by Jackie Guzman

U.S. Rep. Luis Gutiérrez has laid down the gauntlet to the next U.S. president.

Addressing 1,000 guests at a Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute luncheon this fall, Gutierrez vowed to lead a march on the White House next year if our newly elected president doesn’t use his power to ensure prompt passage of a comprehensive, compassionate immigration bill.

In their messages to Hispanic audiences, both Barack Obama and John McCain have promised to give immigration reform highest priority if elected. McCain said he’d start working on it on his very first day in office.

Gutierrez chairs the Democratic Caucus Immigration Task Force and also heads up the Congressional Hispanic Caucus’ task force on immigration.

In his emotional CHCI presentation, he described the infamous federal raid on a Postville, Iowa, meat-packing plant—the biggest such operation yet—with parents snatched up and hustled out of the country.

Nearly 400 Guatemalan and Mexican families were torn apart.

“For every two people deported, you leave a citizen in this country; a brother, a mother, a child,” Gutierrez said.

Luncheon guests rose to applaud the Illinois congressman several times.

Weekly Report asked audience members and others afterwards.

“Would you march on the White House with Luis Gutiérrez, even at the risk of being arrested?”

Some responses: Juan Andrade Jr., president, U. S. Hispanic Leadership Institute. Chicago:

“I would be on the first plane to D. C. to join him in solidarity. This is the greatest moral issue of our time. The risk of going to jail would be an honor.”

Josiane Martinez, La Alianza Hispana, Boston.

“Of course I would be part of a march. To take action and get involve in the matter is essential. The mobilization of our people is needed to make changes. It is little probable that one will be arrested because of a protest. I think it shouldn’be be necessary to get to this point.”

Grace Napolitano, Member, U.S. House of Representatives, 38th District, California: “We can get El Piolín and some of those gentlemen who were very effective last time. In a peaceful way we can tell the rest of the nation that we are ready to move forward on getting a fair immigration reform. We do what we need to do.

Henry Cuéllar, Member, United States House of Representatives, 28th District, Texas.

“I­’ll let Luis Gutiérrez do the marching for me.”

Carmen Delgado-Votaw, long-time activist, Washington D.C.  “Absolutely. We can’t wait anymore. There are lots of feminists, civil rights marchers, lots of people who have been arrested. We are not afraid of that.

Fred Rodríguez, president, Veterans in Community Service, Calif.

“Yes. if you believe in an issue strong enough, you should be willing to accept the consequences.”

Mario Solís-Marich, radio show host, Los Angeles.

“One of the most important things that we can do is to be much more aggressive.

One good way is to visibly demonstrate that now we know how powerful we are.

Absolutely, I would participate.”

Eliseo Medina, SEIU executive vice president, Los Angeles “Of course, but the bottom line, to w/n we have to change the conditions that we are working on. We need to do two things.

“We need to make a huge impact in November. That is absolutely critical.

“Second/y, we have to keep every mobilized community that /s engaged in the elections and turn ad those activities into legislative advocacy.” Hispanic Link.

by Mark Aspillera

Supporters of Proposition K, a prospective measure which would decriminalize prostitution in San Francisco, held a press conference at Pier 5 Law Offices on Oct. 29, 2008 as part of what they called a “final push of a historical campaign.”

The conference stressed a CNN broadcast that said that “according to the polls” 73 percent of San Franciscans support the proposition. The broadcast did not specify which polls were being cited. (Broadcast viewable at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rn-UoXbPu2I).

Rachel West with the U.S. Prostitutes Collective said that $11.4 million is spent yearly to arrest sex workers and that Prop. K would redirect the money, and that recommendations for the money will be “thought out when Prop. K passes.”

The proposition would implement “the main recommendations made by the San Francisco Task Force on Prostitution, a task force created by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors in 1996, according to Prop K advocates.

Carol Leigh, a sex worker activist and another Prop. K supporter, said the $11.4 million would go to voluntary programs for sex workers.

Prominent critics of Prop. K include San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, District Attorney Kamala Harris and the San Francisco Police Department, all of whom officially oppose the proposition.

Harris, who played a part in a 2006 state law making human trafficking a felony, said Prop. K will impede the progress of human trafficking investigations.

Newsom attended a No on K press conference, also on Oct. 29. Opposition to Prop. K has said that the proposition will increase crime and allow human traffickers to thrive in the city.

West described said criticisms as “just another scare tactic,” adding that the proposition says nothing to support what has been called slavery.

“There is a difference between trafficking and prostitution,” she said.

Pro-Prop. K pamphlets state that by decriminalizing prostitution, San Francisco police will be able to “vigorously enforce” laws against violent crimes associated with the sex trade including trafficking.

West said the criminalization of prostitution “empowers” pimps and traffickers.

Slava Osowska with Industrial Workers of the World, an international union, characterized Prop. K as a “labor issue.” He said that sex workers have García“no recourse whatsoever” for crimes perpetrated against them.

Referred was made at the conference to the Oct. 28 FBI operation aimed at child prostitution, which resulted in the arrest of more than 100 people in the Bay Area and 642 nationwide.

“How much did that cost?” said West. “Why aren’t they helping child prostitutes? Why are they arresting them?”

Margaret Prescod, radio host and a Prop. K supporter, described raids that impact immigrant women as “basically ICE raids,” in reference to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and “a vice racket.”

by Mark Aspillera

Locked in with their arms inside the barrels, young people from different parts of the Bay Area protest against the abuses and raids of the U.S. Immigration and Custom Enforcement (ICE). The teenagers managed to block the bordering streets to the immigratin building.(photo by Marvin J. Ramirez)

A group of student protesters demonstrated in front of San Francisco’s U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement office on the morning and afternoon of Oct. 31, 2008.

The Halloween event was not a youth party, but an organized protest directed against immigration raids conducted by ICE.

The week before the protest, ICE agents conducted 17 raids as part of a three-year investigation in the East Bay and San Francisco. The raids resulted in the indictment of 29 individuals. The 52-count indictment includes charges of murder, trafficking and extortion.

Protesters carried banners and signs with messages such as “Our Immigration is Forced Migration,” and “We are ready to fi ght ICE out.” Many were clad in solid black clothing and wore black and white face paint in the likeness of a skull.

Among the signs were banners for non-Latino organizations such as United Native Americans Inc. and the Filipino Community Center.

The group marched around the perimeter of the building in what guest speaker Renee Saucedo of the Day Worker Project described as a “funeral procession.”

“No more raids,”protesters chanted.

The march stopped before the front doors, where organizers burnt incense, performed a ritual dance to a drum and spoke to the crowd using a PA system covered by a plastic sheet and carried along on a shopping cart.

Among the speakers was Barbara Lopez, a Tenderloin-based community organizer and San Francisco School Board candidate, who criticized critics of San Francisco’s 1989 Sanctuary City law.

“It is unacceptable that immigration is used as political football,” she said.

Lopez also praised the youth groups and organizers taking part in the protest. She also warned of adversities, saying that “there are plenty of forces against you,” referring to the young protesters.

Renee Saucedo criticized the tactics of ICE to wild cheers.

“This building represents death,” she said, referring to the Immigration building behind her.

After speaking in front of the front doors, the march split in two and continued down both Jackson and Montgomery Street, where they paused to let photographers take pictures of the procession.

­The two groups stopped within feet of the gated automobile entrances of the building, where, reportedly, detainees acquired in raids are brought in and out.

The entrances were guarded by offi cers from the San Francisco Sheriff’s Department and the United States Federal Protective Service, the security and law enforcement arm of Immigrations and Customs Enforcement and the Department of Homeland Security. Officers of the SFPD were present as well.D espite the tension generated by the security presence and several profanities shouted against ICE in general, neither side adopted a confrontational attitude.

On Jackson Street, protesters approached the gates with two steel fuel drums emblazoned with slogans and several people bound at the arms with cardboard tubing.

On Montgomery Street, several participants were invited to speak on a bullhorn.

Four East Bay BART stations including Richmond’s were shut down that morning, preventing several people from joining the protest, and rumors indicated that several students were detained.

The stations were reopened around 11:45 a.m. according to BART spokeswoman Luna Salaver.

­

by the El Reportero’s news services

Rodrigo Ávila

The ruling Alianza Republicana Nacionalista (Arena) has finally appointed a candidate as running mate for Rodrigo Avila in next March’s presidential elections. It made a highly controversial choice: Arturo Zablah, a wealthy businessman and former economy minister.

Zablah is a political chameleon. He tried to run for the left-wing opposition Frente Farabundo Martí para la Liberación Nacional (FMLN) in 2004, and when that came to nothing he attempted to stitch together an anti-Arena alliance last year. He has also been fiercely critical of some of the current Arena administration’s economic policies.

Tension in Mexico over energy reform

Mexico City, Oct 27 (Prensa Latina) The Mexican political scenario its still tense today with only a few hours left for the presentation to the Senate of a bill on energy reform.

This Sunday former presidential candidate Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador called the people to protest the approval of the initiative which will decide the future of Petroleos Mexicanos (PEMEX).

The opposition leader convoked a demonstration tomorrow at the site of the lower chamber to reject the PEMEX reform because he considers that proposal hurts national sovereignty.

Many Mexican academics warned that the reform has favorable openings for transnationals of the industry.

Analyst Carlos Payan commented that there are numerous holes in the legislation, and insisted that PEMEX is on the verge of being privatized.

Chileans vote for change

In the municipal elections on 26 October Chileans voted against incumbent mayors. This was the clearest conclusion to take from the elections which are a pointer to the general elections due at the end of 2009. Over 50 percent of the country’s 345 mayors are new to the job. The anti-incumbent swing is, therefore, bad news for the left-of-centre Concertación which has ruled Chile since the return of democracy in 1990. The ruling Concertación, however, played up the fact that it still won more council seats and mayorships than the rightwing opposition Alianza por Chile, even though it actually lost 55 mayorships. The Alianza won more mayorships and controls most of the big cities.

Bolivia’s congress approves referendum on constitution

The government of President Evo Morales this week clinched a signifi cant victory after striking a deal with the opposition to approve legislation calling for a referendum on the new constitution. Morales’ agreement to ditch the article on presidential reelection was the decisive concession. While over 100 articles were amended as a result of the negotiations in congress, the revised draft constitution retains its original spirit in terms of enshrining indigenous rights, consolidating state control over key natural resources and addressing land reform. The government victory is a setback for the political opposition, Podemos, and the regional opposition prefects.

Indigenous arrive in Cali

Tens of thousands indigenous protesters arrived in Colombia’s third largest city Cali Saturday, Oct. 25. Organizing indigenous organizations expect over 50,000 protesters to be in the capital of Valle del Cauca when they speak with Colombian President Álvaro Uribe Sunday.

Bolivian President Evo Morales, one of the prominent international figures invited to join the protesters said Friday he isn’t able to come. It’s uncertain if other international invites will be able to come.

The natives hope to be joined by other groups like labor activists, truckers and cane cutters that have been demanding improved working conditions for weeks.

Indigenous leaders will meet Uribe Sunday morning to discuss their five-point proposal to improve the situation of approximately one and a half million natives in Colombia.

­by David Bacon

The first of the 388 workers arrested in the immigration raid on the Agriprocessors meatpacking plant in Postville, Iowa, were deported in mid-October, Salvadorhaving spent five months in federal prison. Their crime? Giving a bad Social Security number to the company to get hired. Among them will be a young man who had his eyes covered with duct tape by a supervisor on the line, who then beat him with a meathook.

COLUMN

The Postville raid was one of the many recent immigration operations leading to criminal charges and deportations for thousands of people. Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff calls this “closing the back door. “ Meanwhile, his department seeks to “open the front door” by establishing new guest-worker programs, called “close to slavery” by the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Something is clearly wrong with the priorities of immigration enforcement. Hungry and desperate workers go to jail and get deported. The government protects employers and seeks to turn a family-based immigration system into a managed labor supply for business. Yet national political campaigns say less and less about it.

Immigrant Latino and Asian communities feel increasinglyafraid and frustrated. Politicians want their votes, but avoid talking about the rising wave of arrests, imprisonment, and deportations.

This month national demonstrations across the nation are protesting the silence, asking candidates to speak out. Immigrant communities expect a new deal from a new administration, especially from Democrats. They want a new U.S. president to take swift and decisive action to give human rights a priority over fear, and recognize immigrants as people, not just a source of cheap labor.

Agenda for the Next President

In its first 100 days, a new administration could take these simple steps to benefit immigrants and working families:

• Stop Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) from seeking serious Federal criminal charges, with incarceration in privately run prisons, for lacking papers or for bad Social Security numbers.
• Stop raiding workplaces, especially where workers are trying to organize unions or enforce wage and hour laws. This would help all workers, not just immigrants, to raise low wages.
• Double the paltry 742 federal inspectors responsible for all U.S. wage and hour violations and focus on industries where immigrants are concentrated. The National Labor Relations Board could target employers who use immigration threats to violate union rights.
• Halt community sweeps, where agents use warrants for one or two people to detain and deport dozens of others. End the government’s campaign to repeal local sanctuary ordinances and drag local law enforcement into immigration raids.
• Allow all workers to apply for a Social Security number and pay legally into the system that benefits everyone. Social Security numbers should be used for their true purpose – paying retirement and disability benefi ts – not to fi re immigrants from their jobs and send them to prison.
• Reestablish worker protections ended under Bush on existing guest worker programs, force employers to hire domestically fi rst, and decertify any contractor guilty of labor violations.
• Restore human rights in border communities, stop construction of the border wall between the U.S. and Mexico, and disband the Operation Streamline federal court, where scores of young borders are sent to prison in chains every day.

Alternatives

After the first 100 days, Democrats will have to decide what reforms to bring before Congress, and when. Some would delay action for a year or more. But the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and dozens of trade groups won’t sit on their hands. They’ve been pushing for years for big guest-worker programs, more raids and enforcement, and a weak legalization program. But many immigrant and labor rights activists advocate three steps toward an alternative, more progressive reform:

1. A moratorium on raids, while protecting human and labor rights, in the fi rst 100 days.
2. A law to give green-card visas to the undocumented and clear up the backlog of people already waiting for them. If visas are more easily available abroad, people won’t have to cross the border without them. That law could also create jobs in unemployed communities, repeal employer sanctions laws that make work a crime for immigrants, and encourage labor law reform to protect workers’ rights. Guest-worker programs with a record of abuse should be ended, as they were in 1964.
3. A new approach to trade policy and renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), so they stop causing poverty and uprooting communities, making migration peoples’ only alternative for survival. Reject new trade agreements with countries like Colombia, which will cause job loss in the U.S. and spread low wages, labor violations, and displacement abroad. U.S. tax dollars, instead of being spent on the Iraq War, could expand rural credit, education and health care in Mexico and other countries, easing the pressure behind migration.

There’s common ground here among immigrants, communities of color, unions, churches, civil rights organizations, and working families. Legalization and immigrant rights, tied to guaranteeing jobs for all working families, can bring people together. All workers, including immigrants, need the right to organize and enforce labor standards, the same goal sought by unions in the Employee Free Choice Act. Changing trade policy will benefit working-class communities in the U.S. while helping families of immigrants back home from Oaxaca to El Salvador.

The diverse communities who need these reforms can and will find ways to seek them together. In fact, if Barack Obama wins the presidency and a larger Democratic majority takes hold in Congress, they will owe their victory to this coalition.

After the election, this same coalition will need jobs and rights. But immigrant workers are going to jail now. The wave of raids continues to divide families, even as candidates hold rallies and ask for votes. In Los Angeles’ Placita Olvera, activists have begun a hunger strike to stop the deportations. Marches and demonstrations are making the same point from coast to coast.Promises of change aren’t enough. For candidates who want working-class votes, the fi rst step is to speak out.

Silence on Immigration David Bacon | October 23, 2008 Foreign Policy In Focus http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/5620.