Why don't Democrats have more female and minority Governors?

"We have a lot more legislators and mayors and Congress members that are women, that are Latino, that are Asian, that are African American." L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa

by Clifford F. Thies

When asked a straight forward question by MSNBC about Governors, Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa shifted to other offices.

First, let's look at Govenors:

Female Governors:

Republicans 4 (AZ, NM, OK, SC)

Democrats 2 (NC and WA)

Minority Governors

Republicans 4 (LA [Asian], NM [Hispanic], NV [Hispanic], SC [Asian])

Democrats 1 (MA [black])

We have 30 Governors (counting RI's independent as one of ours), and they have 20. So, we have greater advantages in female and minoriy Governors (2:1 and 4:1) than we have in Govenors (3:2). So, it's not simply that we have more Governors.

Second, let's look at Senators

Female Senators

Republicans 5 (AK, ME [2], NH, TX)

Democrats 12 (CA [2], LA, MD, MI, MO, MN, NC, NH, NY, WA [2])

Minority Senators

Republicans 1 (FL [H ispanic])

Democrats 3 (HI [2] [Asian}, NJ [Hispanic])

So, with regard to Senators, the tables are turned. They have more female and minority Senators, even taking into account that they have more Senators (53, counting a couple indepndents who caucus with hem) than we have (47).

Indeed, we were to add Senators and Governors together, and ignore double-count the female minorities, we have 15 out of 77, and they have 18 out of 73, giveng them a slight higher percentage than us, but not a substantially higher percentage than us.

So, the correct answer to the question is that the Republicans may have an advantage, just now, in female and minorty Governors, but Democrats have an advantage in U.S. Senators, and taking both of these important top-of-the-ticket satewide offices into account, neither party should be said to have a real advantage over the other.

Next, let's look at members of Congress and, for a reason that will become clear in a moment, let's look at ethnicity.

Black Congressmen

Republicans 2

Democrats 40

Hispanic Congressmen

Republicans 8

Democrats 19

Native Americans Congressmen

Repubicans 1

Democrats 0

The two black Republicans are elected from overwhelmingly white districts (75% white in the case of Tim Scott of SC and 82% white in the case of Allen West of FL). In contrast, all forty of the black Democrats are elected from either "majority-minority" districts under the VRA or ethnically diverse districts (as in the case of Barbara Lee of CA, who was elected from a district in which there is no racial or ethnic majority).

In the case of Hispanics, four of the eight Republicans are elected from majority-Hispanic districts (three in FL and one in TX), another from an ethnically diverse district (CA), and three from majority white districts (TX. ID and WA). All nineteen Democrats are elected from majority-latino or ethnically diverse districts.

The only Native American currently serving in Congress is Republican Tom Cole of OK, a registered member of the Chickasaw nation. While his district has a good number of Native Americans, it is overwhemlingly white.

So, what about the fact that Democrats have more minorty Congressmen, state legislators and mayors? This is because of blacks overwhelming majority are Democrats, in conjunction with the concentraton of blacks in certains districts and cities. Hispnics tend to be Democratc, but not nearly so much as blacks.

As for white Democrats, we wonder why they hardly ever vote for a minority to represent them in Congress. But, with regard to white Republicans, we see it is not uncommon.