Latinos worry as crackdown on immigration intensifies

By PATRICK McGEE
Star-Telegram staff writer

STAR-TELEGRAM
Graph: Deportation fears The threat of deportation has emerged as a huge fear in Latino communities with the federal government's sharp increase in immigration law enforcement, according to a Pew Hispanic Center report released Thursday.

"Latinos are feeling vulnerable in the current political and policy context," said Paul Taylor, acting director of the Washington, D.C.-based center.

The study found that just over half of Hispanics surveyed said they worry that they, a family member or a close friend will be deported.

Even a third of U.S.-born Hispanics expressed this fear in the survey of 2,003 people. The survey included foreign-born respondents but did not ask whether they were here legally. More people are being deported each year, with 300,500 people being shipped out of the country in fiscal 2007, according to the report. In fiscal 2002, 162,865 people were deported.

Last week, the Dallas office of Immigration and Customs Enforcement announced about 1,600 arrests of criminal and fugitive aliens in fiscal year 2007 -- a 270 percent increase from fiscal year 2006. Fugitive aliens are immigrants who have ignored deportation orders and stayed in the U.S.

Alberto Govea, president of a chapter of the League of United Latin American Citizens in Fort Worth, said he has seen this fear of deportation among Hispanics he knows.

He said some illegal immigrants have developed emergency plans for who their children will stay with if they get deported.

"It's a real issue and a real concern," Govea said. "I don't think I could live with that kind of anxiety. It would be hard."

Hispanics are America's largest minority group, and 1 out of 4 Hispanic adults is an illegal immigrant, according to the Pew Hispanic Center.

The survey also found a wide gap between Hispanics' and non-Hispanics' views on enforcement.

"In all cases, Latinos opposed all of these measures whereas non-Hispanics were much more supportive of all of these measures," Taylor said.

Nearly half of all non-Hispanics approved of workplace raids, while only 20 percent of Hispanics approved.

Eighty-five percent of non-Hispanics approved of verifying people's immigration or citizenship status before issuing them driver's licenses. Only 40 percent of Hispanics approved of demanding such documentation.

Nearly half of non-Hispanics disapproved of local police enforcing immigration laws, but 79 percent of Hispanics disapproved of such action.

Joel Downs, president of the Fort Worth chapter of Citizens for Immigration Reform, a group opposed to illegal immigration, said he does not believe so many Hispanics are opposed to stepped-up immigration enforcement.

"The ones that I have talked to that entered legally are nearly as resentful, and sometimes even more than the people who were born here, because they took the time to go through the line and obey the system," he said.

Online: www.pewhispanic.org

pmcgee@star-telegram.com
PATRICK McGEE, 817-685-3806

Most Hispanics in poll say immigration debate, fallout hurt them

By ALAN FRAM
Associated Press Writer
Posted on Thu, Dec. 13, 2007

Minorities wary of one another, survey finds
http://pewhispanic.org

WASHINGTON -- Most Hispanics say the immigration debate and Congress' failure to overhaul immigration laws has hurt them, and many fear deportation for themselves, a relative or close friend, a poll showed Thursday.

The survey, conducted by the nonpartisan Pew Hispanic Center, found that Hispanics in the United States are generally satisfied with their own lives and optimistic about the future. Yet many are wary of negative reactions prompted by heightened attention to illegal immigration in Congress and the presidential campaign trail, and they increasingly cite discrimination as a problem.

Sixty-four percent said the immigration debate and Congress' failure to enact bills revamping immigration laws has made life harder for Hispanics. Just more than half said the increased attention to immigration has hurt them personally, ranging from 12 percent who said they are having more trouble keeping a job to 24 percent who said they are less likely to travel outside the U.S.

A minority - 41 percent - said they or someone close has experienced discrimination in the past five years. That proportion has grown since 31 percent said so in a 2002 poll by Pew and the Kaiser Family Foundation.

Roughly eight in 10 say they think discrimination against Hispanics is a problem in schools, the workplace and when it comes to success in the United States, with an increase in those citing school discrimination since 2002 and the other numbers changing little.

"Hispanics in this country are feeling vulnerable in the current political and policy environment," said Paul Taylor, acting director of the center.

There are about 47 million Hispanics in the U.S., about 16 percent of the country's population. President Bush and Congress have flopped in their efforts to enact legislation dealing with the country's 12 million illegal immigrants - which include many Hispanics - but increased deportations and tighter limits on government benefits have put pressure on the Hispanic community.

The issue has also become a major one in the 2008 presidential campaign, particularly with Republican candidates who have stressed how they would crack down on a problem widely cited by GOP voters as a top concern.

The poll found 53 percent of Hispanics said they worry about deportation for themselves, a relative or close friend, including 33 percent who said they worry about it a lot. While foreign-born Hispanics were most anxious, even one in three native-born Hispanics - who are all U.S. citizens - expressed worry.

Seven in 10 Hispanics say their own quality of life is either good or excellent, yet they are widely divided over the status of the nation's Hispanics overall. One in three say that nationally, the situation for Hispanics has worsened over the past year, a quarter say it has improved and nearly four in 10 say it has stayed the same.

Even so, the survey found, more than three-fourths are confident that Hispanic children will do better economically than Hispanics are doing today.

The study also found that 75 percent of Hispanics said illegal immigrants help the economy by providing low-cost workers, while 17 percent said they hurt by driving down wages. By 48 percent to 40 percent, more non-Hispanics said illegal immigration has hurt the economy.

Large numbers of Hispanics opposed steps taken to crack down on illegal immigration, including 75 percent who oppose workplace raids and 55 percent who object to states checking immigration status before providing driver's licenses.

The poll was conducted from Oct. 3 through Nov. 9 and involved telephone interviews with 2,003 Hispanics adults. It had a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 2.7 percentage points.

Judge tosses immigration lawsuit

Background
HB 1804

House Bill 1804, considered the toughest immigration law in the nation, denies driver licenses and public services to illegal immigrants. It criminalizes harboring, transporting or sheltering illegal immigrants. It requires all state agencies to confirm the immigration status of new hires. This requirement will extend to contractors July 1. Also known as the Oklahoma Taxpayer and Citizens Act, HB 1804 essentially reiterates existing federal law, according to many legal experts watching the case.

Tulsa World | 12/13/2007
By Devona Walker
Staff Writer

TULSA "” U.S. District Judge James Payne, in a very strongly worded opinion, dismissed a lawsuit against Oklahoma's controversial immigration bill, House Bill 1804, Wednesday evening.

Payne found that half the complainants lacked standing and said those with standing "” a handful of "illegal alien complainants" "” were attempting to use the court to openly violate federal law.

"These plaintiffs admit their violation of federal law, and then ask this court to allow them to file suit anonymously, so as to avoid detection by the federal law enforcement," Payne wrote. "These illegal alien plaintiffs seek nothing more than to use this court as a vehicle for their continued unlawful presence in this country. To allow these plaintiffs to do so would make this court an abettor of iniquity and this court finds that simply unpalatable."

Payne remarked that his ruling might have been different had the plaintiffs been children whose unlawful presence in this country was involuntary.

The lawsuit was filed in early September by the Coalition of Latino Clergy and Christian Leaders, two restaurants, two churches, a construction company and a half dozen Jane and John Doe defendants. The suit questioned the constitutionality of the law, arguing that Oklahoma was treading into federal territory.

Author declares victory

Bill author Rep. Randy Terrill, R-Moore, lauded the decision as a great victory.
"It has been my position all along that House Bill 1804 would withstand any legal challenge brought against it. The judge's decision to dismiss the case again vindicates that view," Terrill said. "House Bill 1804 is a very carefully calibrated measure designed to sync perfectly with federal immigration law and not exceed the scope of state authority in this matter."

Opponents of HB 1804 tried to accomplish through the legal process what they could not accomplish through the legislative process. "Thankfully, they have failed," he added.

In Tulsa, Guillermo Rojas, a Hispanic businessman and member of the Governor's Advisory Council on Hispanic and Latino Affairs, continued to decry the law as racist and politically motivated.

"I am very disappointed. Everybody knows the law is affecting the state's economy, and it's not positive under any circumstances," Rojas said.

"I believe this law was inspired by racism and politics. And there's no reason to obey this law, especially when they try to criminalize the undocumented people, no one is going to obey that law. I am not going to."

Hispanic people have been manipulated by politicians for the last few years over immigration, Rojas said.

They were manipulated when Congress failed to pass comprehensive immigration reform.

They were then again used by Terrill when he devised a way to rise up the Republican hierarchy, he said.

"We are sick and tired of being treated like second-class citizens and being used by the politicians. That's going to change for sure, no matter what," Rojas said.

"If we are not going to win this battle, in the next election we will win the war. The Hispanic vote is going to be very important for any candidate."

Rojas said Hispanic community leaders have been working hard to help undocumented people become legal and register to vote. He hopes that work will pay off during the next election cycle.

Ira Mehlman, spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform "” a national group responsible for crafting much of Oklahoma's statute as well as numerous others around the nation "” rejects the notion that the law is either racist or unkind.

"When an illegal alien makes a decision to come here, they are acting completely for self interest. It's perfectly legitimate for an American to say that doesn't serve our interest," Mehlman said.

Contributing: Jennifer Mock,
Capitol Bureau

Poll: In immigration uproar, Latinos share concerns

By LEAH RAE
THE JOURNAL NEWS

(Original publication: December 14, 2007)

More than half the nation's Latinos, U.S. citizens among them, worry that they or someone close to them could be deported, according to a new poll.

It's one measurement in a study by the nonpartisan Pew Hispanic Center that sees concerns being shared, at least to some degree, by both immigrant and U.S.-born Latinos. The study tries to capture their reactions to the nation's turbulent debate over immigration reform.

"Latinos in this country, they live in families, they are part of extended families, they are part of communities, and they are living in a political and policy climate where this concern is a part of their lives," said Paul Taylor, the center's acting director.

Almost two-thirds of respondents believe that life for Latinos has become more difficult because of the national debate and Congress' twice-failed attempt to overhaul the immigration system, according to the study, released yesterday. The results distinguish between U.S.-born and foreign-born respondents but not illegal immigrants.

Hispanics have become the nation's biggest minority group, making up 15.5 percent of the population, or 47 million people. Although they do not make up the same percentage of voters - many are younger than 18 or non-citizens - their views are being closely tracked by strategists who view them as a possible swing vote in the presidential race.

Republicans, in debates such as the one televised in Spanish on Sunday night, have emphasized an appreciation for legal immigrants while promising a crackdown. But the poll points to a "solidarity" among Latinos who feel vulnerable to the enforcement push, the authors say.

Like others in America, Latinos are divided over their support for workplace raids or checking the immigration status of driver's license applicants. But they give less support overall to such measures than non-Hispanics, who were also surveyed.

Regarding workplace raids, for example, 84 percent of immigrant Hispanics oppose them, and so do 63 percent of U.S.-born Hispanics. On the flip side, such raids are favored by 51 percent of non-Hispanics.

There is more of a division on the driver's license issue. Two-thirds, or 66 percent, of foreign-born Hispanics do not approve of checking immigration status before issuing a license, compared with 39 percent of native-born Hispanics. But among non-Hispanics, 85 percent approve of the measure.

Attitudes also differ on whether illegal immigrants help or hurt the U.S. economy. Three-quarters of Hispanics say illegal immigrants help by offering cheap labor, while 17 percent say they harm the economy by driving down wages. Among non-Hispanics, only 40 percent see a positive effect.

Research has shown that Latino immigrant families are often made up of people with different types of legal status. A child who is a U.S. citizen, for example, may have an undocumented mother and a father who has a green card but not citizenship. That's one reason that so many feel vulnerable to the stepped-up immigration enforcement, said Graciela Heymann, executive director of the Westchester Hispanic Center.

"People are really scared," she said.

Latinos, with a close-up view of the immigration process, don't see a black and white distinction between legal and illegal, she said, but rather a multitude of variables. Some nationalities are eligible for "temporary protected status" depending on what year they entered the United States, for example, and others may qualify for an old asylum-related provision. Then there are applicants who spend years in limbo.

"Whether you get immigration status or not - it's a very mysterious thing," she said.


Reach Leah Rae at lrae@lohud

Immigration Controls Cause Exploitation

by Sheldon Richman,

Every so often, the news is filled with reports of the horrible exploitation of illegal immigrants. It might be the story of a dreary sweatshop where people work at low wages in unenviable conditions. Worse, it could be a report about the deaths of immigrants who suffocated while waiting in a railroad car in stifling heat after being brought across the Mexican border. People have died while being smuggled in automobile trunks.

No one could help but be moved by the pictures broadcast some months ago of deaf and mute immigrants from Mexico who were allegedly forced to work on the streets of New York City. No doubt they lived in terrible conditions and were subject to exploitation.

It is hard to know what those people were promised by the Mexicans who arranged their travel to the United States or if they even had a choice in whether to come here at all. Chances are that they were lured by the promise of a better life, as so many people are throughout the world. Maybe they were willing to endure certain hardships now for the prospect of something better in the future. Nevertheless, there is no denying that those wretched souls were at the mercy of those who smuggled them into the United States and those for whom they worked. Their fate was securely in the hands of people who are not exactly admirable characters.

What has not been noticed, however, is that the smugglers and exploiters had accomplices without whom they could not have carried out their schemes. Those accomplices were the Congress, the president, and the Immigration and Naturalization Service. The indispensable assistance those officials rendered was in the form of a legal barrier to the free movement of people into the United States "” the right to immigrate here.

Without those barriers, the degradation and exploitation of immigrants would be much more difficult to carry out. It is not surprising that few wish to indict government and law for the criminal treatment of vulnerable people. But the fact remains that government and law facilitate that treatment and thus deserve harsh judgment.

To understand why, let's examine what we can call the Law of Black Markets. We see many instances of that law. When government attempts to forbid a peaceful activity that people want to engage in, that activity will continue despite the law "” but under more horrendous conditions than previously. A mode of peaceful behavior does not vanish from society simply because government decrees that it must.

Take the prohibition of alcohol in the 1920s. People didn't stop drinking liquor, wine, and beer. To many people, drinking was a perfectly legitimate activity. That judgment didn't change when the Constitution was amended to make the production and sale of booze illegal. But something did change with Prohibition: the industry moved into the underworld. Organized crime grew. Violence connected with the trade abounded. Law enforcement was corrupted by the large black-market profits that reflected the risks of making and distributing contraband alcohol. Of course, the power of government grew, and civil liberties eroded.

This is the standard story with any prohibition. It is true today of drugs. If some people get their way and outlaw tobacco, the same will be true of cigarettes.

How does this relate to immigration? Although immigration is not outlawed, it is restricted. Many people who want to come to the United States cannot do so legally. Yet human nature pushes people to strive for better lives, and they don't stop just because government says they must. They will merely seek other ways to get here. As a result, immigrant smugglers arise to provide a service for which people are willing to pay dearly. Employers offer them low-level jobs when they reach the United States. This is simply a matter of supply and demand. And with any black market, the price escalates to offset the risks of getting into trouble with the law. Would-be immigrants are willing to pay a lot and put up with a lot to get here and stay here.

Furthermore, there is money to be made even off people who don't wish to move. This is where a slave trade can arise. Thugs might find it worthwhile to force people in poor countries to go to the United States to fill a demand for unskilled, low-wage labor that would not exist if immigration were legal.

What makes it especially difficult for unauthorized immigrants is that, because they are here illegally, smugglers and employers have a handy means of exploitation at their disposal: they can threaten to send the immigrants back to their native countries and their poverty if they don't obey. In fact, anyone who wants to take advantage of them can threaten a call to the INS. An indigent person in a strange land with a strange language would find it difficult to resist exploitative demands made by someone with that kind of power. Immigrants are put at a steep disadvantage regarding the terms of employment and living conditions. Promises and contracts can be broken with impunity. Victims are not likely to sue because they obviously have no recourse to the legal system unless they are willing to risk being sent home.

But let us be clear about the source of the power to exploit those vulnerable people: the immigration laws passed by Congress and enforced by the INS. Thus, they are accessories before the fact in the exploitation of the deaf Mexicans in New York City, as well as in the deaths of other illegal immigrants who suffocate in cattle cars while hiding from immigration agents. Without the immigration laws, those victims of government policy would be alive today.

The debate over immigration has raged for years. Even many free-market advocates oppose free immigration. Opponents attempt to scare the American people with tales of immigrants committing crimes and taking welfare. The culture of the immigrants is said to be a threat to American culture.

These are red herrings. If the government didn't tax productive American people to provide welfare, no one could go on the dole. And how will we get rid of the welfare state if it is saved from every strain on its resources? Besides, there's no reason why a condition of immigration can't be: no welfare.

Immigrant crime should be treated the same as citizen crime "” which is to say that when anyone violates the rights of another, the consequences should be swift and certain in order to fully recompense the victim.

As for the culture, it is robust precisely because it is open and spontaneous. Immigration enriches American culture. The concern about culture reminds me of the concern about the future of the English language. Contrary to right-wing worries, English as a near-universal language is in the best shape ever. It is used worldwide and it dominates the newest frontier "” cyberspace. There is no danger of English's going into decline.

The policy debate, mired as it is in welfare, education, and labor statistics, misses the key points. First, the freedom to move about peacefully is a natural right. That is not to say there is a right to trespass. No one has a right to enter property without the consent of the owner.

But when it comes to immigration, many people (employers, for example) are ready to consent. The issue of "public property" certainly muddies the issue, because in theory it belongs to all taxpayers. In fact, it is owned by government officials. The taxpayers are merely nominal owners. There should be little or no public property at all. (Ayn Rand defined capitalism as the system in which all property is privately owned.)

But the existence of public property cannot be used to make a case against immigration. After all, if some Americans wish to invite immigrants here (as a source of inexpensive labor, for example), why can't they, as taxpayers, do so? Why should the majority be able to stop them? Because of externalities? The same theory could be used to interfere with free trade.

Even if all property were private, there would surely be employers and employment brokers who would help immigrants travel here. The upshot is that property rights cannot be used to support restrictions on immigration. The second point usually overlooked in the debate is that it is human nature to strive to better one's condition. As long as the government tries to thwart that natural inclination through immigration controls, we will continue to see the degradation and exploitation that surfaces from time to time. And the federal government will continue to be an accomplice in those offenses.

Responsible Reform of Immigration Laws Must Protect Working Conditions for all Workers in the U.S.

San Diego, CA

Overhaul of our nation's immigration laws is long overdue. The current system is a blueprint for exploitation of workers, both foreign-born and native, and is feeding a multimillion dollar criminal enterprise at the U.S.-Mexico border.

America deserves an immigration system that protects all workers within our borders"”both native-born and foreign"”and at same time guarantees the safety of our nation without compromising our fundamental civil rights and civil liberties.

Any viable solution to this crisis must address the reasons why people are coming to the U.S. Most immigrants come from countries where the international development process has failed, and many are from countries where International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank and trade policies have weakened countries' economies and labor protections, causing a devastating impact on all workers. In some developing countries, IMF policies have caused public-sector workers to lose their jobs and their union protections, forcing them into competition in the private sector, where few, if any, jobs are available, driving down wages and working conditions even further. Trade agreements such as the North American Free Trade Agreement undermine the agricultural economies of developing countries, leading workers to leave the fields and consider moving north. Without rising living standards abroad for workers and the poor, the pressure for illegal immigration will continue and escalate.

At the same time that global forces are pushing workers to our borders, judicial and public policies toward immigrants have created new so-called pull factors for migration into the United States, namely, an incentive for employers to recruit undocumented immigrants for economic exploitation. Too many employers seek to avoid, evade, and ultimately negate U.S. labor and employment laws through the recruitment and importation of undocumented workers. The U.S. Supreme Court created a powerful new incentive for such exploitation by its decision in Hoffman Plastic Compounds v. National Labor Relations Board. In that case, the Court determined that an undocumented worker is not entitled to back pay – the only monetary remedy available to workers under the National Labor Relations Act – when he or she is fired illegally for trying to organize a union. This has made the cost of exploiting immigrants insignificant to unscrupulous employers. The end result is that industries that cannot export jobs – such as those in construction – are attempting to use flawed immigration policies to import the labor standards of developing nations into the United States.

The broken immigration system has allowed employers to create an underclass of workers, which has effectively reduced working standards for all workers. Immigrant workers are over-represented in the highest risk, lowest paid jobs, but the exploited immigrants do not work in isolation. U.S.-born workers who work side by side with immigrants suffer the same exploitation. The U.S. Department of Labor, for example, determined the poultry industry – which is nearly half African American and half immigrant – was 100 percent out of compliance with federal wage and hour laws. The Department of Labor also estimated more than half of the country's garment factories violate wage and hour laws, and more than 75 percent violate health and safety laws. Of course, workplaces that are dangerous for immigrant workers are equally dangerous for their U.S.-born counterparts and co-workers.

Our failed immigration policies also have encouraged employers to use guestworker programs to lower labor standards and working conditions for all workers within our borders. We've seen employers turn tens of thousands of permanent, well-paying jobs in the United States into temporary jobs through the use of various guestworker programs. The temporary guestworker jobs come with few or no benefits, lower wages and often are staffed through temporary agencies, whose fees come out of workers' pockets. The foreign workers recruited to fill these jobs remain legally tied to the employers that recruited them and are thus naturally vulnerable to exploitation.

Guestworker programs, such as the L and H-1B visa programs, operate with little employer accountability and to the detriment of all professional workers. None of these programs connect to the realities of current U.S. labor market conditions. In fact, employers are allowed to turn permanent jobs into temporary jobs and import workers, despite the unusually high current rate of unemployment among professional and technical workers. As a result, working conditions for all professional workers have suffered: pressures caused by employer exploitation of professional guestworkers coupled with the increases in outsourcing continue to have a chilling effect on any real wage increases for professionals, even those not directly or immediately impacted by these matters.

Immigrant workers, like all workers, should be full social partners. We will continue to support effective, credible and enforceable rights for all workers, regardless of their country of origin or immigration status. At the same time, we will ensure that our member mobilization efforts include our immigrant brothers and sisters, and ultimately place immigration squarely within a progressive and sustainable economic agenda that benefits all working families in our nation.

We hereby renew our call for comprehensive and responsible reform of our immigration laws, which must"”at a minimum"”comply with the following standards:

¨ Uniform enforcement of workplace standards must be a priority. History, economics and common sense dictate that exploitation of workers will continue as long, as it makes economic sense to do so, to the detriment of U.S.-born and foreign-born workers alike. Unfortunately, the lax enforcement of labor and employment laws has given too many unscrupulous employers the economic incentive to recruit undocumented workers, and has penalized those employers who abide by the law because it has put them at a competitive disadvantage.

The only meaningful way to remove that perverse economic incentive and to equalize the competitive playing field is to ensure that all those who gain the benefit of a worker's labor, whether that worker is an employee or an independent contractor, abide by all labor and employment laws. That means that the immigration reform law must provide real and enforceable remedies for labor and employment law violations that are available to all workers, regardless of their immigration status, and that there must be a mechanism by which all workers can vindicate their rights without having to face restrictive standing requirements or meaningless regulatory hurdles;

¨ Reforms must provide a path to permanent residency for the currently undocumented workers who have paid taxes and made positive contributions to their communities. Legalization is an important worker protection. History shows that legalizing this population benefits all workers: Wages and working standards of undocumented workers increased significantly after the legalization program of the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act, thereby raising the floor for all workers. Without a legalization program, the economic incentive to hire and exploit the undocumented will remain, to the detriment of U.S. workers who labor in the same industries as the undocumented, because all workers will see their working conditions plummet.

¨ We must reverse the trend of allowing employers to turn permanent, full-time year-round jobs into temporary jobs through attempts to broaden the size and scope of guestworker programs. Longstanding U.S. guestworker policy requires that temporary workers can be used only to satisfy short-term or seasonal labor needs. The agricultural guestworker program, for example, the best known of these programs, is designed to satisfy the seasonal needs of employers who need to temporarily hire large numbers of workers during the growing season, which may be as short as six weeks. Similarly, the H2-B program allows non-agricultural employers in industries such as landscaping, hospitality and crabbing, to hire non-U.S. workers on a temporary basis to fill their seasonal needs.

Guestworker programs are bad public policy and operate to the detriment of workers, in the both the public and private sector, and of working families in the U.S. The abuses suffered by workers in the first such program, the post World-War II Bracero program, are well documented. The negative effects of the modern versions of the "guestworker" construct"”such as the H1-B and H2-B programs"”are all too evident today. Workers around the country are witnessing the transformation of formerly well-paying, permanent jobs into temporary jobs with little or no benefits, which employers are staffing with vulnerable foreign workers who have no real enforceable rights through the guestworker programs. These modern programs have had a major and substantial detrimental effect on important sectors of our economy.

The massive expansion of guestworker programs contemplated by current legislation before the Senate"”which would more than quadruple the number of foreign workers admitted annually and would allow employers to import workers into the public and private sector--will not only harm U.S. workers, but also represents a radical and dark departure from our long-held vision of a democratic U.S. society. We are not a nation of "guests," who, by definition, have only short-term and short-lived interests, but a nation of people who believe in investing in our communities, in our future, in the future of our children, and in our democracy. It defies everything that our nation stands for to legitimize a system that forces our communities to simply be "hosts" for "guests" who are only here to lend their labor, and who have no reason to become invested in that community, and who will never have a voice in their future within that community. We are not a nation of guests; we are a nation of citizens.

In our view, there is no good reason why any immigrant who comes to this country prepared to work, to pay taxes, and to abide by our laws and rules should be denied what has been offered to immigrants throughout our country's history, a path to legal citizenship. To embrace instead the creation of a permanent two-tier workforce, with non-U.S. workers relegated to second-class "guestworker" status, would be repugnant to our traditions and our ideals and disastrous for the living standards of working families.

We fully support the right of all workers to bargain collectively, and we fully support and endorse the existing arrangement within the H2A program that the Farm Labor Organizing Committee (FLOC) negotiated with the North Carolina Growers Association, which provides the protections of a collective bargaining agreement to Mexican H2A workers at the Mt. Olive, N.C., facility.

¨ Long-Term Labor Shortages Should be Filled With Workers with Full Rights. We recognize that our economy may face real labor shortages in the coming years, as the baby boomer generation retires. Instead of relying on a construct that guarantees the deterioration of working conditions in the U.S., we should focus on a meaningful solution that guarantees full workplace rights for all workers, both foreign-born and native, and also permits employers to hire foreign workers to fill proven labor shortages. The solution is simple: Congress should revise the permanent employment-based visas system and devote more resources to removing processing delays.

Employment-based admissions for permanent visas (commonly known as "green cards") are subject to labor certification provisions: the employer must show that there are not sufficient workers in the U.S. who are able, willing, qualified and available at the time and at the place where the foreign worker is to perform the job. To demonstrate this adequately, the employer must offer the job at a prevailing wage, and must attest that the employment of the foreign worker will not adversely affect the wages and working conditions of similarly employed workers in the U.S. Congress has arbitrarily set the number of these visas at 140,000 annually. That approach should be changed so that the number of visas available responds to actual, demonstrated labor shortages, which will satisfy employers' needs for workers, and will prevent the creation of a secondary class of workers and residents, because the new foreign workers will have full employment rights and the promise of a permanent future in our democracy.

· Reform of immigration laws must consider the root causes of migration, and must take into account the global economic policies, as well as U.S. foreign policy that are pushing workers to migrate. Without rising living standards abroad for workers and the poor, the pressure for illegal immigration will continue. U.S. foreign policy, as well as trade and globalization policies, must be grounded upon a coherent national economic strategy, as described in An Economic Agenda for Working Families, adopted at the AFL-CIO's 2005 Convention.

Inglés es gran causa de discriminación de hispanos

December 5, 2007
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Uno de cada cinco inmigrantes hispanos, un 23%, habla bien el inglés. Sus hijos, nacidos en Estados Unidos, casi en su totalidad --88%-- lo hablan a ese nivel, segíºn un estudio difundido el jueves que cita la deficiencia lingí¼Ã­Â­stica como la mayor causa de discriminación hacia los latinos en la nación.

Junto al dominio del idioma, los hispanos señalan también como motivo de discriminación su nivel de ingresos económicos, educación o color de la piel, afirma el estudio Uso del inglés entre hispanos en Estados Unidos difundido por Pew Hispanic Center (PHC).

En 2007, el 47% consideró que el idioma era la mayor fuente de discriminación hacia los latinos, que con 44.3 millones de personas son la primera minorí­a en Estados Unidos, dijo.

Segíºn PHC, organización de Washington que estudia las tendencias hispanas en la nación, sólo 4 de 10 hispanos extranjeros o nativos (44%) que viven en Estados Unidos son bilingí¼es inglés-español, pero entre los adultos que han venido jóvenes el promedio sube a dos de cada tres (68%), dijo.

Para los inmigrantes de primera generación, el inglés no es su idioma primario en casa o el trabajo, situa-ción prácticamente opuesta a la de sus hijos adultos nacidos en el paí­s.

Dice que los inmigrantes hispanos con mayor nivel de educación son los que tienden a hablar "muy bien'' el inglés y a usarlo con frecuencia, un dominio que también se observa en los que llegaron cuando eran niños o han pasado muchos años en Estados Unidos .

La educación universitaria juega un papel importante en la habilidad para hablar y leer inglés, segíºn el estudio compilado por Shirin Hakimzadeh y D'Vera Cohn y difundido en una teleconferencia.

Entre los grupos de origen hispano que tienden más a decir que hablan el inglés "con fluidez'' están los puertorriqueños y sudamericanos. Los mexicanos son los que menos dicen que hablan el idioma.

Las conclusiones son el resultado de un seguimiento desde el año 2002 de unos 14,000 hispanos adultos, al margen de su estatus migratorio, y también incluyen:

n Sólo un 7% de hispanos nacidos fuera de Estados Unidos habla principalmente o solamente inglés en casa, a diferencia de un 29% que hace lo propio con el inglés en su trabajo. Un 43% de hispanos todaví­a habla principalmente o solamente español en el trabajo.

n En la primera generación, apenas un 23% de hispanos dice que puede conversar en inglés muy bien. Ese í­ndice se incrementa drásticamente cuando se trata de una segunda generación de adultos, al pasar a 88%.

_ El porcentaje de hispanos que habla español en casa se reduce también de una generación a otra. En la segunda generación la mitad de los niños todaví­a hablan "algo'' de español en casa. Pero en la tercera o subsiguientes, ese promedio cae a la cuarta parte, o un 25%.

_ Dos de cada tres inmigrantes mexicanos (71%) dice que habla "un poquito'' de inglés o nada. Pero, el 44% de sudamericanos y 35% de puertorriqueños son menos proclives a decir eso.

_ La mayorí­a de inmigrantes hispanos (67%) informa que habla "algo'' de inglés en el trabajo. Apenas el 28% dice que solamente habla español allí­.

_ La mayorí­a de los inmigrantes que se nacionalizan (52%) habla inglés "muy bien'' o "bastante bien''. La mayorí­a de no ciudadanos (74%) habla solamente "un poquito'' o nada.

Latinos Using Search Engines

Should Latinos be a business' next target market on the Internet? If you want to explore new search marketing opportunities, expand with growing economies, and reach young, Internet-savvy consumers, tapping into the Latino market may prove to be one of the best strategies out there today.

While U.S. search marketers have devoted most of the attention to optimizing and advertising opportunities in the major search engines of the dominant country and culture, there are certainly fast-growing new markets and untapped opportunities from multicultural audiences in their native country as well as abroad.

Defining the "Latino" market is not an easy task. The term "Latino" today is commonly used to describe both U.S. Hispanics and Hispanics living elsewhere in North, Central and South America; or Spanish-speaking residents of Caribbean islands.

The term "Latin America" is used loosely to refer to all of the Americas south of the U.S. including countries such as Jamaica, Trinidad and Haiti. Just beginning to understand the Latin American market can become a history lesson in itself.

U.S. Hispanics are more intensive than the U.S. general market. The average U.S. Hispanic spends 20 percent more time online, with 25 percent more pages viewed. They're using the Internet more than 17 hours per week, and more than half that time is spent on sites written in Spanish. In fact, U.S. Hispanics now spend more time online than they do watching television.

Eighty-nine percent of the U.S. Hispanic online population searches the Internet. That's the highest ratio compared to all other worldwide regions.

The top 3 Internet penetrations in terms of the overall population: Argentina (26%), Mexico (18%) and Brazil (17%). (Compared to 15% of Latin Americans as a whole).

An average Internet penetration of 15 percent is not something that by itself will turn any heads in the online marketing industry. But further research turns up some enticing results. According to report by comScore Networks, while Latinos make up just 7 percent of the total search market worldwide, but they are posting double-digit increases in terms of growth, with a 16 percent increase from the previous year. Latinos represent over 45 million unique visitors (ranked #2 in the entire world), and are predicted to grow at even higher rates for 2007.

As for the search portals, the major players have already settled in the region: Google set up shop in Argentina, yet it is the most dominant search engine by far, with a whopping 72 percent of the total page views per share in the region. Yahoo is second with 17 percent of total page views, MSN is third with two percent, and local search market players make up the final nine percent.

What is understood is that this market appreciates and responds to sites that have made the effort to reach them on their own terms. It is a market that is just starting to realize its potential, and search marketers reaching out to the Latino market today may find themselves to be the major players in a thriving and dominant market for years to come.

A new publication from Google, Inc. is directed towards its Spanish-speaking supporters

Google has been one of the better search engines to translate its products into other languages. But there was never a Spanish-language publication involved in its print ads. That has all changed with the publication Hoy.

Hoy's size and scope are well suited to the kind of breakthrough it is accomplishing here; according to a company statement, the daily newspaper will be part of the Chicago Tribune Media Group and the Los Angeles Times Media Group, with approximately 1.4 million being distributed each week.

It only makes sense since 72 percent of the Spanish speaking market already uses Google, compared to just 17 percent using Yahoo's search engine. Fifty-one percent of U.S. Latino adults view the Web in Spanish.

If all goes according to the plan, advertisers who already trust Google will embrace this means of contacting the Latino population. Google will split the ad revenue with Hoy, which could then grow even bigger. This could help print advertising survive the technological age.

This is a good public relations move for Google. The company's environmental efforts are all good and well, but with around 600 English-language newspapers involved in the print ads program, it might have looked odd had a Spanish-language entity not been involved.

Coupled with Google's agreement with Univision, the largest Spanish-language media company in the United States, the company could see record profits.

Javier Saralegui, Univision executive, suggested that this is an opportunity for consumer companies not yet targeting Latino online to develop Websites and advertising in Spanish.

Prince William County is dealing with the hot topic of illegal immigration.

wjla.com
posted 12:41 pm Fri December 14, 2007 - Woodbridge, Va.

County leaders, including the county board of supervisors, were questioned Friday about a resolution that will cut off county services to illegal immigrants. So far, state leaders are showing concern that the resolution could violate the civil rights of thousands of residents.

In October, county officials passed the resolution due to concerns about the impact illegal immigrants have on crime and the economy.

Police enforcement on illegal immigrants has been stepped up, and starting in January, officers will check the immigration status of those charged with or convicted of a crime. Those who apply for a business license must also prove they are legal residents.

However, because of the resolution, both legal and illegal immigrants are leaving the country.

The U.S. Civil Rights Commission will be taking public comment on the issue through the end of the year.

Top advertisers in 2007

Hispanic Business Magazine's December issue lists the top 100 Hispanic advertisers.

Here is the top 15:

1. BROADCASTING MEDIA PARTNERS INC -- $210,018,960
2. PROCTER & GAMBLE CO -- $173,541,141
3. LEXICON MARKETING CORP -- $146,294,697
4. AT&T INC -- $107,557,434
5. GENERAL MOTORS CORP -- $102,041,403
6. US GOVERNMENT -- $98,607,400
7. MCDONALDS CORP -- $94,198,981
8. SEARS HOLDINGS CORP -- $86,206,062
9. FORD MOTOR CO -- $85,722,610
10. JOHNSON & JOHNSON -- $82,264,852
11. VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS INC -- $82,099,469
12. TOYOTA MOTOR CORP -- $81,813,323
13. CERBERUS CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LP -- $67,120,211
14. WALT DISNEY CO -- $64,640,205
15. WAL-MART STORES INC -- $64,154,285

Latinos Tell How They Made it to College

One Latina got most of her information about college on her own, by searching the Internet. Another Latino student learned about the college application process through participation in Advancement Via Individual Determination, or AVID, a college-prep program. The personal stories of how those two students and some other Latino youths made it to college are included in a report, "Voces (Voices): A Profile of Today's Latino College Students," released by Excelencia in Education, a Washington-based nonprofit organization.

The report notes that despite increases in enrollment in higher education for Latinos, only 25 percent of college-age Latinos (ages 18 to 24) are enrolled in college, compared with about 42 percent of college-age whites, 32 percent of blacks, and 60 percent of Asians and Pacific Islanders. It says Latinos are as likely as all undergraduates to receive some form of aid to pay for college but they received the lowest average financial aid award of any racial/ethnic group. The average total aid award in the 2003-04 school year for all undergraduates was $6,890. Latinos received an average of $6,250, according to the report.

By the way, the report also notes that 98 percent of Latino students in 2003-04 were either U.S. citizens (86 percent) or legal residents (12 percent). Thus it doesn't look as if many undocumented Latinos are enrolled in college or getting a very large share of college aid. (See my post, "There's No 'DREAM Act,' But College Aid is Available.")

I make mention of the report here because I think it might be useful to teachers or high school guidance counselors who work with English-language learners to read how a number of Latino students got information about how to go to college.

Posted by Mary Ann Zehr on December 10, 2007 1:08 PM

http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/learning-the-language/20...ow_they_made_it.html

Learning the Language

Mary Ann Zehr is an assistant editor at Education Week. She has written about the schooling of English-language learners for more than seven years and understands through her own experience of studying Spanish that it takes a long time to learn another language well. Her blog will tackle difficult policy questions, explore learning innovations, and share stories about different cultural groups on her beat.
December 14, 2007
Overage and Lacking Credits in the Big Apple
If an English-language learner is moving into young adulthood and is short of a lot of credits to graduate from high school, he or she may decide to attend schools operated by the Office of Multiple Pathways to Graduation run by the New York City Department of Education, which aims to reach students at risk of dropping out.

Advocates for Children of New York, a local nonprofit organization, put out a policy brief this week that contends many of those alternative schools are violating state law because they aren't offering the minimum of services required for ELLs. The policy brief says, for instance, that 59 percent of the city's 22 full-time evening programs for students who have been in high school for four years and are older than 17 1/2 don't provide language services to ELLs that are required by state law.

The policy paper notes that during the 2005-2006 school year, the four-year graduation rate for ELL high school students in New York City was 26.2 percent. It says that 30 percent of ELLs in the class of 2006 dropped out. Practically any educator, I think, would call that graduation rate for ELLs pitiful.

I was struck by how the demographics for ELLs in New York City differ from those of ELLs in Los Angeles. Over half of New York City's 139,800 ELLs were born outside of the United States, according to the policy brief. Officials from the Los Angeles Unified School District recently told me that only 22 percent of ELLs in their school system were born outside of the United States.

So when comparing student achievement statistics among school districts, it's important to remember that, on average, the academic preparation and exposure to English for ELLs can differ greatly between school districts"”even between large urban school districts like New York City and Los Angeles.

Posted by Mary Ann Zehr at 12:48 PM
http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/learning-the-language/

U.S. Border Patrol agents have battled rock-throwing attackers by launching pepper spray and tear gas into Mexican border neighborhoods, according to witnesses, Mexican authorities and human rights groups. Here, Alfredo Aceves, 24, holds a tear gas canister that he says landed in his carpenter shop two weeks ago.

Tijuana enclave feels sting of escalating border strife

By Richard Marosi, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
December 14, 2007

TIJUANA -- In an escalation of clashes between U.S. Border Patrol agents and rock-throwing smugglers, agents have begun launching pepper spray and tear gas into densely populated Mexican border neighborhoods, according to witnesses, Mexican authorities and human rights groups.

The more aggressive approach reflects the tense climate in this city's most notorious smuggling neighborhood, Colonia Libertad, where U.S. agents say they have had to counter human traffickers' increasingly aggressive tactics by ramping up their own use of force.



Photo Gallery
Border dispute



Map

Agents have used pepper spray in the past, but usually aimed directly at the smugglers. The new tactics, which saturate large areas, have forced dozens of temporary evacuations and sent some residents to hospitals, according to witnesses.

Border Patrol officials say tear gas and pepper spray rarely cause serious injury or damage. They say that they use them against assailants trying to divert attention from border crossers by pelting agents, and that residents are not targeted.

Since Oct. 1, the Border Patrol has counted 90 assaults against agents in the San Diego area, five times as many as during the same period a year ago. Agents have suffered serious head injuries, officials say.

The acting Mexican consul general in San Diego, Ricardo Pineda, has met with Border Patrol officials to protest the aggressive use of tear gas and pepper spray, said Alberto Lozano, the consular spokesman.

"We told them the Mexican government cannot tolerate having Mexican nationals hit with these kind of devices on Mexican soil by U.S. authorities, regardless of the reason," Lozano said.

Residents of the area's hillside shanties and muddy streets say the Border Patrol's measures neglect their welfare. Some agents, they say, show compassion, even apologizing for the tactics. But others are defiant and continue saturating areas despite their pleas.

"I said to the agent, 'Put yourself in my place. I have two children,' " said Robis Guadalupe Argumeo, who added that her home has been gassed three times since August, most recently after a verbal exchange with an agent Saturday. "He said, 'I'm the policeman of the world. No one can touch me.' "

The agent, Argumeo said, was peering over the border fence pointing his pepper-spray launcher at her house. She said that she told him, "But this isn't Iraq, this is Mexico" but that he continued firing into the neighborhood.

The clashes are taking place east of the San Ysidro port of entry along a two-mile stretch of border where Colonia Libertad, one of Tijuana's most densely populated neighborhoods, pushes up against the frontier.

This was once a heavily trampled immigrant-smuggling corridor where hundreds crossed nightly, but trafficking slowed considerably a decade ago when U.S. authorities erected two layers of fencing.

In recent months, however, illegal crossings and assaults have increased dramatically, agents say. Apprehensions of illegal immigrants are up 7% this year in the San Diego area, the only area on the Southwest border that showed an increase from last year.

The situation has deteriorated to the point that authorities are considering whether to add barbed wire to fencing along certain areas bordering Colonia Libertad, an option avoided in the past because of the negative symbolism.

Agents say smugglers -- by wearing cardboard shields or heavy jackets to deflect the projectiles -- long ago adapted to the original tactic of shooting pepper ***** directly at them. The agents say the pepper *****, which explode on impact, don't seem to affect some of the hardened smugglers.

Using larger quantities of pepper spray and tear gas is more likely to disrupt their operations and de-escalate violence, agents say.

Smugglers throw rocks and other objects as one way to give immigrants time to scale the fences and disappear. Agents say the attacks are highly coordinated.

Two years ago an agent fatally shot a rock thrower in Colonia Libertad, prompting protests from the Mexican government. Border Patrol officials say using nonlethal weapons is the best way to avoid deadly outcomes.

"It's either that or you allow those people to assault our agents at an astronomical level and somebody gets killed," said Agent Richard Smith, a Border Patrol spokesman. "The alien-and drug-smuggling organizations should be ashamed for using innocent people as shields. It just goes to show they prioritize profit over human safety."

Some Mexican residents sympathize with the U.S. agents. Carmen Lopez, 63, scolds smugglers who climb onto her tar-paper roof to get a better view of Border Patrol activity. "The smugglers tell me, 'We're just trying to make a living like anyone else,' " she said.

But a smuggler pelted her for complaining, and she now stays inside. If anyone's to blame, she said, it's the Tijuana police, who should crack down; until then the Border Patrol's tactics are justified.

"How can they be at fault? They have a right to defend themselves," Lopez said.

Many others disagree.

In the last few weeks, there have been at least six incidents of Border Patrol agents throwing or shooting pepper spray or tear gas into the area, forcing the temporary evacuations of dozens of people, according to witnesses and others. After a canister -- possibly of pepper spray, possibly of tear gas -- exploded outside her home in late November, Marisela Arias, 19, who is four months pregnant, said she struggled to breathe and fainted.

Her husband, Miguel Arias, 23, took her to the hospital, where he vomited, he said. Their extended family of more than eight left the house until the smoke cleared, he said.

Aberto Rojas, 37, who lives a few blocks from the Arias' home, said he had a similar encounter with the Border Patrol the next day. Agents had targeted a smuggler who was hiding behind a van near Rojas' property. The canister they fired in the smuggler's direction skipped on a parked car and bounced into Rojas' car repair shop, where the gas sent him and his brother scrambling for cover, Rojas said.

Up the hill on the same day, 15-year-old Juanita Gonza*** was washing dishes when several devices exploded on her patio, sending spray and smoke through the open window, she said. Gonza*** said she fled with her baby brothers, joining several other families rushing to evacuate on the block.

"My face was burning," said Gonza***, who had to be helped out of the house because she was having trouble breathing. "I felt like I was drowning."

Argumeo, the woman whose home has been gassed three times, said that after one incident, her 12-year-old son had nosebleeds for a week. Her neighbor, Ramiro Lopez, said an errant explosive shattered his car window before exploding.

The car is the least of his worries, he said. "Something has to be done -- more than anything, for the children."

richard.marosi@latimes.com

Mexico boycott over Republican immigration policies

By Jeremy Schwartz | Friday, December 14, 2007, 01:05 PM

Mexico's foremost expert on immigration is calling on Mexicans to do whatever they can to stop Republicans from winning the White House next year, including a boycott of companies that donate to Republican candidates.

Jorge Bustamante, the United Nations' Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants and a sociology professor at the University of Notre Dame, this week called Republican Party policies on immigration "immoral."

Writing in the Mexico City daily Reforma, Bustamante said the Republican candidates share a in immigration stance that "lacks even the most minimum recognition of the demand for the Mexican migrant labor."

He called on Mexicans to harness "the real power we have as consumers" to boycott big companies that do business in Mexico and fund Republican candidacies. Bustamante didn't name any particular companies, but said "that is public information available to anyone with basic understanding of how to navigate the Internet."

Frida: Now found on your shoes and in your tequila

By Jeremy Schwartz | Tuesday, December 11, 2007, 09:20 AM

The commercialization of Frida Kahlo is now complete: You can wear the works of the iconic Mexican painter on your shoes, as Converse has released a Frida Kahlo line of its Chuck Taylors. There are three styles to choose from, "The Two Fridas," "Feet for Those I Love," and simply, "Frida Kahlo!" The shoes, featuring the painter's image, signature and snippets of her more famous paintings, are available throughout Mexico and are going for about $80 a pop on Mexico City's trendiest avenue.

The cult of Frida has reached so far that the Mexican media has coined a term for it: Fridamania. And lest you think sneakers are the only mass consumer item you can buy with Frida's visage, you can also buy Frida Kahlo tequila, courtesy of Venezuelan businessman Carlos Dorado, who has bought a 51 percent share in the Frida Kahlo Corporation. The Corporation, set up along with Frida's niece, controls the rights to Frida's image and Dorado is also reportedly planning a Frida clothing line and, if you can believe it, a musical group called "The Daughters of Frida."

The mass marketing of Frida has generated a number of critics in her homeland, who point out that the leftist painter (her casket was covered with a Communist Party flag) would have likely been revolted by the idea of her face and paintings being used to rake in corporate profits. "In this instant she must be turning in her grave (and not because of the pain in her spinal column)" wrote columnist Fernando Rivera Calderon in the Mexico City daily La Cronica.

A day without Wal-Mart in Mexico

By Jeremy Schwartz | Monday, December 3, 2007, 03:18 PM

The anti-Wal-Mart movement is fixture in the U.S., but relatively new to Mexico, where the giant retailer has 997 stores. There have been a few sporadic protests at specific stores, including a Wal-Mart near the pyramids of Teotihuacan and in the picturesque lakeside village of Patzcuaro.

But this weekend, a group of Mexican and U.S. organizations, including the AFL-CIO, kicked off what they hope will be a sustained protest of Wal-Mart labor practices in Mexico, as a group of workers fights to form a union. It began at a store in southern Mexico City on Sunday with a so-called "Day Without Wal-Mart," which featured protesters handing out leaflets urging shoppers not patronize Wal-Mart and a short rally.

The organizers decried Wal-Mart's refusal to enter into collective bargaining with its workers or pay overtime wages. Wal-Mart in Mexico responded, according to Bloomberg, with a fact sheet boasting that it's lowest salary is 18 percent higher than minimum wage.

Ice skating in the Zocalo

By Jeremy Schwartz | Monday, December 3, 2007, 12:43 PM

The world's largest ice skating rink is now located ... in Mexico City? The wondrous thing is smack dab in the middle of the Zocalo, Mexico City's premiere plaza, where it bakes under a merciless autumn sun and captivates this city as it plunges into the Christmas season.

Tens of thousands of Mexicans have made the pilgrimage to the massive rink since it opened over the weekend, many waiting hours in line to strap on a pair of skates for the first time in their lives.

More than 1,500 pairs of skates have been trucked in (you could probably count the number of Mexico City residents who own their own skates on your fingers and toes) and 600 instructors are on hand to help the beginners with their first tentative steps.

Sunday, the first day of public skating, featured spills aplenty. Here's how the El Universal newspaper described the scene: "The fear almost immobilized some, who were barely able to make it around the rink, going step by step like babies learning how to walk."

The rink was inaugurated Saturday night and I have never seen the Zocalo more packed, even during the mega-rallies of Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador of 2006. But despite the fascination with the rink, many Mexicans question the wisdom of building it, given the high cost (about $1.5 million). The city is not exactly swimming in cash (it's scrambling to find enough money to build a new municipal dump), and according to one newspaper poll, 48 percent of city residents oppose it.

But Mayor Marcelo Ebrard has never been one to shy away from splashy displays of governmental largesse. To great fanfare, last summer he built a series of urban beaches (mostly tons of sand around portable pools) that were ridiculed by the city's wealthy set, but embraced by the masses of people who can't afford weekend jaunts to Acapulco.

The new ice rink, the mayor said earlier in the week, will make Mexico City residents "feel like we are in Paris or New York, but prettier."

Headlines differ on Spanish-language debate; no "alien" talk in Miami

By Eunice Moscoso | Monday, December 10, 2007, 02:14 PM

The Spanish language GOP presidential debate Sunday night at the University of Miami inspired very different headlines from two large wire services. Check it out:

The Associated Press: "GOP Hopefuls Temper Anti-Immigrant Talk."

Reuters: "Republicans Talk Tough Against Illegal Immigration."

For what it's worth, the Miami Herald seemed to agree with AP with the headline, "A Softer Tone In Bilingual Debate," but the New York Times was more like Reuters, saying, "Republican Candidates Firm on Immigration."

Another interesting note on the unusual debate "” none of the GOP presidential candidates used the term "illegal alien" during the 90-minute exchange which was broadcast by Univision to a Spanish-speaking audience.

Hispanics and the 2008 Election: A Swing Vote
Paul Taylor and Richard Fry, Pew Hispanic Center

After spending the first part of this decade loosening their historic ties to the Democratic Party, Hispanic voters have reversed course in the past year, a new nationwide survey of Latinos by the Pew Hispanic Center has found.

Some 57% of Hispanic registered voters now call themselves Democrats or say they lean to the Democratic Party, while just 23% align with the Republican Party – meaning there is now a 34 percentage point gap in partisan affiliation among Latinos. In July, 2006, the same gap was just 21 percentage points – whereas back in 1999, it had been 33 percentage points.

The new survey finds that a plurality of Hispanics view the Democratic Party rather than the Republican Party as the one that shows more concern for Latinos and does a better job on the issue of illegal immigration (although a substantial minority of Latinos see no difference between the parties on these matters). Also, many more Latinos say the policies of the Bush Administration have been harmful to Latinos than say they have been helpful.

Hispanics are the nation's largest and fastest growing minority group; at 46 million strong, they make up about 15% of the U.S. population. Their electoral clout continues to be undercut, however, by the fact that many are ineligible to vote, either because they are not citizens or not yet 18 years old. In 2008, Latinos will comprise about 9% of the eligible electorate nationwide. If past turnout trends persist, they will make up only about 6.5% of those who actually turn out to vote next November.

But despite these modest numbers, Hispanics loom as a potential "swing vote" in next year's presidential race. That's because they are strategically located on the 2008 Electoral College map. Hispanics constitute a sizable share of the electorate in four of the six states that President Bush carried by margins of five percentage points or fewer in 2004 –New Mexico (where Hispanics make up 37% of state's eligible electorate); Florida (14%); Nevada (12%) and Colorado (12%). All four are expected to be closely contested once again in 2008.

The analysis of Hispanic partisan affiliation and political attitudes is based on the new 2007 National Survey of Latinos. The survey was conducted by telephone from Oct 3 through Nov 9, 2007 among a randomly selected, nationally representative sample of 2,003 Hispanics, of whom 843 are registered voters. The state electoral analysis uses recent Census surveys.

In addition to the state-by-state demographic and electoral data, an Appendix includes the most recent information on Hispanics by congressional district.


Other Resources
Roberto Suro, Richard Fry and Jeffrey Passel. Hispanics and the 2004 Election: Population, Electorate and Voters, June 27, 2005. Washington, DC: Pew Hispanic Center.

Louis DeSipio. 2006. "Latino Civic and Political Participation," in Hispanics and the Future of America, edited by Marta Tienda and Faith Mitchell. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.

Pew Hispanic Center/Kaiser Family Foundation. July 2004. Pew Hispanic Center/Kaiser Family Foundation 2004 National Survey Of Latinos: Politics and Civic Participation. Washington, DC: Pew Hispanic Center.