Lexington: Lessons from the desert "I DON'T know how anyone of Hispanic heritage could be a Republican," said Harry Reid, the Senate majority leader, in 2010. Three months later, Brian Sandoval, a Republican, defeated Mr Reid's son to become the first Hispanic governor of Nevada. Voters in New Mexico that day made Susana Martinez, another Republican, America's first Latina governor. And over in Florida Marco Rubio, a charismatic young Cuban-American, won a Senate seat after an insurgent, tea party-backed campaign. Republicans now have two Latino (and two Asian-American) governors; Democrats have none. Mr Sandoval, a former Nevada gaming commissioner, shrewdly exploited a scandal within the state Republican Party to win election. Ms Martinez is a former criminal prosecutor from a border town, and an ex-Democrat whose 1995 conversion seemed to bear out Ronald Reagan's quip that Hispanics, a fast-growing chunk of the electorate, are Republicans who "just don't know it yet." Some polls show Latinos to be more pro-life than other Americans; many Republicans, rightly or wrongly, see this as an opportunity. Latinos are also more likely to run their own businesses and to believe that "most people can get ahead if they work hard," which sounds like a good fit with Republican ideas. However, according to the Pew Hispanic Centre, 75% of them favour a bigger government that provides more services, which doesn't sound like a good fit at all. In truth, many Latino votes are up for grabs. George W. Bush won a respectable 40% of them in 2004; Mitt Romney won a pathetic 27% in 2012. That suggests two things. First, personalities matter. Mr Bush, a Texan with a half-Mexican nephew, was at ease with Hispanic audiences; Mr Romney was not. Second, Latino voters really care about immigration. Mr Bush was vocally in favour of giving illegal immigrants a chance to become legal; Mr Romney was against it. Today, 55% of Latinos say immigration is the most important issue they face. What difference, then, will the Republican Party's new Hispanic faces make? The party is keen to give them a national stage. Speaking at last year's convention, they all delivered rags-to-riches stories with a Hispanic twist. "¡ En America, todo es posible!" exclaimed Ms Martinez (though the line earned her less applause than her celebration of the .357 Magnum). Both Mr Sandoval and Ms Martinez are fairly successful governors. They are popular and likely to be re-elected in Democratic-leaning states with troubled economies and large Latino populations. Mr Sandoval is an adept operator, holding the line on spending and pushing through reforms to help people learning English. The pugilistic Ms Martinez has had a harder time; the state legislature has thwarted her attempts to stop illegal immigrants from obtaining driving licences. But she has managed to balance a budget that was $450m in the red when she took office. And in a populist touch, she sold the state's jet. Both governors are pragmatic: unlike many Republican-led states, Nevada and New Mexico will expand their Medicaid programmes (health care for the poor) under Obamacare. Both take conservative stances on social issues (no to gay marriage and gun control, though Mr Sandoval is pro-choice on abortion), but neither is an intolerant headbanger. Crucially, both are strong on schools reform, a potential vote-winner among Latinos. This is not a bad policy mix for a 2016 Republican presidential nominee. Ed Gillespie, a former party chairman, says the positive tone both governors strike should be a lesson to the national party. But Latinos will not vote Republican if they think the party is run by bigots who want to deport their cousins. After Mr Romney's defeat, chastened party elders and the odd shock-jock urged a pro-Hispanic overhaul, starting with immigration reform. Mr Rubio helped pass a bipartisan Senate bill with a path to citizenship for America's 11m illegal immigrants. Alas, that reform is now stuck in the House of Representatives, where only 10% of Republicans represent districts with a Latino population of over 25%. For many House Republicans the fear is not of alienating Latino voters, but of a primary challenge from the anti-immigrant right. Thus they resist any bill that rewards lawbreakers with citizenship. Meanwhile some Republican strategists argue that the party's future need not depend on wooing Hispanics after all. Some fear that immigration reform would simply mean 11m more Democratic voters. Not necessarily: polls suggest that over two-thirds of Latino legal non-citizens consider themselves neither Republican nor Democrat. A door slammed in their faces, however, could help them decide. Ms Martinez and Mr Sandoval both supported Mr Rubio's efforts, but neither has spoken up for reform since it ran aground in the House. Friends say they are focused on governing their states. Yet their silence is telling. Both face re-election next year, and may aspire to national office in 2016; Ms Martinez on the presidential ticket, and Mr Sandoval for Mr Reid's Senate seat. Sitting on the border fence Like so many Republican Hispanic politicians, they must perform a balancing act, appeasing the party's law-and-order base without offending their fellow Hispanics. Ms Martinez has mastered the art of sounding tough on illegal immigration rather than immigrants, says Matt Barreto of Latino Decisions, a polling firm. She urges more border security, for example, while celebrating the achievements of immigrants and lambasting Republican colleagues who think deportation is the answer to everything. None of this, however, will help Republicans win the White House so long as they insist on keeping 11m Latinos in the shadows. As Senator John McCain puts it, passing immigration reform would not in itself win many Latino votes, but it would put Republicans "on the playing field where we can compete."