“The question about legalizing marijuana is no longer when, it’s no longer whether, it’s how,” said Ethan Nadelmann, the executive director of the Drug Policy Alliance, a national advocacy group that will play a pivotal role in any 2012 ballot measures in California or other states. “There’s a really strong body of people who will be ready to pull the lever in the future.”

Indeed, many pundits questioned the wisdom of pushing the proposition in a midterm election year, when young people have such a poor track record of showing up at the polls. This fact only adds to the hopes of supporters for the initiative’s prospects in 2012, however. They say they will once again push the measure in California and perhaps a number of other states during the upcoming presidential election cycle.

The exit poll data point to a continued trend of Latino support for Democrats, which is interesting given concerns that pro-immigration reform Latinos — the majority of Latino voters — might stay home to push back against Democrats who failed to address the issue. In Arizona, about 71 percent of Latino voters preferred the Democratic candidate, versus 56 percent who preferred Obama in 2008. This can perhaps be attributed to the unpopularity among Latinos of Arizona’s SB 1070 immigration law, which Republican Gov. Jan Brewer signed into law this spring.

Other states saw slight dips in support for Democratic candidates from the high levels of support for Obama, but still mostly voted for Democrats. In California, the state with the largest Latino population in absolute terms, 64 percent of Latino voters picked Democrat Jerry Brown for governor over Republican Meg Whitman. Preferences for Senate were similar: 65 percent of Latinos preferred Democrat Barbara Boxer to Republican Carly Fiorina. In 2008, 74 percent of Latinos in California voted for Obama.

The only major exception in the Pew poll results was Florida, where Republican Marco Rubio captured 55 percent of the Latino vote, according to exit polls. As I mentioned yesterday, though, Rubio had high levels of support from fellow Cuban-Americans, who tend to vote Republican. The Latino Decisions poll found non-Cuban Latinos in Florida voted for the Democratic candidate, Kendrick Meek.

*One note on polling: According to Latino Decisions’ Gary Segura, a Stanford political science professor, exit poll data often under-represent minorities because exit polls tend to skip precincts that always go red or blue. Segura said minorities who live in white-dominated areas, who could be more conservative than average, tend to be over-represented in exit poll data. The Pew Hispanic Center data is based on exit polls, while Latino Decisions polled Latino registered voters directly the night before the election.

“The Latino firewall in the west actually saved the election for Democrats,” Frank Sharry, executive director of the immigration reform group America’s Voice, said on a conference call. “Latino voters played a significant role in Senate races.”

Although it is still unclear how many Latinos turned out to vote, the poll taken the night before the election indicates strong support for Democrats. On a generic ballot, 76 percent of the Latino voters polled picked the Democratic candidate over the Republican. Preferences were particularly strong in California, which has the country’s largest Latino population. About 86 percent of Latino voters in the state preferred Democrat Jerry Brown for governor over Republican Meg Whitman, and the same number preferred Democrat Barbara Boxer for Senate over Republican Carly Fiorina.

A majority ranked the economy, jobs and immigration as their top issues for choosing candidates, and most said they wanted to see immigration reform that included paths to citizenship for illegal immigrants already in the country.

In Nevada, where Reid faced a tough race against Republican Sharron Angle for his Senate seat, Latinos seem to have made the difference between winning and losing for the majority leader. Latinos preferred Reid by large margins to Angle, who has run an aggressively anti-illegal immigration campaign that many perceived as anti-Latino.

Latino groups said harsh rhetoric against illegal immigration by Republican candidates mobilized Latino voters, many of whom said anti-Latino or anti-immigrant sentiment influenced their vote. Because Latinos are the fastest-growing minority group in the country, rights groups said this year’s results could spell bad news for Republicans in 2012 and beyond as Latino voters become more influential.

“Political parties that demonize or take Latinos for granted are doing it at their great risk,” Clarissa Martinez de Castro of National Council of La Raza said on the call.

One exception was in Florida, where the Latino Decisions poll found majority Latino support for Republicans Rick Scott for governor and Marco Rubio for Senate. Florida, though, is generally an exception to most trends in Latino voting due to the large number of Cubans, who are often Republican, and Puerto Ricans, who are born U.S. citizens and therefore less involved in immigration issues. Although Rubio received 62 percent of the vote among Latinos polled Monday, Democrat Kendrick Meek had the advantage among non-Cuban Latino voters.

It was mostly bad news for House Democrats who voted for the chamber’s cap-and-trade bill. The two most stinging defeats were Rep. Rick Boucher (D-Va.), who worked furiously behind the scenes to secure benefits for his coal-dependent state in the bill before finally giving his “yes” vote, and Rep. Tom Perriello (D-Va.), who became somewhat of a celebrity on the left for standing by the more liberal wing of his party on a number of key votes, including cap-and-trade. Boucher, from Virginia’s 9th district, lost to his Republican opponent, Morgan Griffith, and Perriello, despite a big last-minute push by environmentalists and President Obama himself, lost to state Sen. Robert Hurt (R).

Politico ran the numbers this morning. At least 12 freshman Democrats who voted for the cap-and-trade bill lost their re-election bids, while at least seven (I noted Rep. John Yarmuth (D-Ky.) last night) won, with some races still too close to call. In total, Politico notes, more than 30 Democrats who voted for the House climate bill fell to their Republican opponents last night.

In the West Virginia Senate race, Gov. Joe Manchin, a Democrat, managed to eke out a victory over Republican John Raese. While Democrats can technically put Manchin in their column, he campaigned against nearly every significant Obama administration policy, including cap-and-trade. In one now-infamous ad, he shot the House climate bill with a shotgun.

But there was some good news for environmentalists last night. Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), the chairwoman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, won her reelection bid against Carly Fiorina. Boxer has always been a strong advocate for environmental protections, but her job is likely to get harder in the next Congress. She has already been accused of unwillingness to reach across the aisle, but with more Republicans in the Senate, she’ll have no choice if she wants to pass energy and climate bills.

At the same time, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) survived a tough race against Tea Party darling Sharron Angle. The big question going forward now is what will Reid do on energy and climate legislation next Congress. By now, it’s common knowledge that it will be next to impossible to pass comprehensive climate legislation in the next two years. So it seems Reid will focus on a series of low-hanging-fruit provisions that are popular on both sides of the aisle, including bills to incentivize electric vehicles, improve energy efficiency and weatherize homes.

The fate of two big-ticket items for environmentalists — a renewable energy standard and a much-delayed oil spill response bill — remains unclear. While there’s still time in the lame-duck session to try to pass both provisions, Republicans have more incentive to block the bills until next Congress, as they’ll have more sway later. There is Republican support for an RES, which would require that a certain percentage of the country’s electricity come from renewable sources like wind and solar, but GOP gains in the Senate could make it more likely that Republicans will push to add nuclear power and coal with carbon capture technology to the mix, a nightmare scenario for environmentalists.

It’s even less clear what will happen with the oil spill response bill. More than six months after the massive Gulf oil spill, Congress has yet to pass significant legislation to overhaul offshore drilling (on the regulatory side, the Interior Department has issued its own new drilling rules). A number of contentious issues, like how liable an oil company is for damages from a spill, are sure to take on new significance now that more Republicans are in the Senate.

In other key midterm results, Proposition 23, a California ballot initiative that would suspend the state’s landmark climate change law, failed. It’s a huge win for environmentalists, who funneled millions of dollars into the “No on Prop 23″ campaign, pitting themselves against two Texas oil refiners that campaigned heavily for passage of the initiative. California’s climate law is viewed by environmentalists as the gold standard. Passage of the ballot initiative would have been the icing on the cake of a disappointing year for climate activists.

At the same time, it looks like another California ballot initiative, Proposition 26, will pass. The measure would require a two-thirds majority vote in the state legislature and in local government bodies to impose new fees on industry. Environmentalists say the proposition will make it more difficult to implement key environmental rules, including parts of the state’s climate law. In the last days of midterm election campaigning, as it became clear that Prop 23 would fail, activists’ attention shifted to Prop 26. But it was apparently too late to make a significant difference at the polls.

It’s also worth noting that the powerful House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman James Oberstar (D-Minn.) was defeated last night. Obsertar worked for years to reform pipeline safety and was in the process of developing new legislation to do so in the aftermath of a massive oil pipeline spill in Michigan and a natural gas pipeline explosion in California.

Two other key Senate races remain too close to call this morning. In the Colorado Senate race, Sen. Michael Bennet (D) and Republican Ken Buck are still neck and neck. As I noted yesterday in my midterm preview, the League of Conservation Voters and the Sierra Club have trashed Buck in ads, highlighting his comments questioning whether climate change is man-made. Environmentalists have made Buck the poster child of Republican climate skeptics running this cycle. For his part, Buck’s spokesman said his official position is this: “Ken believes climate change is occurring, but that it’s natural more than man-made.”

Bennet does not support the House version of cap-and-trade, but his campaign said recently that he would support a “well-thought-out, market-based bill.” Buck’s campaign jumped on the comments, saying Bennet’s position on the issue is unclear.

Don’t hold your breath for results of the Alaska Senate race between incumbent and write-in candidate Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R), Tea Party favorite Joe Miller (R) and Democrat Scott McAdams. Murkowski appears to be winning, according to early results. Murkowski is the ranking Republican on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee. Though she has opposed cap-and-trade bills in the past, she has a history of working closely with Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.), the panel’s chairman, on key energy bills, including the comprehensive energy bill they passed in 2009.

That means that Boxer will stay on as the chairwoman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.

Here’s what I had to say about Boxer in my midterm energy/climate preview:

[Boxer] has been a key player in drafting climate change legislation (remember the Kerry-Boxer bill?). But amid accusations that she is too partisan, Boxer played a largely behind-the-scenes role in the most recent Senate run at climate change legislation. Instead, a bipartisan trio of lawmakers — Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.), Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.) and, for a while a least, Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) — took the lead.

All of the races listed below could go either way, but it’s worth speculating on where the election could have an effect on immigration policy:

Majority leader: The Senate race between Sen. Harry Reid (D) and Sharron Angle (R) could open up the position of majority leader, which Reid currently holds. It’s unlikely Republicans will take over a majority of the Senate, but losing Reid would put another Democrat in charge of the push for immigration legislation. Luckily for reform supporters, both of the senators likely to take over as majority leader if Reid loses are equally strong supporters of immigration reform as Reid — perhaps even stronger.

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), currently second in command, is the chief sponsor of the DREAM Act, which would provide legal residency states to some undocumented students and military service members, and supports comprehensive immigration reform. Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) is considered the favorite to take over as majority leader because of his past success as chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. He also supports comprehensive immigration reform, and wrote a blueprint for comprehensive immigration reform this spring with Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.).

Immigration subcommittee: Schumer heads the Judiciary subcommittee on Immigration, Refugees and Border Security, which will remain in the hands of Democrats unless Republicans take over a majority of the Senate. The committee could see some shifting if the current members lose their seats, but most who are up for re-election have comfortable leads. Schumer looks certain to win against Republican challenger Jay Townsend, while Sen. Pat Leahy (D-Vt.) looks like he’ll be safe against Republican candidate Len Britton and his five other challengers. The other Democrats on the committee — Durbin, California Sen. Dianne Feinstein and Rhode Island Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse — aren’t up for re-election this year.

On the Republican side, only Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) is up for re-election. He is favored to win over Democratic challenger Roxanne Conlin. The other GOP members of the subcommittee — Texas Sen. John Cornyn, Arizona Sen. Jon Kyl and Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions — aren’t up for re-election. In the very unlikely event that Republicans win control of the Senate, Cornyn would be the chairman of the subcommittee on immigration.

Other immigration-related races: In the Senate especially, every member’s views on a given issue are important for passing legislation. A few races between pro- and anti-immigration reform candidates could make the difference for passing comprehensive immigration reform or, in lieu of that, smaller-scale legislation such as AgJOBS to create paths to legalization for some farm workers.

Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) faces a challenge from Republican Carly Fiorina, who supports the DREAM Act and reform of the guest worker system but argues against “amnesty” for illegal immigrants — the derisive term used by conservatives to refer to efforts to allow some undocumented immigrants already in the United States to earn legal status. Boxer, on the other hand, has been a consistent supporter of comprehensive immigration reform, arguing Congress should pass a bill increasing border security and enforcement efforts while also allowing some illegal immigrants in the country to remain here legally.

In New York, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), who was appointed to Hillary Clinton’s old seat, is favored to win over Republican Joseph J. DioGuardi. Gillibrand was originally considered an anti-immigrant pick for the Senate seat, but has since shifted to a pro-immigration reform view and advocates legislation that would allow some undocumented immigrants in the country to become legal residents.

Open seats could see the addition of some immigration hardliners. Rand Paul, a Republican running for Senate in Kentucky against Democrat Jack Conway, supports state-led solutions to illegal immigration such as Arizona’s SB 1070 immigration law. He also wants to built an electric fence between the United States and Mexico and move overseas military bases back to the country to man the border. Conway, on the other hand, said he supports more border agents but also paths to legalization. “Let’s take people out of the shadows and turn them into taxpayers,” he said during a debate.

Republican Mark Kirk and Democrat Alexi Giannoulias are facing off for Obama’s former seat in Illinois. If Giannoulias wins, the Democrats will have a nearly sure vote for comprehensive immigration reform as well as the DREAM Act. But Kirk has said that the Senate should tackle border security first, and that he would vote against the DREAM Act and other immigration reform.

Senate:

Alaska: Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) is facing off against Republican Joe Miller, a Tea Party favorite, and Democrat Scott McAdams. The Associated Press reports that all the candidates engaged yesterday in a last-minute push to gain votes. Even Bill Clinton got in on the action, doing a robocall for McAdams. This race is hugely important on the energy front because Murkowski is the ranking Republican on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee. Despite her opposition to recent cap-and-trade proposals, she has worked closely over the years with committee Chairman Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.), most notably on their comprehensive energy bill, which received bipartisan support in committee, but never made it to a floor vote (much to Bingaman and Murkowski’s chagrin). If Murkowski loses, Alaska loses a senator with seniority on energy issues, and that’s exactly the message Murkowski has been sending in campaign speeches.

California: Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) is in a tight race with her Republican opponent Carly Fiorina. Boxer is the head of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee and has been a key player in drafting climate change legislation (remember the Kerry-Boxer bill?). But amid accusations that she is too partisan, Boxer played a largely behind-the-scenes role in the most recent Senate run at climate change legislation. Instead, a bipartisan trio of lawmakers — Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.), Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.) and, for a while a least, Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) — took the lead. Fiorina, for her part, has raised questions about climate science.

Colorado: This race is mostly important because of the extent to which environmentalists don’t want Sen. Michael Bennet’s (D-Colo.) opponent, Ken Buck, to win. The League of Conservation Voters and the Sierra Club have trashed Buck in ads, highlighting his comments questioning whether climate change is man-made. Environmentalists have made Buck the poster child of Republican climate skeptics running this cycle. For his part, Buck’s spokesman said his official position is this: “Ken believes climate change is occurring, but that it’s natural more than man-made.” Bennet, for his part, has said he does not support the House version of cap-and-trade, but his campaign said recently that he would support a “well-thought-out, market-based bill.” Buck’s campaign jumped on the comments, saying Bennet’s position on the issue is unclear.

Nevada: Sen. Harry Reid’s (D-Nev.) re-election bid has to make pretty much every one of these lists because, well, he’s the Senate majority leader. His opponent, Tea Party darling Sharron Angle, is slightly ahead in polls. While Reid has faced some criticism from environmentalists, often not in public, for being too hesitant to move forward on climate and energy legislation, most fear the implications of a loss by Reid. Though prospects for a comprehensive climate bill are next to non-existent in the next two years, environmentalists are hoping to pass a number of energy/environment bills next year, including proposals to incentivize electric vehicles, weatherize homes, respond to the oil spill and require that a certain portion of the country’s electricity come from renewable sources like wind and solar.

House:

VA-5: Freshman Rep. Tom Perriello is in a tight race against state Sen. Robert Hurt (R). The Perriello race is seen by many Republicans as a referendum on President Obama’s policies. Perriello, from a conservative Southern Virginia district, voted for both cap-and-trade and the health care bill and has been taking flack at home for it. In an attempt to come to Perriello’s rescue, environmentalists have run ads criticizing Hurt as a friend of big oil. Even President Obama got in on the action, campaigning for Perriello late last week.

MN-8: Rep. James Oberstar (D-Minn.), who chairs the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, is in a nail biter against his Republican challenger, Chip Cravaack. The latest polls show the race incredibly tight. Oberstar, as head of the transportation panel, is one of the key lawmakers charged with reviewing pipeline safety in the aftermath of a massive oil pipeline spill in Michigan and a natural gas pipeline explosion in California.

Proposition 23:

While the latest polling says that Prop 23, which would essentially overturn California’s landmark climate change law, will fail, it’s still on our radar.

Proposition 26:

The lesser-known California ballot initiative, Prop 26 would require a two-thirds majority vote for the state legislature to impose any new fee on industry. If it passes, it could also impact the state’s climate law because it would make it difficult to enforce through the legislature, the Los Angeles Times notes.

Latino voters could make a big difference in certain races, given their status as the largest and fastest-growing minority group in the country. The San Francisco Chronicle has a good list of the races in which Latinos could have the biggest impact next week, all in states where Latinos make up a large proportion of the population.

Here are the Chronicle rankings, along with my summaries of the candidates’ stances on immigration:

1. Sharron Angle (R) vs. Sen. Harry Reid (D) for Nevada senator

Angle has taken a harsh stance on illegal immigration in her ads against Senate Majority Leader Reid, with two fairly extreme ads depicting the evils of undocumented immigrants. (She didn’t earn any more love from the Latino community with her talk of Latino teens looking “more Asian.”) Reid’s campaign hopes her statements, along with Republican inaction on immigration reform, will motivate Latino voters and his Democratic base to vote for him in the primary. His argument is that Latinos who support reform don’t have a better option: “I don’t know how anyone of Hispanic heritage could be a Republican,” Reid said in August.

2. Sen. Barbara Boxer (D) vs. Carly Fiorina (R) for California senator

Fiorina supports a few immigration reform measures, such as the DREAM Act and reform of the guest worker system. A conservative Latino group supports her candidacy and a National Organization for Marriage-backed group funded Spanish-language ads praising her values. But Boxer has consistently supported immigration reform — including a comprehensive overhaul of the system that would allow some illegal immigrants in the country to gain legal status — and has the edge among Latino voters.

3. John Hickenlooper (D) vs. Dan Maes (R) vs. Tom Tancredo (I) for Colorado governor

The three candidates for governor have wildly different views and rhetoric on immigration, mostly because of the near single-issue campaign Tancredo has run as a third party candidate. Tancredo, a longtime anti-illegal immigration hardliner, has accused Hickenlooper of running Denver as a “sanctuary city” for illegal immigrants and aired an ad blaming his Democratic opponent for the death of a toddler struck by an undocumented driver. For his part, Hickenlooper has taken a more positive angle — he even ran an ad in which he showers to wash away negative campaigning — while shooting down “sanctuary city” charges. Maes took increasingly conservative positions on immigration during the Republican primary, and now opposes pathways to legalization. Hickenlooper was excepted to win, but Tancredo seems to be catching up in the polls and could overtake him next week.

4. Alexi Giannoulias (D) vs. Mark Kirk (R) for Illinois senator

Giannoulias supports both comprehensive immigration reform, which would allow some illegal immigrants already in the country to become legal residents, and the DREAM Act for undocumented students and military service members. Kirk has said he would vote no on the DREAM Act and other reform legislation unless border security were addressed first. “This is not the time to do this,” he said of the DREAM Act during an Oct. 19 debate. “We have a decisive, bipartisan majority right now for border control. For making sure the United States can defend itself and make sure that illegal entry into the United States is not possible.” (Notably, this was after the Senate passed a $600 million bill aimed at improving border security in August.) The candidates are close in the polls, but Giannoulias could be put over the edge if Latino voters show up in large numbers as they did for Obama in 2008.

5. Bill Brady (R) vs. Gov. Pat Quinn (D) for Illinois governor

Brady and Quinn have been largely quiet on their immigration views, perhaps because of Illinois’ large number of immigrants from Mexico, Poland and India. While Quinn condemned Arizona’s SB 1070 immigration crackdown as “un-American,” Brady declined to state an opinion on the law. He has also remained silent on the DREAM Act, but says the country should find a way to secure the borders and mend legal immigration without “amnesty.” For now, Brady reportedly has a slight edge.

Also on the Chronicle list are five congressional races: Texas’s 23rd Congressional District, Arizona’s 7th, Colorado’s 3rd, California’s 47th and Nevada’s 3rd.

The larger pro-immigrant sentiment in California seems to align with a growing Latino population. In 1990, when former Gov. Pete Wilson (R) was first elected, Latinos made up almost 26 percent of the population in California. Wilson become a fervent supporter of Proposition 187 to deny state services to illegal immigrants, and is credited with derailing Latino support for Republican candidates for years. As of 2008, Latinos made up 37 percent of the population, meaning Californians are more likely to be or know Latinos.

For California politicians, these changes mean harsh anti-immigration stances may no longer be as successful. “I cannot win without the Latino vote,” Republican gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman said earlier this month.

Whitman shifted to noticeably softer statements on immigration after she won the Republican primary.  Her campaign stepped up its outreach to Latino voters and ran ads and billboards in Spanish claiming she did not support Proposition 187 — interesting, because Wilson serves as her campaign chairman — or Arizona’s SB 1070 immigration law.

Carly Fiorina, the Republican challenging Sen. Barbara Boxer, earned support from a National Organization for Marriage-sponsored Latino group that is running Spanish ads on her behalf.

So far, these efforts have not worked: Whitman and Fiorina both trail their opponents by large margins among Latino voters.

But as the recent LA Times/USC poll indicates, these candidates also face a general population that may be less interested in candidates with hardline stances on immigration. While support for illegal immigrants staying in the country was stronger among Latinos — 76 percent said illegal immigrants should not be deported — 56 percent of white voters also said illegal immigrants should be given paths to stay in the country rather than face deportation.

This seems to signal support for comprehensive immigration reform that would create additional options for legal status for some of the 11 million illegal immigrants already in the country. But so far, neither Republican candidate is supportive of measures that would help undocumented immigrants avoid deportation. Whitman said last year she supports comprehensive immigration reform, but has since called legalization “amnesty” and said the government must first focus on securing the border. Fiorina, too, refers to paths to citizenship as “amnesty” for illegal immigrants and argues for a border-first strategy.

Meanwhile, NARAL Pro-Choice America’s PAC, which has already donated to Boxer’s campaign, announced it had approved an additional $70,000 in contributions to the campaigns of 13 House candidates and Rep. Kendrick Meek (D-Fla.), who’s running for Senate in Florida. It’s nowhere close to the spending by conservative groups like American Crossroads, but abortion rights groups are energized by what they fear are a new crop of surprisingly rigid anti-abortion candidates in the current election.

“The 2010 election cycle features some of the most extreme anti-choice candidates in recent memory,” NARAL president Nancy Keenan said in a statement. “At this point in the campaign season, we know that voters are especially attentive to issues on which there’s a clear difference between candidates—and choice is one of those issues. We want to make sure these mainstream pro-choice candidates have the resources necessary to make this contrast clear to voters who have not yet made up their minds.  We are confident that voters don’t want politicians interfering in our personal, private medical decisions.”