“It’s huge: everywhere I go, people burst out into applause when I start talking about it,” Mr. Poizner said after appearing at a town hall-style meeting in El Segundo flanked by bright red screens with white lettering proclaiming, “No Amnesty: Stop Illegal Immigration.”

“Our positions are just different,” he continued. “Meg Whitman opposes Arizona. I fully support it. In fact, I don’t see how you can be a Republican running for high office in the United States and be taken seriously if you oppose what’s going on in Arizona.”

Both candidates are independently wealthy and together have spent more than $100 million — about $80 million for Ms. Whitman, and $25 million for Mr. Poizner — which has guaranteed a wide audience for the back-and-forth volley of television advertisements, radio spots and mailers. The demonstrated willingness of Ms. Whitman and Mr. Poizner to tap their own political fortunes to win the governorship is one of the key reasons Republicans are hopeful about defeating Mr. Brown.

Even without immigration, candidates this primary season face a politically daunting task in trying to navigate an increasingly conservative Republican base and emerge as a viable candidate in the general election. Mark Baldassare, president and chief executive of the Public Policy Institute of California, a policy study and polling group, said that 75 percent of Republicans statewide disapproved of President Obama in a poll earlier last month, compared with 39 percent of all registered voters in California.

“The Republican primary voters are not representative of the overall mood of Californians,” Mr. Baldassare said. “This is really a unique slice of the electorate.”

One sign of this is the extent to which both Ms. Whitman and Mr. Poizner are critical of Mr. Schwarzenegger. Mr. Poizner said he would not want the governor to campaign with him should he win the nomination. “I think it would be better if he just stays out of the primary and the general election,” he said.

Ron Nehring, the chairman of the state Republican Party, said the severity of the economic problems facing California would overshadow the immigration stances taken by the Republican candidate during the primaries. “The Democrats are always trying to paint Republicans as anti-immigrant,” he said. “But the first, second, third and fourth issue in the race for governor is jobs and the economy.”

Ms. Whitman’s advisers said that if she won the nomination, she would move away from immigration to broaden her appeal. But Mr. Poizner said he would not change his campaign a bit.

“This is important for everyone to know: What you see is what you get,” he said. “The campaign I’m waging now in the primary is exactly the same campaign I’ll be waging in the general against Jerry Brown. I think it’s a myth that independents, Democrats, these groups that supposedly would object to my strong positions on illegal immigration — uh-uh.”