Al Cardenas worries about the drift of the current GOP
Al Cardenas‘ perspective on what’s going on with the Republican Party in 2015 is worth listening to. The former two-term Republican Party of Florida Chairman and head of the Washington-based American Conservative Union from 2011-2014 (which hosts the annual CPAC conference every winter) is backing Jeb Bush this cycle, but also has ties to Marco Rubio. Cardenas spoke at the Sunshine Summit on Friday afternoon, but his comments to a handful of reporters in the hallways of the Rosen Shingle Creek hotel in Orlando were as interesting as anything he said on stage. When asked about the state of the national GOP, Cardenas sounded somewhat alarmed. “I’m a firm believer that’s all’s well that ends well. That continues to be my hope. All is not well now. I don’t think the Republican Party as a brand for a long term future can be successful, given what I’m watching. To be successful, you gotta appeal to people’s higher instincts, not lower instincts. You have to inspire people to be better, not to be mad or angry. And you’ve gotta convince them that you can lead them to a better tomorrow, rather than to get even with the bad guys. And if our party is unable to do that, through our eventual leadership, then our party is going to face some long term consequences.” Noting how much success the Republican Party has had nationally since Barack Obama was elected (816 Democratic lawmakers have lost their jobs in state legislatures since 2009, as well as the party taking control of the House and Senate), Cardenas says the contrast is stark when it comes to executive leadership in Washington. “My hope is that whomever we select as our nominee can get the party nationally to meet up with the bar we’ve set up with the states,” he says, adding that he’s not certain at this time if Donald Trump or Ben Carson can beat Hillary Clinton at this time. When asked about the report that Right to Rise, Jeb Bush’s super PAC, may spend millions (perhaps tens of millions) to go after Marco Rubio, Cardenas said that shouldn’t be surprising, since politics always comes down to going after your opponents. “I don’t talk to Mike Murphy (Right to Rise’s strategic leader), as the top-tier gets redefined and we get into next year, all four or five top-tier candidates are going to begin contrasting with each other. Trump’s doing it, Ted Cruz has begun doing it with Marco, Ben Carson has tried to stay out of the fray, but I don’t believe that will last for long. … I think all of them will get into that contrasting business, and I think the only reason you’re paying a lot of attention to it is because of their relationship. If it wasn’t for that, you’d think of it as, ‘Hey, everybody is going to be involved with that.’”
Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio bring Spanish fluency to 2016 campaign
Republicans are bringing something unique to the 2016 presidential campaign: an ability to speak to Americans in both of their main mother tongues, Spanish as well as English. Democrats can’t match it. Previous GOP candidates couldn’t. But now, paradoxically, the party that’s on the outs with many Hispanic voters over immigration is the party that has serious presidential candidates who are surefooted in their language. It remains to be seen how much Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio will use their fluent Spanish in the campaign. Rubio offered a few words of it in his presidential campaign announcement, quoting his Cuban grandfather, a small but notable addition in a speech meant for everyone to hear, not just a Hispanic crowd. Bush peppered his remarks with Spanish in Puerto Rico on Tuesday, making an obvious cultural connection with many in his audience. Even a modest amount of Spanish will be more than presidential campaigns have known. President George W. Bush rarely used his barely high school-level Spanish and, when he did, it was a token nod, not a real conversation. President Barack Obama and 2016 Democratic presidential contender Hillary Rodham Clinton have gamely tried a few lines now and then. Bilingualism is a tricky issue in politics and you can be sure that careful calculations are being made on how and when to display it in the Bush and Rubio campaigns. Bush the former governor and Rubio the senator have spoken Spanish liberally in Florida politics and other settings. But this is a national campaign for the highest office. Republicans, on the one hand, want to win over Hispanic voters. On the other, they want to avoid upsetting some traditional supporters who — whether because of immigration concerns, nativism or simple cultural tradition — want English only. A second Hispanic-American in the Republican race, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, has largely lost the language of his Cuban-born father and calls his Spanish “lousy.” (Another contender, former Texas Gov. Rick Perry, also is not fluent.) Should Bush or Rubio go on to win the nomination, and should Clinton take the Democratic prize, history is sure to be made in 2016. After having elected the first black president, Americans would now be putting either the first fluent Spanish-speaker, or the first woman, in the presidency. How much does language matter? No one thinks speaking Spanish is an easy ticket to Hispanic votes. Especially for Republicans, who saw Obama take 71 percent of the Hispanic vote in 2012. But it’s a sign of respect, says Bob Quasius, founder of Cafe Con Leche Republicans, which presses for the Republican Party to become more inclusive of Hispanics. “Even if your Spanish isn’t very good, it’s welcome.” Hispanic turnout has increased in every election for nearly three decades, meaning it may top 10 percent of the electorate in 2016, according to Mark Hugo Lopez, director of Hispanic Research at the Pew Research Center. Even so, among registered Hispanic voters, 83 percent prefer English or are bilingual, Pew has found. Only 17 percent identify Spanish as their dominant language. Spanish is much more heavily preferred among Latinos who are not registered to vote. “If a candidate can speak Spanish, it could at least get Hispanics interested,” Lopez said. “But it’s not going to be the deciding factor.” • • • Rubio The son of Cuban immigrants, Rubio hails from heavily Hispanic West Miami and grew up bilingual. He shifts comfortably between the two languages while running Senate meetings, appearing at news conferences and interacting with people. Rubio delivered two versions of the 2013 Republican response to Obama’s State of the Union, in English and Spanish. As a Senate candidate, he used both languages with South Florida crowds. Al Cardenas, former head of the Florida Republican Party, remembers Rubio firing up volunteers in the two languages while working for Bob Dole‘s unsuccessful 1996 White House run. “He was then, and he is now, just as comfortable doing that in one language as the other,” Cardenas said. It’s too early to know how much Rubio will do that outside of Hispanic-heavy events in the presidential campaign. When he spoke about his grandfather to Iowa social conservatives on the weekend, he did not use Spanish. • • • Bush Bush speaks Spanish at home with his Mexican-born wife, Columba, and whenever he encounters people who approach him in that language. Like Rubio, he clearly wants to draw more Latinos behind his effort, and he can be expected to address a variety of Hispanic functions, as he was doing Wednesday in Houston. He earned thunderous applause in Puerto Rico at events where he mixed English with effortless Spanish. “I love it,” said Maria Elena Cruz, a 59-year-old government worker from Toa Baja. “He speaks Spanish just like us.” “That makes us feel good,” said Paola Bazzano, 72, a doctor’s assistant. “It’s a way to establish good rapport.” How far he will go with his bilingualism, though, is not yet apparent. His speech announcing his candidacy, whenever it comes, will offer a clue as to what he will do when speaking to a national audience. Will he say a few words of Spanish, like Rubio? Make a bolder statement, with even more? • • • CRUZ Cruz is the first Hispanic senator from Texas, where many residents are native Spanish speakers. He struggles with the language, however, and nixed a proposal for a debate in Spanish in his 2012 Senate campaign. “Like many second-generation Hispanic immigrants, he is conversational, though not fluent in Spanish,” Cruz spokeswoman Catherine Frazier said. “But that will not hinder his efforts to build a robust Hispanic outreach operation.” Republished with permission from The Associated Press.
Jeb Bush preparing to delegate many campaign tasks to super PAC
Jeb Bush is preparing to embark on an experiment in presidential politics: delegating many of the nuts-and-bolts tasks of seeking the White House to a separate political organization that can raise unlimited amounts of campaign cash. The concept, in development for months as the former Florida governor has raised tens of millions of dollars for his Right to Rise super PAC, would endow that organization not just with advertising on Bush’s behalf, but with many of the duties typically conducted by a campaign. Should Bush move ahead as his team intends, it is possible that for the first time a super PAC created to support a single candidate would spend more than the candidate’s campaign itself — at least through the primaries. Some of Bush’s donors believe that to be more than likely. The architects of the plan believe the super PAC’s ability to legally raise unlimited amounts of money outweighs its primary disadvantage, that it cannot legally coordinate its actions with Bush or his would-be campaign staff. “Nothing like this has been done before,” said David Keating, president of the Center for Competitive Politics, which opposes limits on campaign finance donations. “It will take a high level of discipline to do it.” The exact design of the strategy remains fluid as Bush approaches an announcement of his intention to run for the Republican nomination in 2016. But at its center is the idea of placing Right to Rise in charge of the brunt of the biggest expense of electing Bush: television advertising and direct mail. Right to Rise could also break into new areas for a candidate-specific super PAC, such as data gathering, highly individualized online advertising and running phone banks. Also on the table is tasking the super PAC with crucial campaign endgame strategies: the operation to get out the vote and efforts to maximize absentee and early voting on Bush’s behalf. The campaign itself would still handle those things that require Bush’s direct involvement, such as candidate travel. It also would still pay for advertising, conduct polling and collect voter data. But the goal is for the campaign to be a streamlined operation that frees Bush to spend less time than in past campaigns raising money, and as much time as possible meeting voters. Bush’s plans were described to The Associated Press by two Republicans and several Bush donors familiar with the plan, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the former Florida governor has not yet announced his candidacy. “This isn’t the product of some genius thinking,” said a Republican familiar with the strategy. “This is the natural progression of the rules as they are set out by the FEC.” Bush spokeswoman Kristy Campbell said: “Any speculation on how a potential campaign would be structured, if he were to move forward, is premature at this time.” The strategy aims to take maximum advantage of the new world of campaign finance created by a pair of 2010 Supreme Court decisions and counts on the Federal Election Commission to remain a passive regulator with little willingness to confront those pushing the envelope of the law. One reason Bush’s aides are comfortable with the strategy is because Mike Murphy, Bush’s longtime political confidant, would probably run the super PAC once Bush enters the race. Meanwhile, David Kochel, a former top adviser to Mitt Romney‘s campaigns and an ally of Bush senior adviser Sally Bradshaw, would probably be the pick to lead Bush’s official campaign. “Every campaign is going to carefully listen to the lawyers as to what is the best way to allocate their resources and how to maximize them,” said Al Cardenas, former chairman of the American Conservative Union and a Bush adviser. “Nobody wants to relinquish any advantage.” For Bush, the potential benefits are enormous. Campaigns can raise only $2,700 per donor for the primary and $2,700 for the general election. But super PACs are able to raise unlimited cash from individuals, corporations and groups such as labor unions. In theory, that means a small group of wealthy Bush supporters could pay for much of the work of electing him by writing massive checks to the super PAC. Bush would begin a White House bid with confidence that he will have the money behind him to make a deep run into the primaries, even if he should stumble early and spook small-dollar donors, starving his own campaign of the money it needs to carry on. Presidential candidates in recent elections have also spent several hours each day privately courting donors. This approach would not eliminate that burden for Bush, but would reduce it. “The idea of a super PAC doing more … means the candidate has to spend less time raising money and can spend more time campaigning,” said longtime Mitt Romney adviser Ron Kaufman, who supports Bush. The main limitation on super PACs is that they cannot coordinate their activities with a campaign. The risk for Bush is that his super PAC will not have access to the candidate and his senior strategists to make pivotal decisions about how to spend the massive amount of money it will take to win the Republican nomination and, if successful, secure the 270 electoral votes he will need to follow his father and brother into the White House. “The one thing you give away when you do that is control,” Kaufman said. Bush will also be dogged by advocates of campaign finance regulation. The Campaign Legal Center, which supports aggressive regulation of money and politics, has already complained to the FEC that Bush is currently flouting the law by raising money for his super PAC while acting like a candidate for president. Others are on guard, too. “In our view, we are headed for an epic national scandal,” said Fred Wertheimer, president of the pro-regulation group Democracy 21. “We intend to carefully and closely monitor all the candidates and their super PACs, because they will eventually provide numerous examples of violations.” All of the major candidates for president
