Marine is sworn in as a U.S. Citizen. (NYC Marines/flickr)

Republican Rep. David Rivera proposed a bill late last week which would give undocumented youth a path to citizenship.

The Adjusted Residency for Military Service Act – the ARMS Act – is a pruned version of the DREAM Act. Immigrant youth who were brought into the United States illegally as children have the chance to change their status by attending college or joining the military under the DREAM Act. Rivera’s measure only allows undocumented youth the opportunity to legalize through enlisting in military service.

“If somebody is willing to die for America, then certainly they deserve a chance at life in America,” Rivera told the Miami Herald.

Both Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney support the ARMS Act.

“I think there is no opposition to that part of the DREAM Act,” Gingrich told a gathering of the Latin Builder’s Association Friday. “I think it should go through immediately.”

Undocumented youth, however, are not as enthusiastic about the ARMS Act.

Juan Escalante, a DREAM Act activist, says that “the ARMS Act is the GOP ‘dream’ of the Dream Act.”

“The ARMS Act is an opportunistic attempt, in my opinion, from the GOP trying to capitalize some DREAM Act momentum,” he said.

Escalante is not the only DREAMer who opposes the military-only version of the DREAM Act.

Colorlines reporter Julianne Hing wrote that undocumented youth ask, “why it is that the only way they can serve the country they’ve grown up in is by joining the military. Undocumented youth argue that they are fully capable of serving the country in many other ways.”

Escalante, who has no objections himself to the military component of the DREAM Act, said, “It seems foolish to me that you could only be granted relief by risking your life for this country. What are those doctors, lawyers, or politician scientists such as myself, going to do?”

“Better yet, is the United States ready to deport trained professionals or students who have benefited from the public education system funded by the taxpayers?” he asked.

Ali Noorani, Executive Director of the National Immigration Forum, released a statement characterizing the ARMS Act as “a distortion of the DREAM Act.” He argues that excluding legalization through higher education “would provide the wrong incentives for military enlistment during a time of war.” Some undocumented youth might sign up out of desperation and not because they are interested in military service.

Noorani also contends that “by denying immigrant students the right to higher education, America is losing out on their entrepreneurship, productivity and economic contributions.”

The ARMS Act does not make sense. It appears to be a thinly veiled GOP attempt to pander to military hawks while dangling a bittersweet fruit in front of Latino voters turned off by the immigration rhetoric spewed during the Republican presidential primaries.

There is something mercenary about the idea.

The fact of the matter is a majority of Americans support the full DREAM Act. In December 2010, the bill passed the House by a resounding vote of 216-198 but failed in the Senate by five votes.

There is nothing wrong with encouraging anyone to enlist with the military. If done voluntarily it is a noble act which should be applauded and held high as an example. But there is more than one way to serve your country.

Undocumented youth, if given the chance, would educate our children, heal our sick, strengthen our economy and yes, die for the country they consider their own.

You can follow Erwin de Leon on Twitter or read his blog.

Feet in Two Worlds is supported by the New York Community Trust and the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation with additional support from the Mertz Gilmore Foundation and the Sirus Fund.

The Valle brothers. (Photo courtesy of endourpain.com)

In his State of the Union speech, President Obama gave a nod to undocumented young people, and indicated his administration is making pinpointed immigration fixes because Congress doesn’t have an appetite for comprehensive reform.

Speaking a few days later to a Latino audience on Univision, the Spanish-language TV network, he again touted his administration’s changes to deportation policy.

“Some of the changes that we’re making on immigration, we’re trying to make sure that we’re prioritizing criminals [for deportation],” Obama said.  Under the Obama administration, there have been a record number of deportations.

The president was referring to an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) policy that recently affected Peruvian immigrants Michell and Yasser Valle. The brothers narrowly escaped the chilling prospect of deportation, enabling them to spend Thanksgiving with their family in New Jersey.

ICE revived the use of prosecutorial discretion this fall, citing that with limited resources, the federal government should apply “smart” immigration enforcement and focus on offenders who are serious criminals as opposed to undocumented students with no criminal history. Immigration judges had at times used prosecutorial discretion before, but under this new push 300,000 deportation cases went up for review.

Advocates argued the Valles were clearly eligible for a waiver under the policy: They have no criminal history, they have ties to the community (they entered the U.S. at the age of five and six), and have immediate family members who are U.S. citizens or permanent residents. The brothers are also pursuing a college education and meet other conditions that are spelled out in the Morton Memo, the June 17, 2011 letter issued by ICE Director John Morton to ICE field officers, agents and attorneys, laying out the new policy.

Even though the Valles met ICE requirements, Gaby Pacheco, coordinator of the End Our Pain campaign of the United We Dream organization, said it took several months of “advocacy, putting pressure and using media” to nudge ICE officials in New Jersey to reopen the case. Ultimately their petition was granted and the Valles were given a one-year stay from deportation. During this time they were able to return to school, get employment authorization documents and apply for driver’s licenses. They have the option to file for an extension of their deportation hold, but what’s important, Pacheco told Fi2W, is, “They are doing things the legal route.”

Two cities became pilot areas for a test of the new policy from November 2011 to January 2012. ICE officers, agents and lawyers in Denver and Baltimore underwent training on the use of the policy following the roadmap provided in the Morton Memo.

“In Denver, the courts were closed down so they had time to review how to handle the cases,” said Denver lawyer Laura Lichter, president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association.

“They looked at every case, putting them in files — positive, negative, serious criminal history or bad immigration in one pile, positive factors like [immigrants] coming to school here, with ties to community, with family ties to people who are green card holders or members of the armed forces, or have young children in a different pile,” she said. “They were looking at 8,000 cases.”

Reports on Denver’s pilot program show that about 16 percent of the cases were recommended for closure. The results are preliminary, Lichter stressed. In some cases, prosecutorial discretion simply took cases out of court dockets for review but did not resolve or close them.

“They can be put back in the dockets,” according to a lawyer who spoke at an immigration briefing on the policy, voicing his concerns about accountability and transparency. “There is very little public information on what the DHS is doing with these cases.”

The new policy has not escaped backlash, even within ICE. Despite the Morton Memo, not all ICE officers have received training, because an ICE union leader opposes the policy.

It comes down to limited government resources for deportation, advocates say. “Let’s make sure we go after the truly dangerous ones,” Lichter said. “If you have 400,000 seats on the bus, who would you rather get a seat: a bank robber, a drug dealer, a gang member or would you be going after a college student who was brought here when he was 3 years old who doesn’t have a criminal record and whom we want to be part of our community?”

For the Valle brothers, it’s a relief to be out of detention. But they are still stuck in an immigration no-man’s land. Despite being granted a reprieve from immediate deportation, they do not have permanent legal status.

Feet in Two Worlds is supported by the New York Community Trust and the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation with additional support from the Mertz Gilmore Foundation and the Sirus Fund.

A Chicano studies teach-in after the shut-down of the Mexican American Studies program in the TUSD. (Photo: Valeria Fernandez)

TUCSON, Arizona—Instead of going to class at Tucson Magnet High School last Tuesday, high school senior Juan Quevedo,  entered a different type of classroom, protesting with hundred of others the cancellation of his Mexican-American studies program (MAS) by the Tucson Unified School District (TUSD).

Inside the Casino Ballroom, organizers from Unidos, a youth group that opposes the ban, held an all day teach-in on culture, critical thinking and Chicano studies with round tables where the students could engage in dialogue.

“It would be illegal now for the teachers to teach us [Mexican-American studies] so we are coming here to learn all the things they don’t want us to,” said the 18-year-old Quevedo.

The students went back to school on Wednesday, but Unidos will continue to hold teach-ins on Saturdays. A representative from Unidos said that independent student groups may also choose to walk out again.

The controversy over MAS entered a new phase on Dec. 27 when an Arizona administrative judge ruled the classes were in violation of a 2010 state law that bans ethnic studies when they promote the “overthrow of the U.S. government.”  As a result, this January, the Tucson School Board and school administrators proceeded to suspend the MAS classes and remove books that were considered inappropriate from classrooms.

In his ruling, Judge Lewis Kowal sided with findings presented by the Superintendent of Education John Huppenthal who argued that “students were being indoctrinated to develop resentment on a racial basis.”

Some of the books that were taken from classrooms include Rethinking Columbus: The next 500 Years and Occupied America. There are reports that teachers were also advised against teaching Shakespeare’s The Tempest, because of its racial themes.

So for the past weeks Quevedo and other students have protested what they believe is an arbitrary ban to their education via walkouts.

“It is very impressive, because students have come together from high schools to middle schools to protest against this,” said Jesus Romero a former MAS student and member of Unidos.

“We want to plant a seed, to keep learning about our history and culture,” Romero said.  Sixty percent of the over 55,000 students in the Tucson school district are Latino.

Like Quevedo, another 800 students enrolled in the MAS classes in Tucson found themselves having to switch gears mid-semester.

“We’re teaching the traditional curriculum, if a student was in the Mexican American history perspective classes they defaulted to a traditional history class,” said Sean Arce, co-founder and director of MAS.

Nicolas Dominguez, an 18-year-old student that attended the Unidos teach-in said he was disheartened and stressed when he discovered his classes had changed from one day to the next.

“It slows us all down,” he said. “Our teachers want to do something but they’re stepping on glass, they don’t know where to go.”

Dominguez was taking classes on Latino literature, Mexican-American  history and the Social Justice Education Program.

He especially liked his literature class when they were analyzing hip-hop songs, and reading magazines to look at how women are portrayed in society.

HB 2281 was introduced by Republican Representative Steve Montenegro in 2010 after he was approached by then-Superintendent of Education Tom Horne—now the state attorney general— specifically to be applied at TUSD.

“One of the reasons we brought this bill forward was because of the curriculum, the text books they were using, some of them had violent material aimed at inciting violence against another race or class of people,” said Montenegro.

Supporters of the MAS program deny Montenegro’s and Huppenthal’s assertions.

The school district was faced with loosing 10 percent of its funding, about $15 million, for not being in compliance with the law. Four members of the board, with the exception of Adelita Grijalva voted to eliminate the classes.

“The law is unjust, it’s racist and it’s discriminatory,” said Grijalva. “Our classes aren’t designed to overthrow the government or for ethnic solidarity.”

Teachers and students that filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of HB 2281 contend that an audit commissioned by Huppenthal himself found “no observable evidence” that MAS violated the law.

“He didn’t like the findings of his own commissioned audit, which spoke of higher graduation rates,”  said Arce, about the documented academic success of the program. “He came up with his own findings, which are not factually based. Misinterpretations of historical text and historical pictures, based on fear and hate mongering for the Latino community,” added the teacher, who is also a plaintiff in the lawsuit.

Arce maintains that the findings and even the the judge’s ruling were subjective and are tied to a hostile climate for Mexican immigrants in the state and linked  to passage of SB 1070, a law that made it a state crime for an immigrant to not carry documents authorizing their presence in the U.S.

Backers of the ethnic studies law said that it is doing what it was intended to do.

Montenegro emphasized that the law “doesn’t prohibit the teaching of ethnic studies in its true nature.”

“It prohibits the teaching of resentment against other people,” he said.

Students from Unidos disagree with Montenegro’s assertion and plan to hold more of their own classes in the future.

“They’re operating like the Nazis did in the 1940s, when they were banning books, were censoring. Even the politics behinds this have sort of a Nazist, fascist, racist orientation,” said Augustin Romero, a founder of the MAS program and director for student equity in TUSD.

“We are going to be here, and we’re going to learn,” said Daniel Montoya, a 19-year-old former MAS student that founded Unidos. “It doesn’t matter if they create laws to stop our education, we’ll get our education anyway.”

Feet in Two Worlds is supported by the New York Community Trust and the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation with additional support from the Mertz Gilmore Foundation and the Sirus Fund.

Republican contender Mitt Romney. (Photo: Gage Skidmore/flickr)

The Florida Primary could be a turning point in the race for the Republican presidential nomination, and Latino voters are in the middle of the fight.

It will be the year’s first primary in a state with a large Latino population. Florida also has a significant bloc of conservative Republican Latino voters. Will they vote for Newt Gingrich, a social conservative who says he’s open to some type of immigration reform? Or will they heed the endorsements of powerful Cuban American leaders in the state and support Mitt Romney?

Host Aswini Anburajan is joined on this podcast by Dan Judy, a Republican strategist and pollster at Ayres, McHenry & Associates, Inc., and Mark Lopez, associate director of the Pew Hispanic Center.

Listen to the podcast

Take a look at the recent Latino Decisions/Univision/ABC Poll about Latino voters in Florida.

The Pew Hispanic Center also has a new poll about Florida Latinos.

Subscribe to the Fi2W podcast using iTunes or Podbean

Feet in Two Worlds is supported by the New York Community Trust and the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation with additional support from the Mertz Gilmore Foundation. Fi2W podcasts are supported in part by WNYC Radio and the CUNY Graduate School of Journalism.

President Obama giving his 2012 State of the Union Address

President Obama once again called for comprehensive immigration reform during his State of the Union address Tuesday, stressing that his administration has done more on border enforcement than previous administrations.

I believe as strongly as ever that we should take on illegal immigration.  That’s why my administration has put more boots on the border than ever before.  That’s why there are fewer illegal crossings than when I took office.  The opponents of action are out of excuses.  We should be working on comprehensive immigration reform right now.

We should, but we’re not.

Obama recognizes, like most Americans, that “nothing will get done in Washington this year, or next year, or maybe even the year after that, because Washington is broken.” He knows that Congress will not pass an expansive bill which tackles all problems afflicting the country’s immigration system, especially one that includes a path to citizenship for millions of unauthorized immigrants. Not in this current Congress or the next.

He therefore proposed smaller steps, alluding to the DREAM Act which passed the House but failed in the Senate a little over a year ago.

But if election-year politics keeps Congress from acting on a comprehensive plan, let’s at least agree to stop expelling responsible young people who want to staff our labs, start new businesses, defend this country.  Send me a law that gives them the chance to earn their citizenship.  I will sign it right away.

There is, after all, some sympathy for undocumented youth who were brought to the United States as children without their consent. Gallup reports that Americans generally favor rather than oppose the DREAM Act.

Obama’s State of the Union was largely a “dream” speech. The chances of comprehensive immigration reform happening is practically nil. Less ambitious bills that favor undocumented youth, high-skilled foreign workers, and agricultural laborers are a little more likely to pass, and the President would sign them.

Everyone agrees that the immigration system is broken but there is and will be no stomach for a major overhaul. Smaller pieces are more palatable and feasible.

The immigration system will change but true to its history and the messy reality of legislation, it will be through patchwork efforts.

You can follow Erwin de Leon on Twitter or read his blog.

Feet in Two Worlds is supported by the New York Community Trust and the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation with additional support from the Mertz Gilmore Foundation and the Sirus Fund.

Sen. Marco Rubio from Florida. (Photo: Gage Skidmore/Flickr)

As eyes turn from South Carolina to Florida for the GOP primaries, one Republican Senator who isn’t even running for president is sharing the spotlight with the Republican presidential candidates.

GOP candidate Mitt Romney.

Mitt Romney is cementing his hardline stance on immigration.

He has touted the endorsement of Kris Kobach, Kansas’ Secretary of State who helped author the draconian immigration laws of Alabama and Arizona. He reiterated his unrelenting position on unauthorized immigrants and DREAMers—young people who stand to benefit from the DREAM Act—at the GOP presidential debate Monday.

“I absolutely believe that those who come here illegally should not be given favoritism or a special route to becoming permanent residents or citizens that’s not given to those people who have stayed in line legally. I just think we have to follow the law, I think that’s the right course,” he said when asked by Fox News political analyst Juan Williams whether he was alienating Latino voters. Romney did say “I love legal immigration.”

“I would veto the DREAM Act, if provisions included in that act say that people who are here illegally, if they go to school here long enough, get a degree here that they can become permanent residents,” Romney added after applause from the audience.

“I think that’s a mistake. I think we have to follow the law and insist those who come here illegally, ultimately return home, apply, and get in line with everyone else.”

He ended by stressing that “to protect our legal immigration system we have got to protect our borders and stop the flood of illegal immigration and I will not do anything that opens up another wave of illegal immigration.”

It won’t help Romney win Hispanic votes. Somos Republicans, the largest Hispanic republican group which says it has 6,000 members, endorsed Newt Gingrich this week, the one candidate who supports a limited path to residency for some undocumented immigrants.

Who is Romney even trying to appeal to? According to the latest Gallup poll, only three percent of Americans say immigration is the most important problem facing the country today, reported Jon Clifton, Gallup Social and Economic Analysis deputy director at an immigration symposium in Washington, D.C. Tuesday.

Clifton said that based on Gallup’s latest findings, lingering unemployment, the federal budget and continuing economic malaise are more worrisome to Americans than the perceived scourge of unauthorized immigration trumpeted by some on the far right.

Its true that almost two thirds of those polled say they are “dissatisfied” about the level of immigration to the U.S. Simon Rosenberg, president and founder of NDN, a think tank and advocacy organization, believes that immigration will be an issue in the upcoming Presidential elections because it is a hot button topic, especially in key southwestern states that will be contested in November. Clearly, Romney is placing his bets that reaching anti-immigration voters in those states is more important than the Hispanic voters who live in them.

Rosenberg, another panelist at Tuesday’s symposium, said that immigration is at a deeper level a “surrogate for growing diversification of society.” It is “about race, culture and how we are changing.”

He believes that with the election of an African American president, “the country has passed on to a new place in race,” but he contends that “we have not digested it yet as a country.”

Mitt Romney, rather than helping us process these seismic social and cultural shifts is calcifying the toxic immigration debate by insisting on an uncompromising position, a stance not taken by previous Republican presidents and candidates.

Ronald Reagan signed into law the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 which legalized the status of millions of unauthorized immigrants. President George W. Bush and Senator John McCain supported comprehensive immigration reform that included border enforcement and a path to citizenship for unauthorized immigrants.

If Romney’s braggadocio proves to be real, then he will be presenting a very different Republican Party from that of Reagan or Bush. Is pandering to anti-immigrant sentiment the direction the Republican party, and this country, should be going?

You can follow Erwin de Leon on Twitter or read his blog.

Feet in Two Worlds is supported by the New York Community Trust and the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation with additional support from the Mertz Gilmore Foundation and the Sirus Fund.

A volunteer for the 2008 Obama campaign. (Photo: Amburn Everett/flickr)

Michael Dompas, an Indonesian native who has just been sent overseas by his employer, plans to return this fall to help with President Obama’s reelection campaign.

“I’m allowed to do this,” he explained. “I was so frustrated by the Supreme Court’s decision over the results of the 2000 presidential elections that I just had to do something. I wanted to give money and volunteer. So I consulted a friend who at that time worked for the Federal Elections Committee.”

His friend told him that as a legal permanent resident (a Green Card holder) Dompas can give money and volunteer for political campaigns.

Since then, the Indonesian banker canvassed for Tim Kaine during his 2001 run for lieutenant governor of Virginia and manned the phones for presidential candidate John Kerry in 2004. In 2008, Dompas took two weeks off from work to campaign for then Senator Obama.

The outcome of November’s elections will not only affect the lives of native-born Americans but immigrants as well. For that reason some foreign-born individuals are doing what they can to get the candidate they believe has their best interest in mind elected.

Yet the Federal Elections Commission bans foreign nationals from “contributing, donating or spending funds in connection with any federal, state, or local election in the United States, either directly or indirectly.”

Foreign nationals include those who are not legal permanent residents or do not have Green Cards such as students, business travelers, temporary workers, and tourists. The commission also prohibits foreign governments, political parties, corporations, associations and partnerships from intervening in U.S. elections.

In October 2010, two foreign nationals who live and work lawfully in the United States filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia challenging the constitutionality of this prohibition.

Benjamin Bluman and Asenath Steiman argued that the ban violated the First Amendment and since they are here legally, their freedom of speech was also protected.

Bluman, a Canadian and self-described ”passionate” Democratic supporter, wanted to donate to the 2008 Obama campaign. Steiman, who holds dual Canadian and Israeli citizenship, wanted to contribute to Republican Sen. Tom Coburn, the party’s National Senatorial Committee, and the Club for Growth.

The District Court dismissed Bluman and Steiman’s challenge last August and the Supreme Court issued an order Monday upholding the statute against foreigners making financial contributions.

Adolfo Franco, a Republican strategist who was an advisor to John McCain’s 2008 presidential campaign, clarifies that anyone who is in the United States, with or without a green card, can volunteer for political campaigns so long as they do not make financial contributions, make in-kind donations, or are compensated for services they render.

“Freedom of expression applies to everyone,” he said.

Franco adds that the Republican National Committee doesn’t encourage or discourage legal immigrants from volunteering.

“We do not draw a distinction between U.S. citizens or legal permanent residents,” he said. There is “no vetting process for people who walk in the door to volunteer.”

Indeed, the RNC’s website does not mention anything about who can volunteer but does check the eligibility of anyone who donates.

Dompas shared that though he is not a naturalized citizen he gets involved “because I live here and the policies and decisions made by elected officials affect my life.”

He supports the Democratic Party because he says its core values are aligned with his own. “They care about the individual, about social welfare, which in the long run can only improve society,” he said. “They fight for social justice which is important to me as a Catholic.”

Franco believes, however, that immigrants will likely fare better under a Republican administration. In particular, he argues that immigration reform stands a better chance with the GOP.

“Comprehensive immigration reform will become law but only with a Republican president,” he asserted, “because most Americans would trust Republicans with immigration just as they would feel more comfortable with Democratic leadership on issues such as Social Security and Medicare. A lot of Americans think the Democratic Party is soft on the border security and illegal immigration issue and that Democrats are not really serious about tackling the illegal issue or adequate border security.”

Dompas, on the other hand, believes that immigrants will be better off with a Democrat in the White House and said he will do everything he can to help Mr. Obama keep his job.

Dompas is justified in wanting to get involved in a campaign, as are Bluman and Steiman, as are all people living in the U.S.—citizens and non-ctizens alike—because we are all affected by the policy decisions and rhetoric of our elected officials.

But the prohibition on foreign nationals influencing, and in particular, financially contributing, to U.S. elections is sound. We want people who are truly invested in the welfare of the United States, and who identify as Americans, determining its future through the electoral process.

Arguably, there are foreign nationals who want nothing more than to be U.S. citizens or at least have a green card but currently have no visible path to citizenship. These are the unauthorized immigrants who have planted their roots with American children, jobs and homes in communities across the country. People who have lived here for decades and know no other home, and who want to contribute fully to this country.

The question then for immigrants and their advocates is which party will give them the best chance to legalize their status and earn a voice, and a vote, in our democracy.

You can follow Erwin de Leon on Twitter or read his blog.

Feet in Two Worlds is supported by the New York Community Trust and the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation with additional support from the Mertz Gilmore Foundation and the Sirus Fund. 

(Photo: Mockstar/flickr)

While the Republican presidential candidates have taken hard line positions on illegal immigration, rank and file GOP voters in New Hampshire tend to have a more nuanced position on the issue.  Pilar Marrero, senior political writer for La Opinion, says Republican voters she has met in New Hampshire are worried about illegal immigration, but they don’t necessarily support policies that would separate immigrant families.

In this podcast, recorded on the eve of the 2012 New Hampshire Primary, Marrero and free lance journalist Valeria Fernandez speak with Fi2W Executive Producer John Rudolph about the mood of the voters in the Granite State.  Fernandez talks about her reporting on the state’s small but growing Latino population, and their concerns about the Republican candidates and President Obama’s immigration policies. Listen:

Subscribe to the Fi2W podcast using iTunes or Podbean ¦ Download this episode

Feet in Two Worlds podcasts are supported by the New York Community Trust and the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation with additional support from the Mertz Gilmore Foundation. Fi2W podcasts are also supported in part by WNYC Radio and the CUNY Graduate School of Journalism.

Newt Gingrich speaking at CPAC 2011. (Photo: Gage Skidmore/flickr)

Latinos make up a tiny fraction of the New Hampshire population–only 2.8 percent, according to the Census Bureau, versus 16.8 percent nationwide–but the Republican GOP candidates are fighting for every vote they can muster leading up to Tuesday’s primary.

On Sunday, Newt Gingrich held a rowdy campaign event at a Mexican restaurant in Manchester, where he spoke again about his controversial plan that would, among other things, provide legal residency for a small subset of undocumented immigrants who have been in the U.S. for 25 years and have strong community and family ties. The LA Times reported that a Latino man in the audience told Gingrich he’d have his vote if he promised to enact the plan within 100 days of taking the Oval Office. Gingrich did not answer directly and said the plan would have to be broken into many different bills in order to pass (translation: we’re not talking a comprehensive immigration reform bill).

The first Latino elected official in the state, Rep. Carlos Gonzalez (R), introduced Gingrich. The Washington Post reported that Gingrich’s staff distributed Spanish-language paraphernalia, including a card that listed  “10 reasons why Latinos should support Newt Gingrich for president.”

“I’m here because we really believe that we have an opportunity to pull together people of all backgrounds,” Gingrich said. “We particularly wanted to reach out to the Latino community, but also frankly, to all ethnic communities…It’s very important for us to make a case that we are in favor of many people, from many places, having the opportunity to become Americans—that this is truly a land of opportunity.”

Meanwhile, at the Rochester, New Hampshire, Opera House, Romney told the crowd that his father was born in Mexico–something he rarely mentions in public. Romney’s father, George, who ultimately became governor of Michigan, came to the U.S. when he was five, and Candidate Romney painted his life story as that of an immigrant living out the American Dream.  “We became a nation that attracted the innovators of the world,” Romney said. “It’s in our DNA, it’s who we are.” Univision reported:

But Romney hardly ever mentions his father’s roots in Mexico or the fact that he still has many distant relatives living in the country and it’s not surprising the subject does not come up more often. His family’s history there is controversial. Romney’s great-grandfather, Miles Park Romney, fled the U.S. to Mexico with a group of Mormons in 1885 to avoid anti-polygamy laws in America. And a Washington Post piece published in July detailed how his relatives have more open views on immigration than the former Massachusetts governor.

Every vote counts, as we saw in Iowa, where Romney won by eight little slips of paper. But realistically, the candidates are likely just practicing their talking points for Florida, the first state in the primary season that has a sizable Latino population.