by Armando Manzanares

Nevada’s Jan. 19 Democratic caucuses gave Latino activists a rare opportunity to fl ex their expanding political muscle.

Exit polls showed Latin­os made Up 14 percent of the participants and backed Democratic presidential primary winner Hillary Clinton over Barack Obama, 65 percent-20 percent. Clinton won 50.7 percent of the total caucus vote, Obama 45.2 percent.

Some 116,000 people took part in the caucuses, 12 times more than four years ago.

Latinos make up 25 percent of the state’s population, with 12 percent eligible to vote.

The Nevada Democratic Party had engaged in some major Latino voter Initiatives and put the population’s voting power to the test. The date for the Nevada primary was moved up to showcase the Latino vote.

“This is an historic opportunity. We are very proud of the turnout and participation of the Latino community,” Fabiola Rodríguez-Ciampoli, the Clinton campaign’s director of Hispanic communications, told Weekly Report.

She said the effort to mobilize the Latinos in Nevada started last April. “Strong organization on the ground at the very beginning is why we are seeing these results,” she said.

Major marketing campaigns for Spanish-language media were in effect, the Nevada Democratic Party had Spanish-language caller hotlines and outreach programs. Additionally, there was involvement from key Latino politicians both from Nevada and neighboring California.

Nevada is heavily unionized. Its biggest union, the Culinary Workers Union, is 40 percent Hispanic. It endorsed Obama.

One new twist was bilingual caucusing. Large bases of Latinos in Nevada are fi rst generation or foreign born.

Rodriguez-Ciampoli said that those groups of voters were particularly energized because of their sense of civic responsibility to be active the election process.

“This is important to Latinos, to have the freedom to choose. It is the fi rst time some really feel their vote matters and they want to participate,” Rodriguez Ciampoli said.

The next bouts for Democrats come in South Carolina (Jan. 26) and Florida (Jan. 29). Then the Feb. 5 biggie, Super Tuesday, with at least 19 states placing odds on who will be the next Democratic presidential nominee.

As for the pull Latino voters might have in the primaries and caucuses ahead, Rodriguez-Ciampoli said if Nevada is any indication, be prepared. Hispanic Link.­

by Jonathan Higuera

Arizona’s tough new employer sanctions law is leading some residents to leave the state but it may also be forcing some employers to relocate operations to Mexico.

Scattered media reports are finding evidence of both.

The law is designed to discourage hiring of undocumented immigrants by suspending or revoking business licenses of employers caught hiring them.

“It’s certainly not what we need right now,” said Roberto Reveles, past president of Somos América, a coalition of immigrant rights groups. “It’s hurting the state’s economy.”

On Jan. 9, a federal judge said he would make a decision on court challenges to the law by early February.

U.S. District Court Judge Neil Wake also signed on to an agreement by both parties that no employer be prosecuted until after March 1.

So far, the law, which took effect Jan. 1, appears to have generated only a handful of complaints against employers around the state, perhaps because many county attorneys said they would not accept anonymous tips.

One exception is Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas. He has declined to release a figure as to how many complaints his offi­ce has received.

The law requires employers to use a program called E-Verify to check the hiring status of all new workers.

The computer program screens each worker by using his or her Social Security number against a Department of Homeland Security database. Those caught twice “knowingly” hiring unauthorized workers could have their business licenses permanently revoked.

Attorneys challenging the law argue it does not allow employers a chance to challenge “non-confi rmation” letters they may receive from the E-Verify process.

­

by Contessa Abono

Landlord keeps tenants in precarious situation Willaim Villalta feeds his 4-month baby, Mariana, in their small room. Below, looking over the roof, he shows El Reportero the house he rents in. where his landlord stores his personal items in the garage. (photos by Stephen Morrison)

In a crowded building in the Mission District, more than 20 people who make up the families who live there sighed in relieve when the city of San Francisco turned their gas services back on after a month without it. This happiness was short lived.

The tenants say the owners have not provided heat, have shut off the water services, gas and garbage pickup to the building, and have threatened to shut off the electric service.

­Building owner Larry Wong has also allowed the shut off of gas service leaving tenants without heat and hot water. To date gas service has not been restored.

Philip O’Brien the tenant’s attorney says the tenants have been paying their utilities on time. However, he says, “they have went without gas for one month. That means not hot water and no oven.”

O’Brien also pointed out to El Reportero, that there are children living in the building, including three newborns and seven children living there.

One of the tenants William Villalta says that the living conditions at the building are terrible. He says he has been fixing broken windows and doing work around the house because the landlord would never do it.

“The landlord always says he has no money or no time to fix anything, and that he won’t even pay our gas bill. But he is the first one at the door for his money when rent is due,” says Villalta.

Apparently rooms in the basement were being rented four of five people to a room, but since the rainstorms of December and January, the basement has flooded over from leaking pipes and sewage.

According to Villalta none of the tenants had complained to the city, and the city inspectors were not involved until neighbors had begun to complain about the garbage that was piling up.

“This is the worst case I have ever seen,” says O’Brien. “The city inspectors finally came in and turned the gas on when they came on Christmas eve but now since it has been turned off again, the city has been dragging their feet.”

Now that both parities have lawyers involved, the tenants hope the situation will improve. “The landlord sees us as immigrants. We come to the U.S. with no papers to work, no credit cards, so he thinks he can do this to us,” says Villalta.

The property is a 12 unit residential hotel of singleroom occupancy, a former two-fl at building that was divided and rented as rooms ­to multiple unrelated tenants by owners since 1999.

The residents generally resided at the property for 3 to 5 years with some living in non-conforming basement and attic space, while paying rent directly to the owner. “It’s like the landlord doesn’t care about this building, it could be a nice place if he would fix it up,” says O’Brien.

At press time, Wong did not return calls to comment on the situation.

­