Talk:List of Hispanic and Latino Americans in the United States Congress

Removed Spanish from this List, will remove Portuguese and Brazilians as well.

First of all Brazil is not part of Hispania. Ibero-America would include Brazil. See Hispanic America. Second of all, Spanish people and people who are European who happen to live in Latin or Central America are NOT Hispanic. Knowing many people who are "Mexican", but who's whole families recently came from Spain or other European countries, they are considered white, not hispanic. The term Latin can refer to people of Spain, Italy, France, etc. People who are mestizo can also be called Latin, but the term "Latino" is used more; which is also used interchangeably with "Hispanic" to describe race. "Latino" and "Hispanic" are used to describe people of mixed ethnicity - Spanish (European) mixed with Native or Native and African. "Hispanic" also refers to the region, culture and language of Spanish-speaking countries, but when referring to race, hispanic is not used. A person from Spain is a Spaniard and a white European.

Do NOT add Spanish people to this list. Spaniards are not Hispanic in terms of race. The term used is Spaniard. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hispanic_America DOES NOT REFER TO PEOPLE FROM SPAIN. I will be forced to report those who add back Spaniards to the Hispanic American lists if this continues.

Also, there are many white cubans, Argentineans who are not of native descent (may be Italian, etc.), and other European peoples who are not mestizo who are from Latin American countries. I feel that keeping their nationality is sufficient enough for a category. For instance Argentinean-American vs. Hispanic-American. I will consider the deletion of these other nationalities only after further discussion on the List of Hispanic Americans page. Because the definition refers to those from Central and South America who are not Portuguese. I feel whites from Latin America are NOT Hispanic, however, especially if they are recent immigrants to Latin American countries and are European.--CreativeSoul7981 (talk) 03:38, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

You referenced the article on "Hispanic America" - but not the one on "Hispanic Americans" - which is pertinent to this category. Specifically see this part of that article, which points out that the majority of "Hispanic and Latio Americans" are classified as white.

This very issue is dealt with, in its own encyclopedia entry: White Hispanic and Latino Americans

Furthermore, the bottom part of this current artlicle links to the articles for the Congressional Hispanic Caucus and the Congressional Hispanic Conference. Both of those Caucuses have members (and former members, when they were in Congress), who are from those backgrounds that've now been deleted from this listing (such as Democrat Tony Coelho and Republican Trent Franks, the latter of whom is even identified as "Latino" in this article on U.S. Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (who is Cuban-American).

If the U.S. Congress formally recognizes them as being Hispanic (as evidenced by the very organizations listed on the bottom of this encyclopedia entry), then they must be included, in this listing. (Not doing so would constitute a logical fatality.)

Pacificus (talk) 09:42, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

I see where you're coming from in reference to this particular article because it looks like Spanish people are grouped with Hispanics to beef up the Hispanic categories (this applies to real life groups as well). But, I disagree on the general Hispanic-American list. "Latin" is used differently than "Latino", though it means the same in Spanish. "Latino" is used for mestizos and in this country is really used interchangeably with Hispanic. Most people see Hispanics as mestizos. "Latin" refers to anyone who is of Spanish, Portuguese, Italian, or French heritage. Hispanic America has it's own page, White Hispanics have their own page. I don't know why there is no differentiation. Hispanic refers to culture from Spanish-language countries with ties to Spain. But, in terms of race, White-Hispanics who don't have native or African heritage, are just white. I don't call Spanish people White Hispanic. I call them Spaniards and white Europeans. Portuguese aren't even Hispanic, but Iberian. They don't speak Spanish. Why add the Portuguese and Italian man back. Italians aren't Hispanic either. I'd welcome your input here. --CreativeSoul7981 (talk) 17:53, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Okay, it seems you did leave out the Portuguese and Italian men I had deleted. --CreativeSoul7981 (talk) 17:56, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

"Hispanic" is not a racial category. It does not matter how "most people see Hispanics." The fact that virtually anyone of any race or ethnicity with ancestors who passed through the former Spanish Empire is categorized as "Hispanic" only reveals how broad this category is. But it is a category we have in this country, therefore all members of congress who fit in this category should be here. Personally, I think it is far more informative to identify members of congress as Mexican American, Cuban, Puerto Rican, Spanish, Sephardic Jewish, or so on than as part of a broad category that mainly emerged in the 1970s. (For instance, did Judah P. Benjamin ever identify as part of an ethnic grouping that included Mexican or Cuban people?) 24.167.52.195 (talk) 23:51, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Charles Rangel

I deleted Charles Rangel. He might be half-Puerto Rican by blood, but even that is disputed, and it's definitely no part of his identity. Nowhere on his own page is he referred to as Hispanic, except in a footnote about the disputation; I think this page should draw on what that page says, and any arguments/edits take place there. -- Minivet (talk) 22:40, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

If anyone insists on including Charles Rangel, maybe the way to go is to mention him in a small section or a footnote. SamEV (talk) 23:09, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Charles Rangel's father was from Ponce, Puerto Rico. Says who? Says the New York Times in an article published on September 10, 2008: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/11/nyregion/11spanish.html ("Mr. Rangel himself is part Hispanic; his father, Ralph Rangel Sr., was born in Ponce, Puerto Rico, though he left the family when Mr. Rangel was 6."). In Puerto Rico, Rangel (pronounced "ran-HELL") is not a very common surname, but it is well known (in fact, the first wife of the late Gov. Luis A. Ferré was a Rangel). I know that references to Ralph Rangel, Sr. of Ponce, Puerto Rico being Charles Rangel's father were recently removed from Wikipedia, but, in fact, an 18-year-old single male named Rafael Rangel ("Rafael" is the Spanish-language version of "Ralph") arrived in Ellis Island on October 17, 1917 on a ship that had departed from San Juan, Puerto Rico (even though Puerto Ricans had just been made U.S. citizens, travelers from PR to New York still had to stop in Ellis Island in those days): http://www.ellisisland.org/search/passRecord.asp?LNM=RANGEL&PLNM=RANGEL&CGD=M&first_kind=1&last_kind=0&TOWN=null&SHIP=null&RF=46&pID=610225010297&MID=09516497760151207552& I don't have access to the U.S. Census data that used to be posted on Wikipedia as evidence of Ralph Rangel, Sr. being originally from Ponce, Puerto Rico, but if it indeed showed Ralph, Sr. as having been born circa 1899 then it's probable that we're talking about the same person here.

I fail to see why a Congressman whose father was born in Puerto Rico to Puerto Rican parents and raised in Puerto Rico until he left at the age of 18 should be excluded from a list of Hispanic members of Congress. It wasn't that his father happened to be born in Puerto Rico (to non-Puerto Rican parents) and moved away as a young child, à la Joaquin Phoenix; Ralph Rangel, Jr. appears to have been a bona fide Puerto Rican. Charles Rangel is Hispanic, and should not be removed from the article. AuH2ORepublican (talk) 01:48, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

See my comment below. SamEV (talk) 23:41, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Former Spanish East Indians and Virgin Islanders

Delegates Manuel L. Quezón of Philippines, Ron de Lugo of Virgin Islands, Vicente T. Blaz and Robert A. Underwood of Guam, and Gregorio Sablan of Northern Marina Islands are included on this list. But that seems to be on the basis of ancestry and/or membership in the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, whereas being Hispanic or Latino American is about place of origin, specifically it's about having origins in Hispanic America or Spain. See Hispanic and Latino Americans for a more complete treatment of this.

I'm really not sure yet how to deal with them. Does anyone else have an opinion? SamEV (talk) 23:27, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Ron de Lugo's father was a Puerto Rican who lived in the U.S. Virgin Islands, and Ron de Lugo actually went to high school in Puerto Rico. He was also a long-time member of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. His inclusion should not be controversial.

As for the Delegates from Guam and the Northern Marianas and the Resident Commissioner from the Philippines . . . yes, that's not quite as cut-and-dried. I added Quezón because he was noted for being a mestizo (of both Spanish and Filipino descent) and, in fact, looked more mestizo than Filipino (unlike the other Resident Commissioner from the Philippines, almost all of whom have Spanish names but about whom I could not find evidence of being of Spanish ancestry).

U.S. territories are part of America. Someone who is of not insignificant Spanish descent who was raised in America would almost certainly be considered Hispanic, so it seems odd to exclude Blaz, Underwood and Sablan just because they were born and raised in Guam or the Northern Marianas. And, the way I see it, Quezón has at least as good a claim of being Hispanic as Blaz, and an even better claim than Underwood and Sablan (who appear to be Chamorros with some Spanish ancestry), because Quezón was a mestizo born and raised in a Spanish colony that became part of America in 1898.

Perhaps someone who is more knowledgable about Chamorro and Filipino culture could chime in and halp us decide whether Chamorro or Filipinos with not-insignificant Spanish ancestry are considered Hispanic. AuH2ORepublican (talk) 02:04, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Going by immediate place of origin is much more in keeping with the definition of "Hispanic or Latino". You're acting in good faith, obviously, but claiming every Hispanic/Latino person based on ancestry is too OR, too subjective, as can be seen from all that explaining you've had to do. There is a way to include these people we're discussing: with the support of reliable sources that refer to them as Hispanic or Latino, something that ideally should be done for everyone on the list. SamEV (talk) 23:41, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

SamEV, you wrote "Going by immediate place of origin is much more in keeping with the definition of "Hispanic or Latino."" If you could explain to me what that means, and how it applies to Hispanics born and raised in the U.S., maybe I'd agree with you.

It's an easy case when someone is born in the U.S. both of whose parents were born and raised in Mexico or Cuba or some other Latin American country, even if the grandparents were from Spain or some other Old World country; not as easy when someone's parents came directly from Spain, since there would be no tie to a "Latin American" country. It's weird line-drawing, really: no one doubts that former Senator (and current Secretary of the Interior) Ken Salazar, whose ascendants emigrated from Spain to the Southwest U.S. in the 1500s, is Hispanic, and no one doubts that former Texas solicitor general (and current U.S. Senate candidate) Ted Cruz, who was born in Canada to a Cuban father and non-Hispanic American mother, is Hispanic, but Charles Rangel is not deemd by many to be Hispanic even though his father was born and raised in Puerto Rico for the simple reason that Ralph (Rafael) Rangel, Sr. married a black woman instead of a white woman, and the fact that Rangel is (incontrovertibly) black makes it impossible for some people to accept that he's *also* Hispanic. (I guess that Roberto Clemente was lucky that he was born in Puerto Rico, not the U.S. mainland, and that it was his mother, not his father, whose last name was Walker, since otherwise his blackness and "American-sounding" name might be deemed by some to nullify his Hispanicness.) Hispanics can be of any race (as the U.S. Census famously proclaims), and they can be as white as Alexis Bledel and as black as Alfonso Soriano and every shade in between, so we need to get away from the way of thinking that leads to saying things like "Rangel is Hispanic? I thought he was black"? Being Hispanic and black, or Hispanic and white, or Hispanic and Asian (think former Peruvian president Alberto Fujimori), are not mutually exclusive. If we start excluding half-Hispanics like Rangel based on some purity test I think we'd be surpised with the who would also be excluded.

By the way, I chose to include Congressman Charles Rangel but not former Senator John Sununu, Jr. on the list of Hispanic congressmen because I recognize that lines have to be drawn regarding how far back someone's Hispanic connection goes. Rangel's father was born and raised in Puerto Rico, so I thought that he should be included; Sununu's father was born (but not raised) in Cuba to a an Arab father (of both Palestinian and Lebanese extraction) and a Salvadoran (born and raised) mother (of Lebanese and Greek extraction). I would consider John Sununu, Sr. to be Hispanic because of his Salvadoran mother (although his Cuban birth doesn't hurt, either), but believe that one Hispanic grandparent is not enough for the younger Sununu to qualify. Yes, it's arbitrary, but the line has to be drawn somewhere, and I think that the line should be closer than having just one Hispanic grandparent but not so close that it excludes someone with a Hispanic father.

Regarding the partially Spanish-descended delegates from Guam, the Northern Marianas and the Philippines, I really don't know how they should be treated, but it seems to me that either they all should go in or none should. So, SamEV, I don't really object to you eliminating all of them; as I said before, I'd like to get the input of Chamorros and Filipinos regarding whether Chamorros and Filipinos of partial Hispanic descent should be considered Hispanic. However, I fail to see why former USVI Delegate Ron de Lugo, whose father was Puerto Rican (the Virgin Islands are right next to Puerto Rico and hundreds of Puerto Ricans moved back and forth between PR and the VI during the 19th and 20th centuries), who spent some of his formative years in Puerto Rico (he attended and graduated from the same high school as future Puerto Rico Resident Commissioner and Governor Aníbal Acevedo-Vilá) and who was a longtime member of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, should be excluded from a list of Hispanic congressmen.

But I'm not going to add anyone else to the page; I'll leave it to others to decide who is Hispanic and thus should belong on the list. AuH2ORepublican (talk) 14:07, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

I'd have replied sooner if you'd messaged me on my talk page about your response, because I'm a very inactive editor, lately.

By 'immediate origin' I meant 'most recent origin'.

Imagine Jack, born and raised in the US as the grandson of Colombian immigrants. Jack is an easy call, I'd say: we can include him as Hispanic/Latino, because his immediate origin is Colombian, which is among the subgroups of the Hispanic/Latino group (see [1]).

Now imagine Jill, born and raised in the US. Her father's parents moved from Colombia to Germany, where her father was born. Jill's mother is Estonian American. IMO, Jill is no easy call, because her most recent origins are German and Estonian, neither of which is generally a Hispanic/Latino origin.

Jill's father may have grown up in Germany viewing himself as an 'unhyphenated German'. It is not at all unlikely that Jill would view herself as a German American and Estonian American, and not as a Colombian American and/or Hispanic or Latino American. Well, Ron de Lugo's case looks closer to Jill's. The Virgin Islands is not a Latin American country, and the US Census Bureau lists Virgin Islanders under the non-Hispanic West Indian group. I think that for de Lugo, being of Virgin Islander origin, it isn't a given that he'd see himself as Puerto Rican and/or Hispanic or Latino. Maybe he does (believe me: I'd be a bit surprised if he didn't); but I'd rather we cite a reliable source. For example: he might view himself only as "Virgin Islander", and to repeat, Virgin Islanders are not a Hispanic or Latino group, just as Germans and Estonians aren't.

If there's anything I'd like you to take away from our discussion it's that it doesn't just come down to ancestry. (Nor is it about race.) SamEV (talk) 21:24, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

SamEV, Ron de Lugo joined the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, and is not of Portuguese descent, nor did he represent a constituency with a substantial Hispanic presence, so I assume that he considered himself to be Hispanic. Of course, that someone consider himself Hispanic should not, by itself, settle the issue, since it also matters how other people view the person: Congressman Trent Franks considers himself to be Mexican-America (maybe he had a Mexican grandparent, I don't know), but I don't think that many Hispanics view him as being Hispanic. But De Lugo was accepted in the Congressional Hispanic Caucus without any "Portuguese-American caveat" or anything, so I think that he was viewed as being Hispanic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AuH2ORepublican (talk • contribs) 13:56, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Sorry about forgetting to sign my March 22 comment. AuH2ORepublican (talk) 14:11, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Richard Pombo and David Valadao

Richard Pombo and David Valadao are not a Hispanic or Latino, so they should not be included on the list of Hispanic and Latinos since they are Portuguese Americans. Brazilians are Latinos, but not Portuguese. Only Brazilians; Spanish, who by the way are Hispanics, but not Latinos; Latin Americans; and their descendants should be included in the list. Willminator (talk) 23:37, 26 December 2013 (UTC) P.S: I decided to do the work in deleting Richard Pombo and David Valadao from the list. Willminator (talk) 01:11, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Consistency?

It's lacking. For example, why do the Senators get an ancestry/POB column, but the representatives don't? --96.241.77.157 (talk) 17:03, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Personally, I think that an "ancestry" column causes more trouble than it's worth, and should be removed. But I agree that the birthplace column should be added to U.S. Representatives and Delegates, albeit without the little flag that only creates controversy (e.g., why is there a U.S. flag for someone born in St. Thomas in the 19th century, when it was a British colony?). AuH2ORepublican (talk) 12:53, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Birthplace should be listed for Congress, however Ancestry seems good too. The flag seems bad, I will remove them. --Frmorrison (talk) 21:14, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

former Spanish empire

@AuH2ORepublican, Filipinos and Chamorro born before the Spanish-American War are Hispanic because they were born in Spanish territory. Spain even recognizes this by provisions regarding the Philippines in the Spanish nationality law. By definition of jus sanguinis Hispanic, Nahua peoples of Mexico are not Hispanic if they are of 100% indigenous blood even if they were born in Mexican territory or spoke Spanish.

Besides that, the peoples of Guam and the Philippines spoke Spanish, particularly the educated political class. It was impossible get formal schooling and not speak Spanish in those territories because that was the language of public instruction. They were at least Hispanicized. With regards to present-day Chamorro, Gregorio Sablan is a member of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus which implies Hispanic identity. Shhhhwwww!! (talk) 07:19, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

@User:Shhhhwwww!!, I am aware that Latin-Americans don't always have Spanish ancestry, and can be 100% Native American (or 100% black African, or 100% Italian, or 50% Lebanese, 25% Ukrainian and 25% Croatian). But all of them are from Latin-American countries and thus are considered Latino. The Philippines, Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands do not form part of Latin America. Yes, the Philippines and the Mariana Islands (including both Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands) were part of the Spanish Empire prior to 1898 (well, I think that the Northern Marianas weren't sold to Germany until 1899), just as Equatorial Guinea was a Spanish colony until 1975, but someone from Equatorial Guinea who is of 100% Fang ancestry would not be considered Hispanic (and certainly is not Latin American).

In the Philippines and the Marianas, the native population adopted Spanish surnames, so one can't establish Spanish ancestry simply by looking at their surnames. Many Filipinos, of course, had Spanish ancestry (and were characterized, both in the Philippines as in Spain, as "mestizos"), as is the case of the late Filipino President (and, prior to that, Resident Commissioner) Manuel Quezón and the current Utah Attorney General Sean Reyes; I believe that that's also the case for Resident Commissioners Isauro Gabaldón and Benito Legarda, but have been awaiting confirmation before adding them to the article.

My humble opinion is that the mere fact that a person has ancestors who lived in the Philippines or the Mariana Islands prior to 1898 does not make one, ipso facto, Hispanic. This view is consistent with U.S. Census forms, in which a Hispanic or Latino is defined as a person whose ancestors came from Spain or Latin America. I respectfully request that you remove from the article those Resident Commissioners or Delegates from the Philippines, Guam or the Northern Mariana Islands who do not have substantial Spanish ancestry. If you do have a source that says that particular persons were Spanish mestizos, then please keep them in the article (and edit such person's Wikipedia page to include such ancestral information). Thank you. AuH2ORepublican (talk) 15:40, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

@User:Shhhhwwww!!, I see that you removed most of the Filipino, Guamanian and Northern Marianan Resident Commissioners and Delegates that you had added to the article, for which I thank you. I assume that the ones that you had added and did not remove are the ones that you believe meet the definition of "Hispanic" used in this article (and by the U.S. Census). Looking at those that you did not remove, there's at least one with which I agree wholeheartedly with your decision: I read up a little on Joaquin Elizalde, and he clearly was Hispanic (he was from a Spanish Filipino family) and should have been included in the article from the very beginning. As I had mentioned before, I strongly suspect that Benito Legarda and Isauro Gabaldón are Spanish Filipinos as well, but I would like to see some confirmation on that. Have you found anything on them, or on the other Filipino Resident Commissioners that you kept on the list (Delgado and De Veyra?)?

As for the Chamorro Delegates, you kept Sablan but got rid of the others. Have you found any information regarding Sablan's ancestry? He's a member of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, but so were Robert Underwood and Ben Blaz.

Finally, I see that you kept Congressmen Bobby Scott and Steve Austria on the list due to their Filipino heritage (Scott had a Filipino maternal grandfather, while Austria's father was Filipino). Have you located any evidence that their ancestors were Spanish Filipino? I haven't been able to find anything to that effect.

Thanks again. AuH2ORepublican (talk) 18:05, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

OK, I was able to find sources that confirm that Resident Commissioners Legarda, Elizalde and Gabaldón had Spanish ancestry, and have updated their Wikipedia pages with such sourced information. AuH2ORepublican (talk) 18:26, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

@User:Shhhhwwww!!, I have found sources to confirm Resident Commissioner Francisco A. Delgado's Spanish mestizo ancestry and have added him to the list of Hispanic Members of Congress. AuH2ORepublican (talk) 20:45, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Paul Laxalt

He was born to Basque parents, so he would be considered Hispanic. MB298 (talk) 04:10, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

More to the point, his parents were Basques from France, not from Spain, so he is not Hispanic. AuH2ORepublican (talk) 17:28, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Which illustrates how dumb this category is. Two men from Basque villages that are five miles apart on the Franco-Spanish border are somehow "racially" distinct in the U.S.A.? 70.115.184.213 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:32, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

No, certainly not “racially” distinct, as Hispanic is not a race, but an ethnicity. But just as someone from Windsor, Ontario is Canadian while someone from just across the River in Detroit, Michigan is American, a Basque from north of the Pyrennees is French (and almost certainly will speak French as a first or second language) while a Basque from south of the Pyrennees is Spanish (and almost certainly will speak Spanish as a first or second language). AuH2ORepublican (talk) 06:15, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

Lori Trahan

According to the only reliable sources regarding Adalice Leite (Congresswoman-elect Lori Trahan's paternal grandmother), she was born in Bahia, Brazil (to Azorean parents) and, when her mother died, was sent to her aunt's home in Graciosa (in the Azores), where she was "raised" by her aunt. None of the reliable sources (either in English or Portuguese) state at what age Adalice Leite moved from Bahia to Graciosa, but if it was as a young girl then I certainly understand the insistence of some editors that Lori Trahan is not actually of Brazilian descent. While I am the editor who had added Trahan to the article (as a member elect) because of the reliable sources pointing to her paternal grandmother, Adalice Leite, being Brazilian, I now believe that we should wait for a reliable source that states that Adalice Leite (whose parents weren't Brazilian themselves) wasn't merely born in Brazil but raised there as well before we include Trahan on the list of Hispanic or Latino members of Congress. AuH2ORepublican (talk) 21:37, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Veronica Escobar (cropped square).jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:21, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Veronica Escobar (cropped square).jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:51, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

Hispanic/Latino?

I have started a talk page discussion at Talk:John H. Sununu about whether John E. Sununu (who is on this list), John H. Sununu, and Chris Sununu are Hispanic/Latino. Please feel free to visit Talk:John H. Sununu to participate. SunCrow (talk) 23:46, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Alex Padilla has been nominated to replace Kamala Harris

Would he go with Lujan or a separate section since he’s appointed and not elected? Caciquedelcibao (talk) 18:28, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

When Padilla is appointed and takes his seat (which won't happen until there is a vacancy to fill, and please keep in mind that Kamala Harris may resign as late as January 20), he will go straight into the list of Senators. The Senator-elect category is a special category used for the period between election and the commencement of the term, which normally is around eight weeks, but it is not used for appointees, which won't have to wait more than a couple of days to get seated. AuH2ORepublican (talk) 00:23, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

@AuH2ORepublican: While I see your point of view on this, there are numerous reliable sources that have stated the Padilla will be appointed to the seat. Examples include Times and Press, just to name a few. Furthermore, Padilla's infobox has the title of "United States Senator-designate from California". I think that should be enough to name include him in this article as of now. Fundude99^{talk to me} 00:00, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

@Fundude99, the operative words there are "will be." It is undisputed that Gov. Newsom has indicated that he *will appoint* Padilla *when* Sen. Harris resigns; but given that there was no vacancy when Newsom made his announcement, he had no constitutional authority to appoint Padilla even if he had purported to have appointed him. Let us stipulate that there is no reason to doubt that Newsom will follow through and appoint Padilla at such undeterminate time as Harris resigns from the Senate. That being said, encyclopedias report what has happened, not what we expect to happen, and thus we need to wait until there is a vacancy and Newsom follows through on his promise.

I had never seen the phrase "U.S. Senator-designate" being used to refer to someone not yet nominated before I saw it on Padilla's Wikipedia article. In fact, the only prior time that I recall seeing the phrase was during the few days between Kelly Loeffler being appointed to the Senate and her being seated. If Harris resigns tomorrow and Newsom appoints Padilla but the Senate announces that it's going on recess and won't seat Padilla until January 3 then I definitely think that Padilla should join Luján in the (renamed) elect/designate section, but that is not what has happened. All that has happened so far is that we know that Harris will resign before noon on January 20 and that Newsom has promised to appoint Padilla when she resigns.

Another way to look at the distinction between a person who already has been appointed or elected to the Senate (or elected to the House) as opposed to a person whom it has been announced will be appointed to the Senate when a vacancy occurs (or, e.g., is running unopposed to the House) is what would happen if the person died or decided that he won't be serving after all. If (God forbid) Luján died tomorrow, he would forevermore be listed along with Charles Gayarré (who was elected to the U.S. Senate by the LA legislature but did not take his seat due to ill health) as a person "Elected to the Senate but not Seated." (Similarly, the articles listing African-American senators and representatives, respectively list persons certified as having been elected but who were not seated due to election contests, and the article listing Jewish members of Congress lists a person elected to the House but not seated because he died prior to the commencement of his term.) On the other hand, were Padilla (God forbid) to die tomorrow, he would not join Gayarré in that special section; but if Harris were to resign, Newsom to appoint Padilla, and *then* Padilla to die prior to being seated, we would rename the special section and it would list Gayarré and Padilla as persons Elected or Appointed to the Senate but not Seated.

I expect that Harris will resign from the Senate sometime between January 6 (when Congress officially will declare her VP-elect) and January 20 (when she will be sworn in as VP at noon)--Biden resigned on Jan. 15, 2009, which fell within the oeriod I laid out--and that at such time (unless Newsom changes his mind) Padilla will be appointed to fill the vacancy and be seated the next day. If it is announced on the day of Padilla's appointment that he will be sworn in the next day, the most practical action would be to wait a day and, when he's sworn in, add Padilla directly to the section of U.S. Senators. That's been the practice when the "elect" or "designate" period is expected to be just a few days, as it was for Sen. McSally (appointed Dec. 31, 2018, seated Jan. 3, 2019), Sen. Loeffler (seated a couple of days after her appointment) and even Rep. García of CA in this very article (despite CA taking a few extra days to certify him as the winner of the special election). There is less reason to go through the work of adding someone when you'll have to move him to the main list one or two days later than when it's for someone elected in November who won't be seated until the term starts eight weeks later.

A counterexample, though, was when Brenda Jones was elected in Nov. 2018 to serve the remainder of John Conyers's term (which ran until Jan. 3, 2019). When it became apparent that she was not going to be seated promptly (because she was not resigning from the Detroit City Counsel, which ran afoul of U.S. House rules against holding simultaneous offices), I added her as a Representative-elect to the article listing African-Anerican Representatives (joining in such section those who had been elected for a term commencing on January 3), and she stayed there for a couple of weeks until she finally was seated (after she explained that the Detroit City Council was not scheduled to meet until after her House term ended and promised not to participate if the Council did meet before then) on Nov. 29, when she was moved to the list of Representatives. But the Jones case was an aberration, and I had some egg on my face when I moved quickly to list Kwanza Hall as a Representative-elect on December 2, 2020--when reliable sources reported that he was the winner of the Dec. 1 runoff of the special election for the rest of the late John Lewis's term--only to see another editor move him to the list of Representatives the very next day when he was sworn in by the House. So, unless there's reason to believe that Padilla won't be seated promptly after his appointment (such as in the hypothetical I set forth above in which Harris resigns and Padilla is apoointed in December but the Senate goes into recess), I think that it would be best to just wait an extra day and move him straight into the list of Senators. But if you prefer to list Padilla as a Senator-designate once he's appointed and then move him to the regular list one ir two days later, that would be fine as well. What's important is that, in compliance with WP:CRYSTAL, the Wikipedia article listing Hispanic or Lstino members of Congress report what already has occurred, not what is expected to occur.

Sources using "senator-designate" include Padilla's Twitter account, LA Times, Speaker Pelosi's office, and various other news outlets [2][3][4]. Even if this is not a legally meaningful term, it's absurd to leave him out of the list. It does not violate Crystal to provide what is widely expected to occur, as it is consistently supported by reliable sources. Is this "unverifiable speculation or presumptions"? No. Is this "Predictions, speculation, forecasts and theories stated by reliable, expert sources or recognized entities in a field"? Yes. The differently named section from the member-elect is the right way to do it. Reywas92^Talk 07:28, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

How can it be "absurd" to leave out of an article listing U.S. senators to leave out someone who has not even been appointed to the Senate? Kamala Harris will remain a U.S. senator until she resigns, and until such time there won't be a vacancy to fill. And that the media lazily use the term "Senator-designate" to describe Padilla does not constitute a grant of authority to Newsom to maje an appointment when there is no vacancy. AuH2ORepublican (talk) 13:51, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

RFC on adding Alex Padilla

It seems that there is a disagreement on whether to list Alex Padilla in this article until his official appointment. Should Padilla be added to this list now based on reliable sources[5] [6] [7] stating he will be appointed as a senator from California or should we wait until his official appointment? Fundude99^{talk to me} 00:55, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

• NO It is undisputed that Gov. Newsom has indicated that he *will appoint* Alex Padilla *when* Sen. Harris resigns; but given that there was no vacancy when Newsom made his announcement, he had no constitutional authority to appoint Padilla even if he had purported to have appointed him. As of today, Padilla has not been appointed to the Senate, so he should not be listed in the article yet.

Let us stipulate that there is no reason to doubt that Newsom will follow through and appoint Padilla at such indeterminate time as Harris resigns from the Senate. That being said, encyclopedias report what has happened, not what we expect to happen, and thus we need to wait until there is a vacancy and Newsom follows through on his promise.

If Harris resigns tomorrow and Newsom appoints Padilla but the Senate announces that it's going on recess and won't seat Padilla until January 3 then I definitely think that Padilla should join Luján in the (renamed) elect/designate section, but that is not what has happened. All that has happened so far is that we know that Harris will resign before noon on January 20 and that Newsom has promised to appoint Padilla when she resigns.

Another way to look at the distinction between a person who already has been appointed or elected to the Senate (or elected to the House) as opposed to a person whom it has been announced will be appointed to the Senate when a vacancy occurs (or, e.g., is running unopposed to the House) is what would happen if the person died or decided that he won't be serving after all. If (God forbid) Luján died tomorrow, he would forevermore be listed along with Charles Gayarré (who was elected to the U.S. Senate by the LA legislature but did not take his seat due to ill health) as a person "Elected to the Senate but not Seated." (Similarly, the articles listing African-American senators and representatives, respectively list persons certified as having been elected but who were not seated due to election contests, and the article listing Jewish members of Congress lists a person elected to the House but not seated because he died prior to the commencement of his term.) On the other hand, were Padilla (God forbid) to die tomorrow, he would not join Gayarré in that special section; but if Harris were to resign, Newsom to appoint Padilla, and *then* Padilla to die prior to being seated, we would rename the special section and it would list Gayarré and Padilla as persons Elected or Appointed to the Senate but not Seated.

I expect that Harris will resign from the Senate sometime between January 6 (when Congress officially will declare her VP-elect) and January 20 (when she will be sworn in as VP at noon)--Biden resigned on Jan. 15, 2009, which fell within the period I laid out--and that at such time (unless Newsom changes his mind) Padilla will be appointed to fill the vacancy and be seated the next day. If it is announced on the day of Padilla's appointment that he will be sworn in the next day, the most practical action would be to wait a day and, when he's sworn in, add Padilla directly to the section of U.S. Senators. That's been the practice when the "elect" or "designate" period is expected to be just a few days, as it was for Sen. McSally (appointed Dec. 31, 2018, seated Jan. 3, 2019), Sen. Loeffler (seated a couple of days after her appointment) and even Rep. García of CA in this very article (despite CA taking a few extra days to certify him as the winner of the special election). There is less reason to go through the work of adding someone when you'll have to move him to the main list one or two days later than when it's for someone elected in November who won't be seated until the term starts eight weeks later.

A counterexample, though, was when Brenda Jones was elected in Nov. 2018 to serve the remainder of John Conyers's term (which ran until Jan. 3, 2019). When it became apparent that she was not going to be seated promptly (because she was not resigning from the Detroit City Counsel, which ran afoul of U.S. House rules against holding simultaneous offices), I added her as a Representative-elect to the article listing African-American Representatives (joining in such section those who had been elected for a term commencing on January 3), and she stayed there for a couple of weeks until she finally was seated (after she explained that the Detroit City Council was not scheduled to meet until after her House term ended and promised not to participate if the Council did meet before then) on Nov. 29, when she was moved to the list of Representatives. But the Jones case was an aberration, and I had some egg on my face when I moved quickly to list Kwanza Hall as a Representative-elect on December 2, 2020--when reliable sources reported that he was the winner of the Dec. 1 runoff of the special election for the rest of the late John Lewis's term--only to see another editor move him to the list of Representatives the very next day when he was sworn in by the House. So, unless there's reason to believe that Padilla won't be seated promptly after his appointment (such as in the hypothetical I set forth above in which Harris resigns and Padilla is appointed in December but the Senate goes into recess), I think that it would be best to just wait an extra day and move him straight into the list of Senators. But if you prefer to list Padilla as a Senator-designate once he's appointed and then move him to the regular list one or two days later, that would be fine as well. What's important is that, in compliance with WP:CRYSTAL, the Wikipedia article listing Hispanic or Latino members of Congress report what already has occurred, not what is expected to occur. AuH2ORepublican (talk) 03:30, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

• Yes "encyclopedias report what has happened, not what we expect to happen" is false. Our encyclopedia also reports on what is widely acknowledged to happen, as reported in many reliable sources. Many of these souces are detailing that Padilla will be California's first Hispanic senator, and including such content is absolutely in compliance with Crystal. Reywas92^Talk 18:59, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

It is simply not correct that a reliable source reporting that something is expected to happen means that an encyclopedia can report something that has not happened as if it has already happened. When Ritchie Torres won the Democratic primary in NY-15 earlier this year, it was widely reported by the media that he would become the first openly gay Hispanic in the U.S. Congress. The reason for this was that the NY-15 is such an overwhelmingly Democratic district (e.g., GOP presidential candidates routinely get below 5% of the vote in the district) that winning the Democratic nomination assured Torres of winning the election in November. However, it would have been false to state that Torres had been elected to Congress, which is why he was not added to the article as a Representative-elect until he actually won the general election in November.

The same thing applies to Alex Padilla. That newspapers report that he'll become the first Hispanic U.S. senator from California is an acknowledgment that Sen. Harris will resign sometime prior to noon on January 20 and that Gov. Newsom has indicated that he will appoint Padilla when Harris resigns. But that it almost certain that Padilla will be appointed to the Senate sometime during the next one-to-three weeks is not the same thing as saying that Padilla already has been appointed to the Senate, and the latter statement would be false. You are correct that it does not violate WP:Crystal for Padilla's Wikipedia article to report that he is expected to be appointed to the Senate when Harris resigns, but it certainly would be a violation of Wikipedia norms to list Padilla as someone who already has been appointed to the U.S. Senate. AuH2ORepublican (talk) 00:55, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

• No This list is defined in the first sentence: "This is a list of Hispanic and Latino Americans who have served in the United States Congress." Alex Padilla has never served in the United States Congress. It is an undisputed fact that he does not meet the requirements for inclusion on this list. When he is appointed, then he can be added. In just a couple weeks, either Alex Padilla will be a senator, or something will have happened that means he will not be appointed. Either way, the issue will be resolved shortly. Red Rock Canyon (talk) 04:57, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Press Gallery List

Based on the press gallery list it appears that Devin Nunes, Jim Costa, David Valadao, and Lori Trahan are listed there but not in this article. Is there a reason for this discrepancy? Interestingly, the Press Gallery list omits Mike Garcia and Teresa Leger Fernandez. Yrg8033 (talk) 07:00, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

I don't know what the "Press Gallery list" is, but if it included those four Portuguese-Anerican House members as "Hispanic" I assume that it was compiled from membership lists in the Congressional Hispanic Caucus and Congressional Hispanic Conference, both of which admit Portuguese Americans despite them not meeting the U.S. Census definition of Hispanic or Latino. As this Wikipedia article mentions at the outset, the term "Hispanic" and "Latino" describe people with lineage from Spain and Latin Anerica, respectively, and includes Brazilian Americans (because Brazil is considered part of Latin America) but not Portuguese Americans (who aren't also Brazilian or from another Latin American country). My understanding is that those four Portuguese-American representatives are of Azorean ancestry; the Azores are islands well off the coast of Portugal, the southernmost territory generally considered part of Europe, and certainly are not in Latin America. Please note that when Trahan was first elected I included her as a member-elect because her biography described her as having a grandmother "from Brazil"; my edit was reverted by someone with better knowledge of Trahan's family, and a more detailed reliable source confirmed that, while one of her grandmothers had been born in Brazil, both parents of that grandmother were Azoreans and she was raised by an aunt in to the Azores as a young child when her parents died, so she wasn't actually Brazilian.

Whether Portuguese Americans qua Portuguese Americans should be listed in the article has been discussed several times through the years in the Talk section, and the conclusion has always been that, given the U.S. Census definition, they are neither Hispanic nor Latino and should not be listed. That is why you will not see Costa, Nunes, Trahan or Valadao--or Pat Toomey, Ben Nighthorse Campbell, Richard Pombo, Tony Coello and others with Portuguese ancestry--listed in this article about Hispanics or Latinos in Congress, even when political "Hispanic" groups choose to inflate their numbers by inviting them to join. AuH2ORepublican (talk) 13:24, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

References

Joseph Montoya's Spanish (from Spain) origin is fully relevant

The Spanish origins of Joseph Montoya were removed in this edit with the summary "as for Montoya, of course he has Spanish ancestry, but so does every other Mexican, Cuban and Puerto Rican on this list". This is not entirely true. Not all Hispanic and Latino Americans are descended from Spaniards, though almost all of them are assimilated to a culture from Spain. The Hispanos of New Mexico are a separate ethnic group whose culture is mainly derived from Spain. They will have a different experience in life to the Chicanos who identify with being mestizo, and obviously a different experience of life in the US to Afro-Latinos like Ritchie Torres. The assumption that all Hispanic and Latino Americans are of Spanish origin also makes invisible those like John E. Sununu whose ancestors came from a Spanish-speaking country, but were Arabs. Unknown Temptation (talk) 14:41, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Because New Mexico was part of Mexico from the time of Mexico's independence until New Mexico was ceded to the U.S. following the Mexican War, Montoya's ancestors were Mexican. That most descended from Spaniards does not mean that his Hispanic or Latino ancestry should be described as "Spanish and Mexican." I am well asare that there are Mexicans who don't have Spanish ancestry, but this article does not list as "Spanish" those who do, or else everyone listed as Mexican *in this article* would also be listed as Spanish; were the article to categorize Montoya as Spanish, it would have to do so for the 75 other Mexican-Americans who have served in Congress. Heck, the same would be true for everyone else in the article other than John Sununu (who, as you noted, is of non-Spanish Salvadoran descent). And given that Sununu is listed in this article both as a senator and as a representative despite his Salvadoran grandmother having two Lebanese parents (and no Spanish ancestry), it is odd for you to claim that the article not adding "Spanish" to every other person listed here makes Sununu "invisible." I can see him (twice); can't you? AuH2ORepublican (talk) 18:20, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Antonio Delgado

I added former U.S. representative Antonio Delgado, who identifies as Afro-Latino and has Mexican, Venezuelan and Colombian roots via his maternal grandmother and his mother's maiden name is Thelma Gomez. here. There has been criticism about how he identifies his ethnicity, but reliable sources nonetheless do generally refer to him as Latino per here and here. cookie monster 755 04:10, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Judah P. Benjamin and David Levy Yulee

@Vladimir.copic, being a Sephardic Jew (i.e., a descendant of Jews expelled from Spain or Portugal in the 15th century) is not sufficient to be considered Hispanic. I have removed other Sephardic Jews added to the article, but kept Judah P. Benjamin and David Levy Yulee because they were from Judeo-Spanish (Ladino) speaking families who kept their language and culture for centuries after they were expelled from Spain in the late 15th century. It is their Spanish ancestry, not their Sephardic Judaism, that would qualify them as Hispanic. "Sephardic" is not a Hispanic ancestry, so either Benjamin's and Yulee's "Hispanic or Latino Ancestry" should be listed as "Spanish," or they should be removed from the article.

I've never been very comfortable with Benjamin and Yulee being included in the article, but could see the point of the editor who added Benjamin (whose family history is almost identical to Yulee's--coincidentally, their parents were friends in Saint Croix when they lived there), and I certainly didn't want to remove someone because he was a Spanish Jew instead of a Spanish Catholic. I guess that I'm agnostic as to whether they should (i) be listed as "Spanish" and stay or (ii) be removed; the only aspects on which I feel strongly are that Benjamin and Yulee should be treated the same and that "Sephardic" is not a Hispanic or Latino ancestry. AuH2ORepublican (talk) 02:42, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

I'll address Benjamin and Yulee seperately (even though there are similarities in their background).

• Benjamin is described in sources as hispanic so there is no dispute there from me. I can find no sources however describing him as Spanish. Haaretz says Benjamin was "the son of an English Sephardi father and a Sephardi mother of Spanish-Portuguese descent" but I don't see anywhere actually call him Spanish-Portuguese (or English for that matter) and it would be WP:SYNTH or WP:OR to draw a national or ethnic demonym from this.
• I've had a quick (though not extensive) search for sources calling Yulee hispanic and have come up empty handed. Likewise I cannot find any source describing Yulee as Spanish (his Moroccan heritage is emphasised more so probably should be on this list).

I am in no way an expert on this topic though. Are you able to provide a source supporting your assertion that Hispanic Jews are not hispanic?

If you do not believe that Hispanic Jews are hispanic and neither Yulee nor Benjamin are described as Spanish then this puts things at a head. Happy to look at sources giving greater clarity on this. Personal interpretations of lineages or ethnicity are not going to convince me and contravene WP:5P2. Vladimir.copic (talk) 04:11, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

@Vladimir.copic, where do you get that I "do not believe that Hispanic Jews are Hispanic"? People of Spanish ancestry are, by definition, Hispanic, irrespective of their religion. What I said is that merely being a Sephardic Jew--whose ancestors practiced Judaism in the Mediterranean region after being expelled from Iberia--is not a close enough link to Spanish culture to be able to claim being Hispanic. I do think that Benjamin's and Yulee's families have a colorable claim of being Hispanic due to their continued use of Judeo-Soanish, but being Sephardic does not by itself make one Hispanic anymore than being a descendant of Iberian Moors expelled during the Reconquista and whose family later lost cultural ties to Spain makes such person Hispanic.

In the U.S. Census, the Hispanic ancestries listed include "Spanish" but not "Sephardic." Please also note that persons of Portuguese (as opposed to Spanish) descent are not defined as Hispanic by the Census (although Brazilians are defined as Latino, and, of course, a person whose family came from, say, Cuba or Ecuador would be Latino even if his ancestors had emigrated there from Portugal, Japan, Russia or wherever). So the Hispanic ancestry of Benjamin and/or Yulee should be described as Spanish (or "Spanish Sephardic," I guess, although no other sub-group in Spain has such modification).

I haven't read about David Levy Yulee's family in a few years, but I recall that they were Spanish Jews who went to Morocco after their expulsion around 1492, and lived in a Judeo-Spanish speaking community; I seem to recall that Yulee's father (who used the surname Levy; it was the future senator who adopted the Sephardic name Yulee as his surname later in life) lived in Cuba for awhile, where his Spanish proficiency came to good use. In any event, the Levys were not Arabs (they were Judeo-Spanish speaking Jews), and Morocco is not a Middle-Eastern country, so David Levy Yulee was neither Arab nor Middle-Eastern. (BTW, the "or Middle-Eastern" was added to the article about Arab-American congressmen so as not to exclude those who descended from non-Arab native populations from largely Arab countries in the Middle East, such as Assyrians; the article had a huge RfC or something like that a few years ago in which it was inconclusive whether to remove non-Arab Middle-Easterners from the article and make it solely about Arabs. That article remains a hot mess.)

AuH2ORepublican (talk) 12:53, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Sorry - you’ve completely lost me now? You said "Sephardic" aka Hispanic Jewish is not a Hispanic ancestry? Can you provide sources to support what you are saying about Sephardim not being a close enough link to Spanish culture to be able to claim being Hispanic? Sources clearly identify Benjamin as Hispanic? Were these categories on the census during Yulee and Benjamin’s time? I really have no idea what you are saying but it seems to just be OR. As before happy to see the sources you are basing this on. Vladimir.copic (talk) 13:16, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

@Vladimir.copic, Sephardic Jews are descendants of Jews who were expelled from Spain *or Portugal* in the 15th century. People of Portuguese descent are not considered Hispanic. Ergo, not everyone who is Sephardic is Hispanic, and thus Sephardic is not, ipso facto, a Hispanic ancestry. But Spanish is a Hispanic ancestry, and a Sephardic Jew of Spanish ancestry can properly be described as being Hispanic due to his Spanish ancestry.

Regarding Benjamin's Spanish ancestry, and the close links of the Benjamin and Yulee families, see [8] ("Judah Philip Benjamin was born a British subject in 1811 in Saint Croix, to Phillip Benjamin, an English Sephardic Jew, and his wife, Rebecca de Mendes, a Sephardic Jew from Spain. This was during the period of the British occupation of the Danish West Indies (now U.S. Virgin Islands). His father was a first cousin and business partner of Moses Elias Levy, father of future Florida senator David Levy Yulee.") AuH2ORepublican (talk) 17:38, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

I support Judah Benjamin being included, however I am not sure that the sources used accurately denote him as being hispanic or latino. This particular source described in sources, from the National Park Service, doesn't actually mention him being hispanic/latino, so I think we need stronger sources. I have changed it back to Spanish as the article's category 'Hispanic or Latino ancestry' is about their ancestral country or place of birth e.g Mexican, Cuban, Puerto Rican etc and there isn't a country or nationality called Sephardi and I have seen quite a lot of sources on google mentioning Benjamin's parents emigrated to the West Indies from Spain. WheeSo (talk) 12:47, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

John Garamendi don't consider himself Hispanic

Google john garamendi hispanic, as easy as that. 62.99.89.51 (talk) 12:06, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

Where is Paul Gosar?

His Lower Navarrese mother was from a French and Spanish border condominium. Irony intended, of course. 62.99.89.51 (talk) 12:09, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

His mother is Basque, which is not considered Hispanic. 74.104.221.2 (talk) 22:52, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

I’m gonna add rest of the elects I know of from this election

If anyone wants to help with pictures, which I don’t know how to do that would be great. 162.247.88.242 (talk) 01:44, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Representative-elect Monica De La Cruz.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:52, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Anna Paulina Luna.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:21, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Adesposito.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:06, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

Lori Trahan possible inclusion

Lori Trahan describes herself (at least in some sources) as being "the granddaughter of Brazilian and Portuguese immigrants" [9][10]. I understand that Portuguese-Americans (not Hispanic or Latino) are not listed on this page, but I thought that her partial Brazilian background (Latino) is what is relevant here. As a member of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, the CHC BOLD PAC endorsed Trahan's re-election campaign [11]. TJMSmith (talk) 13:26, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

@TJMSmith, according to the only reliable sources regarding Adalice Leite (Congresswoman-elect Lori Trahan's paternal grandmother), she was born in Bahia, Brazil (to Azorean parents) and, when her mother died, was sent to her aunt's home in Graciosa (in the Azores), where she was "raised" by her aunt. None of the reliable sources (either in English or Portuguese) state at what age Adalice Leite moved from Bahia to Graciosa, but given that she was "raised" in the Azores, it must have been as a young girl. I think that we should wait for a reliable source that states that Adalice Leite (whose parents weren't Brazilian themselves) wasn't merely born in Brazil but raised there as well before we include Trahan on the list of Hispanic or Latino members of Congress. AuH2ORepublican (talk) 20:12, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Would anyone mind helping add a picture for John Duarte?

Brand new congressman John Duarte requires a picture sadly it seems I am having trouble with it. If anyone can help me that would be great. 98.216.87.171 (talk) 03:19, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Maxwell Frost

Firstly, Frost is not Cuban, so somebody needs to stop adding that. Being adopted by somebody does not make you a member of their race or ethnicity. His page also lists him as half-Puerto Rican (of Lebanese descent), so is he even Hispanic at all? Shouldn't he be put under Middle Eastern if that is his ethnicity?74.104.221.2 (talk) 22:55, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Ethnicities and races are different things. There is no such thing as "Cuban DNA" or "Puerto Rican DNA," as Cubans and Puerto Ricans can be of any race and thus have different DNA from other members of their specific ethnicity. Martin Frost was given up for adoption at birth, and his (Puerto Rican) mother had no part in his upbringing (and he didn't even meet her until he was an adult), so he is not Puerto Rican, nor does he describe himself as such. He was, however, raised from birth by his Cuban-American adoptive mother as part of an extended Cuban-American family, and he describes himself as a proud Cuban. Please refer to the reliable sources included in Frost's Wikipedia article, and feel free to use an Internet search engine to find numerous additional reliable sources that attest to Frost being a Cuban-American. AuH2ORepublican (talk) 00:16, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

He can describe himself as whatever he wants. I would call myself Cuban too if I was a political candidate in Florida. I firmly doubt that many of the people on this page have strong connections to their heritage. Hell, John Garamendi, who is still here, has gone on record as not even considering himself Hispanic. You think he knows much about Spain? Maxwell Frost's Wikipedia article very clearly describes him as being a Puerto Rican adopted by a Cuban. Note that his page also describes him as an Afro-Cuban - yet his Haitian birth father was never part of his life and he has zero connection to any form of African-American community. By your standards, Maxwell Frost is a mixed-race White-Cuban. This is clearly untrue. He is a Haitian-Puerto Rican. 50.227.112.186 (talk) 01:11, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Martin Frost is black because of his genetics. You see, black is a racial category, and being raised in a white family does not mean that a person of sub-Saharan African descent is not black. But Cuban and Puerto Rican are ethnicities, not races, and there is no "Puerto Rican DNA" that makes Frost Puerto Rican nor "Cuban DNA" that Frost is lacking. Adoptive children are just as much a part of a Cuban family as are biological children, and for you to say that someone adopted at birth is not a part of that family is an ignorant statement wholly unsupported by American legal and social norms. Martin Frost's mother is Cuban, as is his grandmother who helped his parents to raise him, and the fact that he doesn't share DNA with the family that raised him from birth is completely immaterial. And, even if we set that aside, reliable sources describe Frost as Cuban American, which is exactly what he considers himself (not because it's "politically useful"--he ran in Orange County, which has a lot more Puerto Ricans than Cubans, particularly in the Democratic primary--but because that's his family heritage. AuH2ORepublican (talk) 04:02, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Firstly, his name is not Martin. And your DNA/ethnicity thing appears to be entirely based on your own analysis. Reliable media characterizes him as "Afro-Cuban" because that's what he calls himself. It is not, however, true. He was born to a Puerto Rican. He is therefore Puerto Rican. Ruben Gallego, also on this list, was raised by a single mother, meaning that by your standards we should remove Mexican from his description. Should we remove literally every single "Taiwanese" descriptor over on the Asian list? They're not genetically or culturally Taiwanese, as that doesn't exist. He can call himself Cuban, he can be culturally Cuban, even moreso than most Cuban Americans, but that does not make him a Cuban. 50.227.112.182 (talk) 20:00, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Well what complicates things as well is that the article says "Puerto Rican woman of Lebanese descent." I'm not digging into what "descent" includes, but to what extent is he Puerto Rican vs. Lebanese to even include in the Middle Eastern article? If sources widely and reliably describe him as Cuban that should likely be included, but I am concerned by how AuH2O describes adoption. I know people with interracial adoptive parents/children, but that doesn't change their ethnicity, regardless of what ethnic communities they are or are not raised in. American legal and social norms generally do not have children take the racial or ethnic groups of their adoptive parents or families. Reywas92^Talk 20:10, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

As I noted above, being raised in a white household does not make a black child white, or vice versa, but if a baby with French biological parents is adopted at birth by an Italian couple, of course he'd have Italian ethnicity. If Frost's birth mother had not revealed her identity, there would be no way of knowing if she was Puerto Rican (who can be white, black, Asian, Native American, or any combination thereof--and in this case reportedly is mostly of Levantine ancestry) or of any other ethnicity, and it would be of no consequence to Maxwell Frost, who would have been brought up eating the same arroz con frijoles negros y maduros as would any biological child of his adoptive mother. AuH2ORepublican (talk) 20:45, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

As I noted above, we should use your same completely ridiculous standards for ALL people if this is the case. If hispanics do not have ethnicity, Gallego is not Mexican. And like I said, none of the Taiwanese people are Taiwanese. 50.227.112.186 (talk) 20:53, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

"I am the proud son of Mexican and Colombian immigrants...." https://rubengallego.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/ruben-gallego-sworn-representative-arizonas-7th-congressional-district

And who said that Hispanics and Latinos don't have an "ethnicity"? I'm saying that Hispanic and Latino are not a race, and that thus there is no genetic definition of Hispanic or Latino, or of individual Latino ethnicities, in the same way that it exists for racial categories. AuH2ORepublican (talk) 23:04, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Gallego's own page states that he was not raised by his father. "He grew up with a single mother who supported him and his three sisters." https://web.archive.org/web/20141122140845/http://www.phoenixmag.com/People/marine-turned-politician.html By your standards, he isn't Mexican. Antonio Delgado is only hispanic through his maternal grandfather. "His mother, whose maiden name was Thelma Gomez, did not have a relationship with her father." https://nypost.com/2022/05/05/hochul-running-mate-antonio-delgado-clarifies-his-afro-latino-roots-after-criticism/ 50.227.112.186 (talk) 03:13, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

"if a baby with French biological parents is adopted at birth by an Italian couple, of course he'd have Italian ethnicity" That's honestly utterly ridiculous and not "of course". A Gujarati Indian baby adopted by a Japanese family is not ethnically Japanese because they're both racially Asian, even if he eats sushi. Reywas92^Talk 14:42, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Tony-Gonzales-Congress.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:53, 27 February 2023 (UTC)