By Lourdes Medrano for Yes! Media.
Broadcast version by Kathryn Carley for Arizona News Connection reporting for the Yes! Media-Public News Service Collaboration

After 37 years of living in the United States, Gastón Garcia overcame anxiety over the naturalization process and became a citizen in Tucson, Arizona, in late September 2024. He has another milestone still ahead: voting for the first time.

Wearing a dark blue suit and a broad smile, he walked out of his naturalization ceremony holding a small U.S. flag and his citizenship certificate. The timing was no coincidence; he aimed to become eligible to vote before the Nov. 5 presidential election. 

“I am very excited that I will be able to vote,” says Garcia, 57. “We can express our voice and, more than anything, we can make ourselves count.”

In swing states such as Arizona, Nevada, and Pennsylvania, and large states such as California, the influence of Latino voters like Garcia could be key to choosing the next president in the race between former President Donald J. Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris. Newly naturalized citizens and an influx of young Latinos reaching the voting age of 18 boosted the estimated number of eligible Latino voters to 36.2 million in 2024, up from 32.3 million in 2020.

A poll released in mid-October by Phoenix-based advocacy group Living United for Change in Arizona (LUCHA) and Data for Social Good shows that a majority of 1,028 registered Arizona voters surveyed between April and May are highly motivated to cast a ballot. While immigration remains important for many Latinos, the poll found they are also deeply concerned about the economy, health care access, and affordable housing. The findings track with results from national polls examining the issues Latino voters are thinking about less than a month before the election.

The shifting demographics of Latino voters reflect the nuanced distinctions within an evolving population often characterized as a monolithic voting bloc. “We’re a diverse community with a wide range of political views, experience, and priorities,” says Alejandra Gomez, executive director of LUCHA.

Canvassers have been knocking on doors all over the state since March to encourage voters—Latinos in particular—to cast a ballot and hopes are high that they will turn out en masse, says Stephanie Maldonado, managing director at LUCHA. “I definitely do see our community showing up and showing up big this November 5th,” she adds.

Garcia says he’s looking forward to making his vote count. For years after coming to the U.S. from Mexico, he worked in construction. In the 1990s, he started his own landscaping business, which he still operates. These days he worries about inflation because his earnings don’t go as far as they used to when buying necessities. “Prices have gone way up, for food and gasoline and other items,” he says.

Garcia is hopeful the next president will take on issues related to the economy, but he also would like the future commander-in-chief to push for immigration reforms. What’s needed, he says, is an orderly, speedier process that gives eligible people already in the country or waiting to apply for U.S. asylum south of the border an opportunity to live here legally. “People come here to improve their lives and to achieve the American dream, as I did,” he says. 

Dustin Corella, who was born in Tucson, is among a generation of young Latinos coming of age in 2024. Soon after turning 18 in June, he registered to vote and is eager to cast a ballot. “It feels like a big responsibility,” he says.

The issues motivating Corella to vote include his desire to elect politicians who ensure appropriate funding for public education as well as after-school programs and other resources aimed at youth in the community. And he says there’s a need for elected officials who can better address the impact of climate change, adding, “Those are the things that I care about, and I’m looking for leaders who can tackle them and create opportunities for the next generation.”

Corella is one of 1.3 million eligible Latino voters in Arizona. The state, along with California, Texas, Florida, and New York, is home to about two-thirds, or 65%, of all Latino eligible voters in the country, according to the Pew Research Center.

For Latinos and immigrant communities across the country, the stakes are high this election, says Nicole Melaku, executive director of the National Partnership for New Americans. The coalition of immigrant and refugee rights organizations is working to encourage the nation’s naturalized citizens to vote, especially in the face of anti-immigrant attacks. For example, a slew of Republican campaign ads focuses negatively on immigrants.

“With the likes of Project 2025 looming about in the background, of family separation and of attacks to our democracy, I think it was important for us to make sure that our communities, and naturalized voters especially, are aware of the power that their vote and their voice has to shape the outcome of the election,” Melaku says.

Project 2025 is a policy agenda of the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank that aims to radically restructure the federal government in a conservative administration. Experts caution that the project threatens voting rights and promotes a litany of anti-immigrant measures with far-reaching implications.

Trump has distanced himself from the project, but he has made immigration a key part of the race. In one campaign stop after another, Trump’s anti-immigrant rhetoric against immigrants punctuates his speeches. Should he win, he promises to quickly launch a mass deportation of immigrants living in the country without legal status—and even some with legal status.

Instead of countering him with pro-immigrant rhetoric, Harris has responded by taking a tougher stance on the issue, including a proposal to toughen asylum restrictions implemented by the Biden administration. She has also endorsed comprehensive immigration reforms. Trump blames Harris for a record number of migrants—many of them asylum seekers—entering the U.S. from Mexico, even as entries have declined sharply in 2024 amid policy changes on both sides of the border. 

In the border state of Arizona, the immigration debate is ever present. On Nov. 5, voters will reject or approve Proposition 314, which would give the state authority to enforce federal immigration policies. The initiative, Maldonado says, “specifically targets immigrant communities and continues to push racial profiling, which we know is a top concern among the Latino community. And I think that this election for us is pushing back against policies that continue to criminalize our families and communities.”

Immigration hits close to home for Maldonado, who comes from a mixed-status family. She and her two siblings are U.S.-born citizens and her father is a legal resident. However, her mother is undocumented, says Maldonado, and returned to Mexico some time ago. Her mother’s departure was the catalyst for Maldonado to become more involved in electoral and civic matters. “We need a permanent solution on immigration, not just for my family, but millions of families across the country and many diverse families that are living in these complexities of being separated,” she explains. 

The Latino vote in the upcoming election could mean a shift in the usual narrative about the nation’s second-largest group of voters, Maldonado says. “If we didn’t have this much power, there wouldn’t be so many attempts at trying to strip away our rights.” She adds, “We just need to come together and make it happen even greater this year.”


Lourdes Medrano wrote this article for Yes! Media.


get more stories like this via email

Despite voter approval in November, Missouri lawmakers are moving to undo part of Proposition A, specifically, the clause requiring employers to provide paid sick leave.

The Missouri House passed the repeal legislation last month by a 96-51 vote. The provision was approved by nearly 60% of voters, who also supported raising the state's minimum wage to $15 an hour by 2026.

Prop A proponents said repealing any part of the measure so soon after its approval undermines the will of the voters.

John Davis, partner at the bipartisan polling firm Red America, Blue America Research, said its latest survey showed 75% of respondents oppose efforts to repeal the legislation.

"Legislators who are thinking about what voters had approved just this past November should be concerned that there's such a strong response in opposition to that particular type of proposal," Davis noted.

Supporters of the repeal contended the sick-leave mandate is too rigid and burdensome, warning it could lead to reduced hiring or even business closures. The bill is now in the Senate, which has two weeks to act before the mandate takes effect May 1.

Business groups have filed lawsuits claiming Proposition A violates Missouri's single-subject rule by linking minimum wage hikes with paid sick leave. Supporters of the repeal also argued the Legislature can amend the law without a public vote since it changed state law, not the constitution.

Davis highlighted the importance of public opinion surveys.

"Some of the decisions made at statehouses are of extraordinary consequence," Davis pointed out. "What we have tried to do is just establish sort of baselines, to take a look over time how folks are feeling about a variety of topics, because state laws really do impact people very, very directly."

If the Missouri Senate approves the bill, it will move to Gov. Mike Kehoe's desk, where he can sign it into law, veto it, or allow it to become law without his signature.


get more stories like this via email

Final action is expected soon on a plan that would prevent North Dakota cities and counties from using alternative voting methods for local elections.

Both chambers of the Legislature have approved a bill that focuses on two options - ranked-choice voting and approval voting.

In recent election cycles, Fargo has used approval voting when local candidates appear on the ballot. It became the first U.S. city to do so, after residents showed support for the idea.

Bismarck resident Andrew Alexis Varvel testified against banning these options.

"The rest of the state does not need to follow everything that Fargo does," said Varvel, "but we do need to have a certain amount of respect for what people at the local level decide."

Other bill opponents also said they don't want the state micromanaging local elections.

The Fargo-endorsed option, approval voting, allows voters to choose more than one candidate. Backers say it reduces polarization by prompting candidates to appeal to more people.

But some lawmakers believe these approaches are ineffective, and want the whole state to use the same voting method.

Gov. Kelly Armstrong hasn't indicated whether he'll sign the bill when it reaches his desk.

North Dakota Secretary of State Michael Howe supports the proposed ban on alternative voting methods.

In his testimony, he noted that Fargo's use of approval voting hasn't created any issues, but he said he worries other cities will follow suit.

"Multiple election methods implemented across the state," said Howe, "would have an impact on the administration of a statewide election."

But a Fargo City Commissioner argues that across North Dakota, there are already many variations - including at-large candidates.

A similar proposed ban was vetoed by former Gov. Doug Burgum two years ago.




get more stories like this via email

A number of lawsuits have been filed in opposition to President Donald Trump's executive order which could reshape how U.S. elections are run and the League of Women Voters of Arizona is one of the groups fighting back.

Pinny Sheoran, president of the group, said democracy is not just on the line, it is actively being broken. Trump's executive order would usher in new requirements, such as having voters provide in-person documentary proof of citizenship and identity. Sheoran called the president's action unconstitutional and illegal.

"Even the states serving as a buttress against the breaking of democracy is greatly under threat, in Arizona, specifically," Sheoran stated.

The White House has defended the president's executive order and called the measures "common sense," and all objections "insane." But Sheoran contends the executive order will suppress voters and enact "unnecessary hoops," making it harder for Arizonans to make their voices heard.

Sheoran argued the directive from the White House will disproportionately affect Arizonans across the board, including people of color, those in rural communities, those with disabilities and women.

She pointed out more than 1.5 million women in the state have changed their last name after marriage, which means many will not have a birth certificate matching their legal identity. Nationwide, the issue grows exponentially.

"For those 61-plus million women, we are talking about many of them, (a) not having a passport; (b) having to now prove why their ID has got a different name than the ID that they registered in," Sheoran outlined.

Sheoran stressed the importance of highlighting the narrative of how the "disastrous" order will affect everyday Arizonans.

"What makes sense to the general public, to the women who don't watch Fox News or MSNBC, is, 'Oh, I can't vote with my voter ID?' 'What, I've been voting, I am 70 years old, I've been voting for almost 50 years, and now you're telling me I can't vote?'" Sheoran underscored. "Think about those conversations."