The Congressional Hispanic Caucus is grappling with an identity shakeup as internal tensions boil over regarding how to best use its voice on immigration and border security issues in a GOP-dominated Washington.
There’s growing frustration among the group’s House members over what several CHC sources complain is an overly passive approach by its Senate counterparts. Beyond that, there’s a divide between progressives and Frontline members on how Democrats should counter the Trump administration’s hardline border policies.
Take the Laken Riley Act for example.
During an internal meeting between CHC members and House Democratic leadership last week, progressive lawmakers griped about losing two CHC senators — Sens. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) and Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.) — on that vote.
“The Senate may feel like they don’t know what the House is doing and the House feels exactly the same,” Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.) told us. “If we’re not working together, they’re just going to play us, and they played us on this last bill.”
Bicameral Beef: Tensions between CHC leadership and senators have been heating up since last Congress, when House members complained they weren’t included in bipartisan Senate talks on crafting a border bill.
Just last week, Rep. Linda Sánchez (D-Calif.) told lawmakers in an internal meeting that the group should request a meeting with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer over what they view as his failure on the issue. Some CHC sources also griped about the continuing absence of Latino senators in the group’s activities, including its first press conference last Thursday that highlighted the caucus’s priorities.
Sen. Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.) told us the group should have “a family conversation” on how they can better work together to craft a united message on the border and immigration.
“Everyone can do better and I certainly hope that that is a reflection that all my colleagues in the Hispanic Caucus agree on — that we all can do better,” Luján said.
Gallego, a once progressive House member who has moderated his positions since running for Senate, also pushed back on complaints from his former colleagues over his vote in support of the Laken Riley Act.
“If CHC is concerned about the view of Latinos on immigration, the way I’m voting is exactly where the median Latino voter is voting and how they feel about the border,” Gallego told us. “They can debate all they want but the Latino voters in the country have spoken.”
A united front: CHC Chair Adriano Espaillat (D-N.Y.) has been seeking to move his members to the middle on border security and immigration. But he also wants to hone in on a strong economic message.
CHC members want to focus on positions favored by a broad swath of the caucus — Dreamers and protecting farm workers — rather than how far to go on border security measures that are a problem for more vulnerable members of the caucus.
Senior sources also tell us the group is looking to be more active after many felt they got rolled by the Biden administration on immigration. We wrote about the strained relationship between the CHC and the Biden White House. Some CHC insiders said they want to be more like the Congressional Black Caucus, which has a seemingly unending well of political capital in the Democratic Caucus.
“We got to stick together,” Rep. Sylvia Garcia (D-Texas) told us. “There’s no question about standing strong with immigrants, especially going through the next four years.”
