So word on the street is that Senator Marco Rubio is joining other Republicans’ mad rush to pander to the Latino vote and do some damage control in anticipation of the November elections. It seems that Republicans want to find a way to undo the disastrous impact that Mitt Romney’s anti-immigrant rhetoric has had in alienating Latino voters. Rumor is that by introducing a red herring version of the DREAM Act, Republicans could capitalize on immigrant rights activists’ frustrations with Democrats’ failure to pass some form of immigration reform. Apparently the legislation would aim to provide some form of relief to undocumented youth only if they serve in the military but unlike previous versions, it would not provide a pathway to citizenship. As New America Media argues, it would be a sort of ‘Don’t Ask Don’t Tell’, presenting a dilemma for the immigrant rights community:

Immigrant rights advocates are now taking the temperature of the political landscape to determine what the bill’s chances are of gaining traction in Congress. They will have to decide whether to back the bill, as what could be the only viable option to improve the legal status of undocumented students here (that is, if it succeeds in gaining bipartisan support); or to hold out for the original version of the bill that would offer a path to citizenship and real equality (even if it has lost its momentum).

Like LGBT activists in 1993, immigrant rights advocates today are facing a Catch-22, where taking a step toward equality simultaneously would cement their status as “second-class citizens.”

I don’t believe for a minute that Republicans are serious about moving their own bill on providing some form of relief to undocumented youth. If they were serious about achieving serious reform, they would have voted for the 2010 version the DREAM Act to begin with. I also don’t believe for a minute that Rubio would be able to rally other Republicans to support this version of a DREAM Act “lite”, as some are calling it. The previous versions that were voted on last time were ALREADY versions that were watered down supposedly to attract Republican votes, and some had Republican support at some point but when it came time to vote on them, all that “Republican support” faded into thin air. We can debate about the reasons why that support eroded but one seems to be an undeniable trend: many Republicans will continue to oppose it because they will never be able to get past their party’s own bigotry and xenophobia. Frankly, hanging your hat on Republican political will seems as disingenuous as hanging your hat on Democratic political will alone.

Having said that, I say let’s call Marco Rubio’s and the rest of the Republicans’ bluff BUT let’s expose them at each step of the way for the predictable hateful rhetoric their party is bound to hurl at immigrants. I hate to say this, but I’d put my money on the Republicans filibustering the bill, concocting some racist conspiracy theory like how this is a secret ploy to “infiltrate” the U.S. military or some other harebrained idea. Let’s also not give Marco Rubio a pass for opting for this latest even-more-watered-down version of a DREAM Act, if it can even be called that. It has been very clear that he has been turning his back on his own Latino community for quite some time now and has sold his soul to the Tea Party all in the name of his own policital ambitions:

So let’s not pretend that this is some grand gesture on Rubio’s part. Yes, it’ll be interesting to see what his bill will actually say. Unfortunately for Rubio, his Republicans colleagues will probably not be able to help themselves in succumbing to the bigoted far-right wing of their party.

So yeah let’s call their bluff and let them vote on the bill and put them on the record. Put right-wingers in all their bigoted glory for everyone to see as they trip over themselves to stop even this bill. As long as it doesn’t hurt other undocumented people’s chances of a pathway to legalization, let’s make Republicans put their money where their mouth is. Let’s see them squirm. What have we got to lose?

Rosa Gudiel's case on her fight against Bank of America to defend her home in Los Angeles was picked up by national media thanks in large part to Telemundo 52 breaking the story. Investigative reporters such as Vicky Gutierrez, now terminated, were early on the scene. Click on the screen shot to access MSNBC's Kari Huus' report.

Telemundo 52 has been showing a disturbing trend of silencing reporting on issues that the local community cares about. Last year Telemundo 52 cancelled “En Contexto” with Ruben Luengas, a news magazine style show that aired weeknights at 11:00PM. It was a top-rated show that increased ratings and market share for Telemundo by showcasing in-depth investigative reporting on critical issues of interest to the communities of Southern California. Here’s a clip:

The show, labeled as the ‘Democracy Now!‘ of the Latino community by some, proved itself to be a runaway success to the network because it set itelf apart from the rest of the local late night news programming in Spanish. Ruben Luengas is still with Telemundo but has been relegated to a curtailed role in the network.

Telemundo 52 has now silenced more voices that have a track record of reporting important community issues. After working 10 years at Telemundo, award-winning Vicky Gutierrez was recently terminated without any explanation, along with four other reporters. In 2009, Vicky Gutierrez received a National Ethnic Media Award for her “Farm Kids” story. Via New America Media:

We came across this little girl who was pregnant, working in the fields, who was denied a break, she was denied water and she ended up at the hospital,” says Gutierrez. “When she felt ill in the field where she was working, they didn’t let her family take her to the hospital, or call 911, because they knew that they would be in trouble because she was underage.”

In interviews with current farm workers, including one boy who appears to be underage, “Farm Kids” probes the case of Maria Isabel in the context of the continued use of underage workers in California’s agricultural fields. “Unfortunately, what we saw in this story is still happening right now in the fields of the whole country, not only California,” said Gutierrez. “There are lots of kids, underage minors, who are not only working, but are being abused.”

The [Telemundo report on the] case of Maria Isabel sparked a crackdown on farm labor contractors across California for failing to provide adequate shade and water for farm workers, and for employing underage workers. In April 2009, three former operators of Merced Farm Labor were charged with involuntary manslaughter in Maria Isabel’s death.”

This is but one of the many examples of the stories of interest that Vicky Gutierrez, Ruben Luengas, and other key reporters at Telemundo highlighted in the community that drove record ratings in key demographics to the network.

Yet, it would appear that new out-of-state management recently brought in to manage Telemundo in Southern California insists that the local community doesn’t care about stories like the “Farm Kids” story or other similar in-depth style of reporting. Is this a case of out-of-touch management views driving that network’s viewership into a ditch? We certainly hope not.

Update: sign this petition to tell NBCUniversal, owner of Telemundo 52, to reinstate investigative reporting!

Photo: New America Media. Reyna Wences' & Tania Unzueta's "I'm queer & I'm undocumented" and Rigo Padilla's "I'm undocumented" declarations sent powerful waves through Netroots Nation 2011.

Apply for a scholarship to attend Netroots Nation 2012 (click here). Netroots Nation 2012 will be taking place in Providence, Rhode Island, from June 7th-10th. The first round of selections will end on March 21st! (there are at a least a couple of rounds of selections).

Here’s my testimonial now up on the Democracy for America’s website:

“I’m queer and I’m undocumented.” Those were the most powerful words I have ever seen a Latino youth say in front of hundreds of people. What was most remarkable was that many in the crowd had never seen a group of Latino youth speak so bluntly about either their immigration status or their sexual orientation. The Latino youth that were up on stage making such bold statements were the recipients of the Freedom from Fear Award Rigo Padilla, Reyna Wences, and Tania Unzueta of Chicago’s Immigrant Youth Justice League. The crowd burst into applause and as a Latino and an immigrant rights activist, my heart just burst with pride. I can only compare the kind of elation that swept over me at that moment to the kind of feeling I felt when the massive immigrant rights marches first burst onto the national scene. The feeling was the same – a sense of powerful unity that broke down through the shadows that for so long we have been condemned to live under in our communities.

The place was the Netroots Nation conference of 2011 in Minneapolis, which I was able to attend for the first time thanks to a partnership between Democracy for America and the immigrant rights organization America’s Voice. I was the recipient of one of their scholarships, which funded my trip to attend the conference. As I attended the various panels during the convention, I ran into many online activists that I had only had the opportunity to talk with through twitter, through e-mail or through phone but never in person. It was actually at one of the panels that I met Rigo Padilla. This was before he received the award and little did I know that I would see him later up on stage in front of everyone. For this reason, during the ceremony I felt an even stronger connection to the people up on stage. I could identify with Rigo in ways that frankly I had not been able to identify with other progressive activists. Although the crowd at Netroots Nation is a progressive one, historically speaking diversity had ben lacking in years past. That is, until Democracy for America in partnership with America’s Voice stepped in.

There are hundreds of activists like me that have not yet made it to the Netroots Nation convention. It is imperative that more people of color participate, and that more people of all walks of life bring their voices and ideas to this massive meeting of progressive minds. I have seen firsthand the powerful effect that it can have on the progressive movement. Thanks to the scholarship I received, I was able to attend and even host a panel on how environmental issues affect Latinos, being that another one of my big passions besides immigration is environmental protection. My panel was titled “Beyond Environmental Justice” and afterwards I had people from big name progressive organizations coming up to me to hear more of what I had to say.

It was an incredible experience that I will never forget. I even got to meet and talk to some of the role models that I have from afar admired for a number of years such as Markos Moulitsas of Daily Kos and Congressman Luis Gutierrez. More importantly, I will never forget making so many friends; activists just like me. People like Rigo, Reyna, Tania, and others. I shared laughs, hugs, handshakes, and discussed strategy and exchanged experiences with many of my fellow progressive brothers and sisters. I can’t wait for this year’s Netroots Nation. I hope that you consider joining in this amazing convention too.

If you are Latino, Asian, or any other immigrant rights online progressive activist, be sure to apply for the scholarship so you can attend this year!

Read more on Rigo, Reyna, and Tania on this New America Media’s post.

Breakdown of polling results from The New York Times

More than half – 55 percent – think upper income Americans pay less than their fairshare of taxes. Only a quarter says higher income people pay the right amount in taxes.

When Americans talk about folks like me paying my fair share of taxes, it’s not because they envy the rich. It’s because they understand that when I get tax breaks I don’t need and the country can’t afford, it either adds to the deficit, or somebody else has to make up the difference – like a senior on a fixed income; or a student trying to get through school; or a family trying to make ends meet. That’s not right. Americans know it’s not right.

Vulture capitalism is the practice of opportunistically feeding off of the struggling middle class, prioritizing making profits for shareholders of big corporations over the creation of good jobs for working families.

The label has been used on Mitt Romney to describe his business practices of prioritizing making big profits for himself and his CEO friends ahead of actually creating good jobs. Here are a couple of analyses from Mike Papantanio discussing the issue with Ed Schultz and from Sam Seder on the Thom Hartman show:

Independently of how accurate the claims are that Mitt Romney is a ‘vulture capitalist’, his questionable business practices are only the tip of the iceberg. Vulture capitalism has been a growing symptom of corporate greed having destructive effects on our economy and the economies of other countries, consequently being also behind our ”immigration problems”.

First Lady Michelle Obama greets children during her visit to a school, Escuela Siete de Enero, in Mexico City, Mexico, April 14, 2010. (Official White House Photo by Samantha Appleton)

The book reveals friction on a number of issues between First Lady Michell Obama and former White House Chief of Staff Rham Emanuel, including immigration. Via The Huffington Post:

That revelation is one of the more explosive included in “The Obamas,” a new book by Jodi Kantor of The New York Times about the first few years of the Obama administration and the strains that it produced on the president’s marriage — strains that were ultimately overcome.

[...]

According to Kantor, in the lead-up to the 2010 midterm elections Emanuel and Michelle Obama were at odds over whether the president should give an address on the need for comprehensive immigration reform. The president wanted to do it. The chief of staff saw no point in pushing for legislation that had no chance of passage. The first lady, who had just been confronted by a second-grader in a Maryland elementary school whose mother didn’t have immigration papers, felt that ignoring the issue was fundamentally at odds with her husband’s own political story.

The Obamas won out. The president ended up writing portions of the speech himself but it ended poorly.

“His impassioned remarks faded almost as soon as he gave them,” writes Kantor. “The media and others were puzzled — why this, why now? … Obama became quietly furious at his team for not giving the address more support, for not delivering the one he had wanted in the first place or talking it up more in the press. The first lady fumed, too: she took it as more proof that her husband’s advisers were poorly serving him. … The speech incident confirmed her worst fears, and by that point, several aides said, Michelle was bluntly telling her husband that he needed a new team.”

The Huffington Post also has this interesting bit: apparently Hillary Clinton had also had confrontations with Rham Emanuel when she was a first lady herself:

“Michelle and Rahm Emanuel had almost no bond; their relationship was distant and awkward from the beginning. She had been skeptical of him when he was selected, and now he returned the favor; he was uneasy about first ladies in general, several aides close to him said, based on clashes with Hillary Clinton in the 1990s that became so severe that she had tried to fire him from her husband’s administration,” writes Kantor. “Now Emanuel was chief of staff, a position that almost never included an easy relationship with the first lady. They were the president’s two spouses, in a sense, one public and official and one private and informal.”

This seems to validate the criticisms that many immigrant rights activists across the country have been voicing for months now. The criticism being that whoever had been advising President Obama on immigration policy had been doing a poor job at it, evidenced by the wrong headed focus on escalation of deportations instead of more executive orders to provide administrative relief to immigrants. We have seen some shift on this but the jury is still out on whether new prosecutorial discretion rules (known as the “Morton Memo“) are even being followed by ICE, paricularly with DREAM Act eligible cases. However, the hope is that the President will continue to realize that he must exercise more of his executive powers to break the gridlock on much needed action to keep families together instead of deporting them. There are some encouraging signs, like the proposal just announced by the Obama administration for a new process allowing spouses and children of US citizens to file for visas while remaining in the country instead of forcing them to leave in order to do so. One thing is to propose and announce a new policy, of course, and another is the actual application of it … so we’ll be monitoring just how much change actually takes place.

Here’s the analysis of the immigration speech President Obama gave that the book references.

Here’s also what Project Economic Refugee wrote on the person that eventually replaced Rham Emanuel, Mr. William Daley.

Read more on the new ‘The Obamas’ book on MSNBC.

Update: so far I’ve read that the new proposed waiver would allow children and spouses of U.S. citizens stay in the country while they process their visas but what about PARENTS of U.S. citizens? Woud this new waiver also apply to parents? Does anyone know?

Update # 2: Also check out the video of First Lady’s remarks during her visit to Mexico City pointing out how Mexico is home to more U.S. citizens than any other country:

As we celebrate the beginning of 2012, I am reflecting on where we were last year in terms of the immigration debate here in the U.S.  Last year, Project Economic Refugee wished for a radical change in the way we framed our national conversation on immigration, particularly in light of the DREAM Act being rejected back then in the U.S. Senate by a measly five votes. We’ve seen some progress on humanizing our debate, in large part because of the tireless energy that immigrant rights activists across the nation continue to dedicate towards this effort.

The other promising factor that we have seen is the rise of the Occupy Wall Street movement. We saw some promising signs coming from the Occupy movement that could accelerate a re-think of how we tackle our immigration problems. That was certainly the premise of the Voto Latino piece I wrote for The Huffington Post. The premise being that we must start recognizing that the corporate greed of the 1% is at the root of the humanitarian crisis we currently have at our border with Mexico.

Prior to the rise of the Occupy Wall Street movement most people simply did not trace back our broken state of affairs to the root cause of the problem: corporate greed. Part of the reason is that we simply lacked the language to communicate these connections within larger and easy-to-understand frames. The Occupy Wall Street movement and its city-by-city and country-by-country incarnations gave us a simple but powerful meta-brand to build upon. Occupy was everywhere, including Mexico City, which followed a rich tradition of uprisings against poverty for Mexican people in particular. It gave us the “we are the 99%” call to end our rampant social inequalities. As the movement evolves beyond occupied space, it is critical that activists seize on the opportunity to integrate more immigration issues into the fabric of Occupy Wall Street.

From the beginning, immigrant rights activists have been involved in the Occupy movement and have injected into it much needed credibility. In the early days of the occupations that sprouted across American cities, the encampments were not seen as having the necessary level of organization for the general public to take them seriously. It was not until the NYPD launched violent crackdowns on the protesters that the traditional media started to pay attention. Thereafter, it was not until more established groups like labor unions, immigrant rights groups, and others started to get involved in the Occupy rallies that the movement boosted its credibility as a force to reckon with.

View pictures from the Occupy ICE event in Los Angeles by clicking on this picture.

These other more organized groups grew and diversified the face of the Occupiers. No longer were the Occupiers primarily young and white. These groups also brought along with them their supporters, which in turn made the Occupy movement more relatable to a wider and multi-lingual audience. Thus the movement started to include more people of color of all ages and walks of life. No longer was the face of the Occupier just a rebellious white youth wearing a scary mask. The faces became more personable: average working moms, unemployed  husbands, families facing foreclosure, etc. The movement then became truly viral and open sourced.

There is certainly no shortage of immediate targets that tie right into the message of anti-corporate greed that have an immigration angle. For example, just recently Occupy Birmingham carried out an action against a detention center for immigrants. Occupy Birmingham understood that, outside of immigrant rights circles, it is not as widely known that the prison industrial complex is deliberately profiting from putting immigrants in detention centers for months on end. In essence, these detention centers are the work of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), a powerful lobby comprised of transnational corporations and powerful right-wing politicians. This is just but one example of many opportunities to work together against the transnational exploitation of workers.

As I have said it before, we need to grow together beyond just immigrant rights marches, beyond just tents, and beyond just General Assemblies. We need to advocate for better jobs here in the U.S. and everywhere else, regardless of creed, color, sexual orientation, or immigration status. The greed of the 1% has been turning many of us into economic refugees for quite some time now. Some just happen to be undocumented.

Photo by Peter Bennett of GreenStockPhotos.com

Latino groups applaud the Obama Administration’s important new standard to control and curb mercury and other toxic air pollution from power plants.

December 21, 2011 (WASHINGTON): EPA announced the adoption of historic safeguards against mercury and other toxic air pollution which will help to protect our children from increased risk of brain damage, cerebral palsy and other neuro-developmental problems. The Mercury and Air Toxics standard, or MATR is a major new measure to protect kids and families from mercury, toxics and other pollution from power plants.

 
These new health safeguards will reduce mercury emissions from power plants up to 90 percent, and vastly reduce levels of the toxic soup of other emissions that also lead to numerous health problems. Among the most dangerous of these pollutants is mercury, a neurotoxin that damages the developing brains and nervous systems of fetuses and young children. Mercury exposure can lead to delayed developmental milestones, delayed speech and other language problems, reduced IQ, problems with motor skills, and a laundry list of other health issues.
This rule protects our health while also creating thousands of jobs from the manufacturing, engineering, installation and maintenance of pollution controls to meet these standards, potentially including 46,000 short-term construction jobs and 8,000 long-term utility jobs.

 
This rule and these cost-savings are especially important to the Latino community because according to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), Latino children have higher levels of mercury in their bodies compared with non-Hispanic white children. With 39 percent of Latinos living within 30 miles of a power plant, emissions controls are a critically needed and welcome safeguard.

Numerous Latino groups nationwide have joined together to thank the Obama administration for taking this important step towards protecting communities nationwide. Several signers to the letter remarked on the importance of this action:
Rafael Fantauzzi, President of the National Puerto Rican Coalition, Inc. (NPRC) and Chair of the National Latino Coalition on Climate Change (NLCCC) said:

 
“Today President Obama has taken an important step towards ensuring a safer, healthier future for our children by announcing a new strong standard for mercury and air toxics. NLCCC member organizations represent many Latino families who live near power plants that spew dangerous toxics into the air we breathe. Mercury is one of the leading causes of preventable birth defects in children like brain damage, cerebral palsy and other developmental problems. We are calling on our leaders in Congress to let this important protection stay in place to protect our children.”

 
Brent Wilkes, Executive Director of the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) added:

 
“We support the new mercury and toxic air pollution rule announced today because it means that the health of our communities and families everywhere across the U.S. will face decreased risks for serious diseases associated with these pollutants. One of the most harmful effects of mercury pollution are birth defects and other developmental issues and with 39 percent of Latinos living near a power plant, we could not be happier to have this important new protection in place. The increased health costs and other expenses associated with these pollutants is also too heavy a burden to ask future generations to bear. These safeguards should be implemented immediately and without question by Congress.”

 
Roberto Carmona of Voces Verdes applauded the rule, adding:

 
“Voces Verdes applauds the Obama Administration’s important new standard to control and curb mercury and other toxic air pollution from power plants. This historic rule will benefit our nation as a whole and Latino families everywhere preventing the harmful effects of these pollutants, such as respiratory diseases, developmental problems and heart attacks in our communities. This rule protects our health while also creating thousands of jobs from the manufacturing, engineering, installation and maintenance of pollution controls to meet these standards, potentially including 46,000 short-term construction jobs and 8,000 long-term utility jobs. This is an important move to protect the public health while ensuring a brighter future for our communities.”

 
Other signers to the letter include:

 
Dr. Elena Rios, National Hispanic Medical Association; Mark Magana, National Latino Coalition on Climate Change, Rafael Fantauzzi, National Puerto Rican Coalition; Mildred Real, Common Ground for Conservation – America Verde; Juan Parras, Texas Environmental Justice Advocacy Services (TEJAS); Antonio Gonzalez, William C. Velasquez Institute; Raquelle Seda, Latino Family Services; Irma Munoz, Mujeres de La Tierra; Luis Olmedo, Centro Cívico del Valle; Refugio Mata, Project Economic Refugee.
Read the letter at Voces Verdes.

For more background on this, read A Long Awaited Victory for Children, Families, and Our Future on The Huffington Post by Adrianna Quintero, Director of Voces Verdes, La Onda Verde of NRDC. Also on the Los Angeles Times: EPA issues strong limits on mercury emissions from smokestacks.

Check out the Inequality Dragon in this graph:

Corporate profits have not only recovered their post-recession highs, they’ve surpassed it. Yet workers' wages are reaching new lows.

If you recall, the data that was presented in this graph illustrated how corporate profits are reaching record highs while workers’ compensations (paychecks) are reaching new lows. Via the Christian Science Monitor:

As you can see, corporate profits have not only recovered their post-recession highs, they’ve surpassed it. And compensation as a share of the economy is far lower. You can also compare how different these patterns look compared to last recession in 2001, when the income shifts were not nearly so sharp.

It’s truly a picture of two very different economies, one for those who depend on their paychecks and one for those who depend on their portfolios.

Here’s the original graph that was released by the Bureau of Economic Analysis before the doodles that revealed the now famous ‘Inequality Dragon’ that broke down the compensation vs. corporate profits per Gross Domestic Product (GDP):

This would be funny except this is NOT a fairy tale. This is one real dragon that does exist and needs to be slayed or it will eat us all.

Update: here’s the runner-up graph. It breaks down the “We’re Broke” lie.

The 1%- Wall Street banks, big corporations, and the super wealthy would rather see us divided, fighting among each other. Occupy ICE presented a united front against corporate exploitation of workers.

A movement that began primarily as a protest against corporate greed and corruption has become a nationwide phenomenon that has sprouted hundreds of groups in California alone, according to a new study released [...]. The latest incarnation debuted in downtown Los Angeles [...] as “Occupy ICE”… -CBS Los Angeles.

[...] the 1% profits from the exploitation of workers, immigrant or otherwise. But we, the 99%, are not going to be fooled anymore. We know that ICE targeting hard working immigrant families is a distraction. When we, the 99%, stand up for all hard working families, everyone benefits.