April 28, 2009
Greetings!
WORKERS AND IMMIGRANTS
WILL MARCH ON MAY DAY
Yes, workers and immigrants will march again throughout the U.S. on MAY DAY, May 1st. This is known as the International Workers' Day, but little celebrated in the U.S., at least until the great diversity of immigrants took to the streets in 2006 to advocate oppostion to the anti-immigrant legislation HR4437, and subsequent years to advocate for fair and humane immigration reform. This budding movement of workers and families has resulted in reviving this important and historic date, recognized internationally in memory of the struggle for the eight-hour day more than one hundred years ago in this country. Ironically, it was immigrant workers of European origin who led the fight for reducing the work-day, establishing unions, and fighting to improve working and living conditions of the laboring classes.
It is in this same spirit that immigrant and native-born workers march today to demand a stop to ICE raids, the forced separation of families and their deportation; legalization for all those currently undocumented in the U.S.; absolutely no new bracero-type programs, which merely constitute modern-day indentured servitude; approval of the Employee Free Choice Act, which will facilitate the right of all workers to form their free associations - unions - in their work-place with virtually little intimidation; and, ultimately, a fair and humane immigration reform of our current system, policies, and practices. Today, working communities are facing incredibly unsettling problems of unemployment, home foreclosures, declining wages, consumer debt, increased tuition for education, loss of or complete absence of healthcare, and a dimming economic future. These are challenging times.
Bert Corona used to say that we don't have far to fall when we have already been pushed off the bed and are lying on the floor. Once again we must stand together, march together, and demand a fair share of the wealth that we create for society. This is truly possible in our time!
Saludos on this MAY DAY from MAPA and Hermandad Mexicana Latinoamericana, and the Hermandad General de Trabajadores Union Internacional/General Brotherhood of Workers International Union
Nativo Lopez-Vigil
National President
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Friday, April 24, 2009
Wintu Tribe sues the Federal Government
Winnemem Wintu Tribe Holds War Dance Before Launching Federal Lawsuit
By Dan Bacher
Arrayed in traditional regalia, over two dozen members of the Winnemem Wintu Tribe held a war dance along the banks of the American River on the evening of April 19 and morning of April 20 to bring attention to decades of injustice and destruction of their cultural sites by the federal government.
Male dancers in traditional feathered headdresses, accompanied by female singers in white dresses, performed the ancient ceremony around a sacred fire to the steady beat of a wooden drum.
After the ceremony, Caleen Sisk-Franco, the tribe’s spiritual leader, and Mark Franco, the tribe’s headman, and their pro bono lawyers filed a lawsuit at the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California.
The suit against six federal agencies and two current federal agency heads alleges that their actions have resulted in the “destruction or damage” to the Tribe’s sacred cultural sites in Shasta County, California. The Winnemem are seeking declaratory and injunctive relief, as well as monetary damages.
“We are a traditional people and have continued our traditional ways throughout the written history of the state of California,” said Sisk-Franco. “We hope this lawsuit and War Dance will protect our basic quality of life and ensure our freedom to maintain our traditions and culture.”
The ceremony was a continuation of the war dance that they launched against the federal government’s proposed raising of Shasta Dam in September 2004. The proposal to raise the dam anywhere from 6 to 200 feet threatens to flood the tribe’s remaining sacred sites vital for preserving their culture, including Puberty Rock where coming-of-age ceremonies are traditionally performed.
The tribe has been forefront in the battle to restore Central Valley salmon populations, now in an unprecedented state of collapse, and the California Delta. They have been outspoken opponents of proposals by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, Senator Diane Feinstein and corporate agribusiness to build a peripheral canal to export more water out of an imperiled estuary.
The tribe was also one of the plaintiffs in a lawsuit against the federal government that successfully challenged a biological opinion by the National Marine Fisheries Service under the Bush administration that concluded that proposed state and federal government water operations would provide “no jeopardy” to winter run Chinook salmon, spring run Chinook salmon, Central Valley steelhead and green sturgeon.
The Tribe held a rally at the State Capitol, attended by members of the Miwok, Hoopa Valley and other Indian Tribes, environmental justice advocates, and local activists, to call attention to the filing of its longstanding grievances against the federal government that began with the construction of Shasta Dam and continue until this day.
California Assembly Members Jared Huffman (D-San Rafael) and Fiona Ma (D-San Francisco) expressed their solidarity with tribe’s efforts at the rally. Huffman was the author of AJR 39, passed by the Assembly and signed by the Governor last year, that supports the restoration of federal recognition. In 1980’s, the tribe was inexplicably dropped from the list of federal recognized tribes in California.
“We all know that tribal recognition matters,” said Huffman. “The tribe was recognized until the 1980’s. Hopefully, with the new administration and Congress, we will be able to right this historic wrong.”
Assembly Member Fiona Ma emphasized that the Winnemen Wintu’s plight occurs within the larger context of the lack of federal recognition to member of Indian Tribes in California.
“Only 38,000 tribal members are recognized in California, while 400,000 tribal members still aren’t,” she said. “It’s important that the federal government bring you the dignity and justice that you deserve – you were living here before us.”
A court decision in the 1980’s forced the Bureau of Indian Affairs to give American Indian tribes throughout the country the right to decide whom their members are. However, the federal government maintained the right to determine who the federally recognized tribes are, according to Sisk-Franco.
“This decision has been devastating in California for Indians who have denied federal recognition,” said Sisk-Franco. “It has made historic tribes into non-people – and tribal members became non-Indians.”
As a consequence, the Winnemem Wintu aren’t protected under the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, the American Religious Freedom Act and other state and federal laws that protect federally recognized tribes.
“Federal recognition of our tribe will strengthen our position by establishing formal government to government relations between our tribe and the federal government,” said Sisk-Franco. “It will allow us allow use to take advantage of resources to do scientific studies, such as those necessary to reintroduce Chinook salmon to the McCloud River. By keeping us unrecognized, the government is holding us in a handicapped position.”
The Tribe would like to reintroduce the McCloud River’s native strain of Chinook salmon, barred from running up the river since the construction of Shasta Dam in the 1940s, to once again ascend the river.
Mark Franco has talked to fishery officials in New Zealand, where the McCloud River strain of Chinook was successfully introduced in the early 1900s, about bringing the fish back from New Zealand to the McCloud. The salmon could be reintroduced to the McCloud by building a channel extension to Dry Creek, a tributary of Shasta Lake, to enter Cow Creek or another tributary to the Sacramento River below the dam.
Jayne Fleming, Pro Bono Counsel and Human Rights Team Leader at Reed Smith LLP, one of the 15 largest law firms in the world, filed the lawsuit on behalf of the tribe. Other members of the team include Heather B. Hostelry, Cheryl B. Kahn, Eugenia S. Churn and Kevin L. Jayne.
“Numerous federal laws and policies require federal agencies to consider environmental and cultural values when they assess proposed government projects,” said Fleming. “These laws also require federal agencies to consult with and fully disclose all the relevant information about their proposed actions to potentially affected individuals, as well as to use all possible means to preserve important historic, cultural and natural aspects of our national heritage. In dealing with the Winnemem Wintu, the defendants have blatantly ignored and violated these requirements, and they continue to do so, to the detriment of the Tribe's history and culture.”
“By holding the war dance and filing the lawsuit, we are hoping the people in power at the Capitol and the federal government take notice of our situation,” summed up Michael Preston, one of the war dancers. “We are doing this because they haven’t paid attention to us as an unrecognized tribe for decades.”
The Lawsuit:
Defendants include the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Forest Service; and U.S. Department of Agriculture, as well as the current Secretary of the Interior Kenneth Salazar and the current Secretary of Agriculture Thomas Vilsack. The cabinet members are being sued in their official and individual capacities.
The Complaint details numerous U.S. government actions that have forced the Winnemem to retreat from their ancestral homeland on the McCloud and lower Pit Rivers and lose critical elements of their culture.
These actions include:
• Interfering with the Tribe’s own sacred burial sites
• Destroying medicinal grapevines and dumping dirt at the Nosoni Creek Cultural Site
• Bulldozing and filling a vegetated area at Nosoni Creek used for ceremonial storytelling
• Interfering with the Tribe’s use of an ancient fire pit at Dekkas Cultural Site; allowing trespassing at the Dekkas Cultural Site
• Destroying ancient Manzanita trees used for sacred fire pit ceremonies at Dekkas
• Ordering removal of the Tribe’s sacred ceremonial rocks from Dekkas; allowing trespassing at the Coonrod Cultural Site at Ash Creek
• Destroying ceremonial and medicinal plants at the Gilman road Cultural Site
• Placing a public bike trail through the Tribe’s Buck Saddle sacred prayer site.
According to the tribe’s lawyers, “These and other actions violate numerous federal laws and policies, including the National Environmental Policy Act, the American Antiquities Act of 1906, the Archeological and Historic Preservation Act, the Historic Sites, Buildings and Antiquities Act, the National Historic Preservation Act, the Archeological Resources Protection Act, the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, the American Religious Freedom Act, and several similar California statutes.”
The Complaint details causes of action for negligence, trespass, public nuisance, private nuisance, conversion, emotional distress, invasion of privacy, declaratory relief and injunctive relief. It demands a declaratory judgment, as well as injunctive relief and mandamus, and damages against all defendants.
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Summit of the Americas
Warning Signs: Mexico and Colombia
Obama's visit to Mexico was a message that U.S. military
allies on the right will remain just that, even with renewed
good relations in the rest of the hemisphere. Pluralism is
fine, but the basis of the relationship with the Mexican and
Colombian right-wing governments poses a threat to the
expressed strategy of non-intervention. Under Plan Colombia
and Plan Mérida, the U.S. military and intelligence agencies
have established a level of intervention and influence in
sovereign affairs that contradicts the promise of "equal
partners" Obama presented at the summit.
These two nations also receive the lion's share of U.S. aid,
most of it military. In addition, the U.S. government has
traditionally overlooked grave human rights violations in
these countries in order to preserve special alliances, while
severely punishing perceived violations in countries less
ideologically aligned. To be consistent with the "new era"
announced at the summit, aid and alliances must be based on
transparent and equitable criteria.
During the summit, U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk met
with Colombian president Álvaro Uribe to discuss the proposed
free-trade agreement (FTA) between the two nations. Obama has
objected to the agreement based on Colombia's record of
assassination of union leaders. Conceding to an FTA with
Colombia would violate both the commitment to human rights in
the hemisphere and to "bottom-up development," supported by
thousands of indigenous and poor Colombians who oppose the
agreement.
The Obama administration has a chance to build solid and
truly beneficial relations with both countries. But the
foundation of the relationships would need to shift to be
consistent with the values the president expressed at the
summit. This depends on both the Obama administration's next
moves, and the mobilization of U.S. and Colombian civil
society groups.
Rhetoric or Reality
There are many skeptics among U.S. progressives, who argue
that all this is empty rhetoric. But here, perhaps, we have
something to learn from the right. When President George W.
Bush announced his new national security doctrine, who among
the hawks and neocons complained that it was mere posturing
and that Bush would never really carry out the plan to
project the United States as a global hegemon, defending the
use of unilateral action, first-strikes, and torture? Very
few, as they would have been shooting themselves in the foot.
Instead, by providing Bush with meticulously thought-out
documents and organizing public opinion, they converted a
president who entered the office saying the United States
would play a more modest role on the international scene into
an unabashed champion of planetary empire.
Progressive forces are far from the compact group of powerful
interests and economic elites that created the disastrous
Bush era. And it goes without saying that no principled
person would advocate employing the lies and manipulation of
tragedy that went into selling the Bush Doctrine.
But with an immensely popular president, backed up by
mobilized new sectors of the population throughout the
country willing to work for change, it's sensible to begin by
taking him at his word.
Barack Obama's words at the Summit of the Americas charted a
new course for U.S. foreign policy. They reflected, in many
ways, the directions progressives have been trying to move in
for years.
Next Steps
If we really want to see the country move in these
directions, it makes much more sense to push for follow-
through than to sit back and speculate on what the
administration will do. Taking Obama at his word does not
mean we should be complacent. A few examples from his speech
illustrate ways in which we can take action:
Bottom-up development: Free-trade agreements don't create
bottom-up development. This is why the poor are nearly
unanimously opposed to them, as seen in Colombian "minga" [7]
demonstrations against the free trade agreement and the
Mexican 2006 elections. U.S. citizens should oppose the
Colombian FTA [8] based not only on labor rights but also
because it's the wrong kind of development, particularly in
times of crisis. NAFTA should be renegotiated to create a
more equitable distribution of wealth in Mexico and enhance
labor rights, and a moratorium on free trade agreements [9]
should be established, pending a full review of impact and
reforms of the NAFTA model.
Reform multilateral financial organizations: If these
institutions are recapitalized as major actors in confronting
the crisis, they must be reformed to prevent the errors of
the past. Fixing problems of skewed representation,
conditionality, and negative lending priorities will be a
huge task. U.S. citizen groups can join [10] with Latin
American organizations to make a difference.
Regulation: The Obama government didn't emerge as a champion
of regulation at the recent G-20 meeting [11]. U.S. citizens
must organize to insist on regulation to avert future crises
and curtail illicit fortunes made off speculation. One place
to start is by regulating commodity speculation [12] that led
to the food crisis.
The Fifth Summit of the Americas showed a tenuous coming to
terms among nations in a new political and economic context,
reflected in the fact that the obsolete declaration was
signed only by the host country. But Latin American countries
were willing to give the new U.S. president the benefit of
the doubt, and prepare to engage in tough political
negotiation and dialogue. Their response to this "new era" in
hemispheric relations serves as a good lesson in strategy for
advocates of U.S. foreign policy reform in the United States.
It's important to remember too that timing is a crucial part
of politics. Most of the reforms proposed are vague, fall
short of what is needed, or are even counter-productive. At a
time of economic crisis in the United States, this doesn't
mean abandoning pressure for needed reforms, but we do need
to understand the support among the public is an essential
aspect of reform. That is a job for the citizen groups that
have so long fought for a new U.S. foreign policy.
These actions would form a much more constructive strategy
than naysaying and sterile debates over whether or not the
three-month-old Obama administration is sincere.
© 2009 Foreign Policy In Focus
[Laura Carlsen (lcarlsen(at) ciponline.org) is director of the
Americas Policy Program (www.americaspolicy.org [13]) in
Mexico City, where she has been an analyst and writer for two
decades. She is also a Foreign Policy In Focus [14]
columnist.]
Obama's visit to Mexico was a message that U.S. military
allies on the right will remain just that, even with renewed
good relations in the rest of the hemisphere. Pluralism is
fine, but the basis of the relationship with the Mexican and
Colombian right-wing governments poses a threat to the
expressed strategy of non-intervention. Under Plan Colombia
and Plan Mérida, the U.S. military and intelligence agencies
have established a level of intervention and influence in
sovereign affairs that contradicts the promise of "equal
partners" Obama presented at the summit.
These two nations also receive the lion's share of U.S. aid,
most of it military. In addition, the U.S. government has
traditionally overlooked grave human rights violations in
these countries in order to preserve special alliances, while
severely punishing perceived violations in countries less
ideologically aligned. To be consistent with the "new era"
announced at the summit, aid and alliances must be based on
transparent and equitable criteria.
During the summit, U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk met
with Colombian president Álvaro Uribe to discuss the proposed
free-trade agreement (FTA) between the two nations. Obama has
objected to the agreement based on Colombia's record of
assassination of union leaders. Conceding to an FTA with
Colombia would violate both the commitment to human rights in
the hemisphere and to "bottom-up development," supported by
thousands of indigenous and poor Colombians who oppose the
agreement.
The Obama administration has a chance to build solid and
truly beneficial relations with both countries. But the
foundation of the relationships would need to shift to be
consistent with the values the president expressed at the
summit. This depends on both the Obama administration's next
moves, and the mobilization of U.S. and Colombian civil
society groups.
Rhetoric or Reality
There are many skeptics among U.S. progressives, who argue
that all this is empty rhetoric. But here, perhaps, we have
something to learn from the right. When President George W.
Bush announced his new national security doctrine, who among
the hawks and neocons complained that it was mere posturing
and that Bush would never really carry out the plan to
project the United States as a global hegemon, defending the
use of unilateral action, first-strikes, and torture? Very
few, as they would have been shooting themselves in the foot.
Instead, by providing Bush with meticulously thought-out
documents and organizing public opinion, they converted a
president who entered the office saying the United States
would play a more modest role on the international scene into
an unabashed champion of planetary empire.
Progressive forces are far from the compact group of powerful
interests and economic elites that created the disastrous
Bush era. And it goes without saying that no principled
person would advocate employing the lies and manipulation of
tragedy that went into selling the Bush Doctrine.
But with an immensely popular president, backed up by
mobilized new sectors of the population throughout the
country willing to work for change, it's sensible to begin by
taking him at his word.
Barack Obama's words at the Summit of the Americas charted a
new course for U.S. foreign policy. They reflected, in many
ways, the directions progressives have been trying to move in
for years.
Next Steps
If we really want to see the country move in these
directions, it makes much more sense to push for follow-
through than to sit back and speculate on what the
administration will do. Taking Obama at his word does not
mean we should be complacent. A few examples from his speech
illustrate ways in which we can take action:
Bottom-up development: Free-trade agreements don't create
bottom-up development. This is why the poor are nearly
unanimously opposed to them, as seen in Colombian "minga" [7]
demonstrations against the free trade agreement and the
Mexican 2006 elections. U.S. citizens should oppose the
Colombian FTA [8] based not only on labor rights but also
because it's the wrong kind of development, particularly in
times of crisis. NAFTA should be renegotiated to create a
more equitable distribution of wealth in Mexico and enhance
labor rights, and a moratorium on free trade agreements [9]
should be established, pending a full review of impact and
reforms of the NAFTA model.
Reform multilateral financial organizations: If these
institutions are recapitalized as major actors in confronting
the crisis, they must be reformed to prevent the errors of
the past. Fixing problems of skewed representation,
conditionality, and negative lending priorities will be a
huge task. U.S. citizen groups can join [10] with Latin
American organizations to make a difference.
Regulation: The Obama government didn't emerge as a champion
of regulation at the recent G-20 meeting [11]. U.S. citizens
must organize to insist on regulation to avert future crises
and curtail illicit fortunes made off speculation. One place
to start is by regulating commodity speculation [12] that led
to the food crisis.
The Fifth Summit of the Americas showed a tenuous coming to
terms among nations in a new political and economic context,
reflected in the fact that the obsolete declaration was
signed only by the host country. But Latin American countries
were willing to give the new U.S. president the benefit of
the doubt, and prepare to engage in tough political
negotiation and dialogue. Their response to this "new era" in
hemispheric relations serves as a good lesson in strategy for
advocates of U.S. foreign policy reform in the United States.
It's important to remember too that timing is a crucial part
of politics. Most of the reforms proposed are vague, fall
short of what is needed, or are even counter-productive. At a
time of economic crisis in the United States, this doesn't
mean abandoning pressure for needed reforms, but we do need
to understand the support among the public is an essential
aspect of reform. That is a job for the citizen groups that
have so long fought for a new U.S. foreign policy.
These actions would form a much more constructive strategy
than naysaying and sterile debates over whether or not the
three-month-old Obama administration is sincere.
© 2009 Foreign Policy In Focus
[Laura Carlsen (lcarlsen(at) ciponline.org) is director of the
Americas Policy Program (www.americaspolicy.org [13]) in
Mexico City, where she has been an analyst and writer for two
decades. She is also a Foreign Policy In Focus [14]
columnist.]
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Obama's Dinosaur in Trinidad
By Tom Hayden
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tom-hayden/obama-and-his-
dinosaur-in_b_188729.htmle
It's becoming a pattern: whenever Barack Obama
implements a campaign pledge, the dinosaurs used to
running things push back. The latest dinosaur to
undercut the president's gestures is Jeffrey Davidow,
US coordinator of the Trinidad meeting, who claimed
that Hugo Chavez wanted a photo with Obama to polish
his reputation with Venezuelans.
Obama is more popular than Chavez in Venezuela, Davidow
added, which explains his rushing photos of their
handshake to the Venezuelan government's website. [ABC
News, April 18] He also managed to disparage Chavez's
presentation of a book by Eduardo Galleano to Obama as
unnecessary since the president already was familiar
with Latin American grievances.
While Obama was pressing for a new diplomacy, Davidow
was practicing the old. He added for good measure that
Brazil, Chile, Peru and Colombia are "forward-looking,
not backward-looking" Latin American countries, and
described the unanimous demand for normalization of US
ties to Cuba as "part of the historical baggage that
Latin America carried with it and is almost a reflexive
suspicion or anti-Americanism."
If Davidow was hoping to provoke an unproductive
reaction from the Venezuelans, he failed, at least on
Saturday. But his spoiler comments were in stark
contrast to a president pledged to listening, dialogue
and respect. Obama's modest relaxation of restrictions
on travel and remittances to Cuba, combined with his
Justice Department's prosecution of the anti-Castro
terrorist Luis Posades Carrillo, has unleashed a
momentum for policy change that may be unstoppable.
Who is Jeffrey Davidow? It might be fair to ask, who
really knows? He was a political officer at the US
embassy in Chile from 1971-74, during the carrying out
of the coup and repression against the democratically-
elected government of Salvador Allende. In a March 3,
1974 memo, later declassified, Davidow wrote to Chilean
officials of a "conspiracy on the part of the enemies
of Chile to paint the junta in the worst possible
terms." [Boston Phoenix, Dec. 16-23, 1999]
Later Davidow was ambassador to Mexico during the
Chiapas crisis, where he told the Mexican media "we
don't know of any [right-wing] paramilitary groups in
Chiapas." [Boston Phoenix, Dec. 16-23, 1999].
Davidow was ambassador to Venezuela from 1993 to 1996,
defending the social order which fell to the Chavez
political revolution two years later.
He retired from government in 2003 to head the
Institute of the Americas, which describes itself as
being "recognized as a leader in promoting regional
integration, economic development and efficient
government in the western hemisphere." The Institute's
board is heavy with energy firms, real estate
investors, and San Diego-based research entities,
including Chevron, Sempra LNG, Skanska [pipelines], the
Barrick Gold Corporation [Canada], J.P. Morgan,
Petrobras Energy [Argentina], and the Oil Industry
Association of Ecuador.
In September 2007, Davidow chaired the regional meeting
of the Trilateral Commission in Cancun, where he
criticized what he called the "creeping coup" happening
through the democratic election of Chavez in Venezuela.
It was a strange turn of phrase since Chavez had been
the target of an actual coup in earlier years. In
moderating a panel, Davidow explained the democratic
election of Chavez as a "creeping coup" as follows:
"What do other countries do when a country votes itself
out of democracy? It's an interesting question. At
least it's interesting to me."
He also warned of the dangerous threat to future oil
supplies from Venezuela resulting from the "creeping
coup":
"What does it mean when the previous principle
providers of petroleum to the US suffer declines in
their production levels?"
Davidow added the question of what to do with a
democratic country which also has become "a major
transshipment point for drugs to the US and Europe", a
claim meant to insist on the "integration" of American
Drug Enforcement Agency operatives on the ground in
Venezuela.
These were explosive questions, all but suggesting the
need for a Cold War against Caracas, in not regime
change. Why Obama named Davidow to head the US presence
at Trinidad remains to be explored. But it suggests a
trademark Obama approach, to reassure the old guard and
seek their approval of and participation in his
proposed new directions. Seeming defensive about his
role, Davidow tried to wrap himself in the pages of the
once-liberal Washington Post in an exchange with Steve
Clemon of the New America Foundation on April 10:
"And lest you think, and I'm sure some of you do, that
I am some sort of ideologue on this, take a look at the
lead editorial in today's Washington Post.Maybe you
think they are a bunch of ideologues as well, but I
think they say it much better than I do. [Talk Left,
April 10]
[Tom Hayden is the author of Writings for a Democratic
Society: The Tom Hayden Reader, published by City
Lights Books, www.citylights.com ]
_________________________
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tom-hayden/obama-and-his-
dinosaur-in_b_188729.htmle
It's becoming a pattern: whenever Barack Obama
implements a campaign pledge, the dinosaurs used to
running things push back. The latest dinosaur to
undercut the president's gestures is Jeffrey Davidow,
US coordinator of the Trinidad meeting, who claimed
that Hugo Chavez wanted a photo with Obama to polish
his reputation with Venezuelans.
Obama is more popular than Chavez in Venezuela, Davidow
added, which explains his rushing photos of their
handshake to the Venezuelan government's website. [ABC
News, April 18] He also managed to disparage Chavez's
presentation of a book by Eduardo Galleano to Obama as
unnecessary since the president already was familiar
with Latin American grievances.
While Obama was pressing for a new diplomacy, Davidow
was practicing the old. He added for good measure that
Brazil, Chile, Peru and Colombia are "forward-looking,
not backward-looking" Latin American countries, and
described the unanimous demand for normalization of US
ties to Cuba as "part of the historical baggage that
Latin America carried with it and is almost a reflexive
suspicion or anti-Americanism."
If Davidow was hoping to provoke an unproductive
reaction from the Venezuelans, he failed, at least on
Saturday. But his spoiler comments were in stark
contrast to a president pledged to listening, dialogue
and respect. Obama's modest relaxation of restrictions
on travel and remittances to Cuba, combined with his
Justice Department's prosecution of the anti-Castro
terrorist Luis Posades Carrillo, has unleashed a
momentum for policy change that may be unstoppable.
Who is Jeffrey Davidow? It might be fair to ask, who
really knows? He was a political officer at the US
embassy in Chile from 1971-74, during the carrying out
of the coup and repression against the democratically-
elected government of Salvador Allende. In a March 3,
1974 memo, later declassified, Davidow wrote to Chilean
officials of a "conspiracy on the part of the enemies
of Chile to paint the junta in the worst possible
terms." [Boston Phoenix, Dec. 16-23, 1999]
Later Davidow was ambassador to Mexico during the
Chiapas crisis, where he told the Mexican media "we
don't know of any [right-wing] paramilitary groups in
Chiapas." [Boston Phoenix, Dec. 16-23, 1999].
Davidow was ambassador to Venezuela from 1993 to 1996,
defending the social order which fell to the Chavez
political revolution two years later.
He retired from government in 2003 to head the
Institute of the Americas, which describes itself as
being "recognized as a leader in promoting regional
integration, economic development and efficient
government in the western hemisphere." The Institute's
board is heavy with energy firms, real estate
investors, and San Diego-based research entities,
including Chevron, Sempra LNG, Skanska [pipelines], the
Barrick Gold Corporation [Canada], J.P. Morgan,
Petrobras Energy [Argentina], and the Oil Industry
Association of Ecuador.
In September 2007, Davidow chaired the regional meeting
of the Trilateral Commission in Cancun, where he
criticized what he called the "creeping coup" happening
through the democratic election of Chavez in Venezuela.
It was a strange turn of phrase since Chavez had been
the target of an actual coup in earlier years. In
moderating a panel, Davidow explained the democratic
election of Chavez as a "creeping coup" as follows:
"What do other countries do when a country votes itself
out of democracy? It's an interesting question. At
least it's interesting to me."
He also warned of the dangerous threat to future oil
supplies from Venezuela resulting from the "creeping
coup":
"What does it mean when the previous principle
providers of petroleum to the US suffer declines in
their production levels?"
Davidow added the question of what to do with a
democratic country which also has become "a major
transshipment point for drugs to the US and Europe", a
claim meant to insist on the "integration" of American
Drug Enforcement Agency operatives on the ground in
Venezuela.
These were explosive questions, all but suggesting the
need for a Cold War against Caracas, in not regime
change. Why Obama named Davidow to head the US presence
at Trinidad remains to be explored. But it suggests a
trademark Obama approach, to reassure the old guard and
seek their approval of and participation in his
proposed new directions. Seeming defensive about his
role, Davidow tried to wrap himself in the pages of the
once-liberal Washington Post in an exchange with Steve
Clemon of the New America Foundation on April 10:
"And lest you think, and I'm sure some of you do, that
I am some sort of ideologue on this, take a look at the
lead editorial in today's Washington Post.Maybe you
think they are a bunch of ideologues as well, but I
think they say it much better than I do. [Talk Left,
April 10]
[Tom Hayden is the author of Writings for a Democratic
Society: The Tom Hayden Reader, published by City
Lights Books, www.citylights.com ]
_________________________
d AFL-CIO Unveil Unified Immigration Reform Framework
Roadmap Lays the Groundwork For an Immigration System that Works For America’s Workers; United labor movement shows importance of addressing issue during 111th Congress
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Joseph T. Hansen, International President of the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union (UFCW) and chair of the Change to Win Immigration Task Force, and John Sweeney, International President of the AFL-CIO, today unveiled a unified framework for comprehensive immigration reform legislation.
The joint announcement and proposal is a critical sign of support for the Administration and Congress to address immigration reform – and to ensure that it remains a priority on the legislative calendar. It is also an important sign that immigration reform is an important part of economic recovery.
“We need an immigration system that works for America’s workers,” said President Hansen. “For too long, our nation’s immigration system has fueled discrimination and exploitation of workers. It has driven down wages and working conditions. And it has failed to live up to our nation’s values. We now have an opportunity to change course. This framework is a roadmap toward real reform—reform that addresses the needs of our nation’s workers, families and communities. This framework is about moving America forward. We are a nation that respects hard work, family and the pursuit of the American Dream. Our immigration system must hold true to these principles.”
"Our nation's broken immigration system isn't working for anybody --not immigrant workers who are routinely exploited by companies and not U.S. born workers whose living standards are being undermined by the creation of a new "underclass." As a part of broad-based economic recovery, we need a comprehensive solution -- and soon. The development of a unified labor position, a position centered on workers' rights, puts us on the path to a legislative solution," said President Sweeney. “The labor movement will speak in one voice to address this pressing issue with Congress and the White House to create a system that protects all workers -- those who work in our shadow economy and those who have full rights.”
Sweeney and Hansen also were joined by Eliseo Medina, Executive Vice President of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), and Arturo Rodriquez, President of the United Farm Workers (UFW) in making the announcement. Both Medina and Rodriguez have been national leaders on immigration reform and played a key role in the formation of the immigration framework.
“As we face the most serious recession since the Great Depression—as healthcare costs skyrocket, income disparity grows, and the middle class continues to shrink—the American public wants fundamental reform of economic and social policies that have benefited the few at the expense of the working majority,” said Medina “Immigration reform is no exception. Today’s unified agreement is a major step forward that will, combined with the continued leadership of President Obama, Vice President Biden and bipartisan leadership in Congress, profoundly improve the future of all workers and build a stronger American economy for our children and grandchildren.”
“Today’s unity statement is a recognition of the dire need to have immigration laws that work and work for all workers,” said President Rodriguez. “Too many workers – both U.S. and immigrant are exploited by the current system and that needs to change. The United Farm Workers, Change to Win and the AFL-CIO came together because we can no longer be delayed.”
President Obama recently reiterated his support for immigration reform and stated that real reform cannot be completed in a piecemeal fashion.
The Unity Framework, which was developed in consultation with Former Secretary of Labor Ray Marshall and the Economic Policy Institute, provides a comprehensive plan for addressing immigration reform.
The plan adheres to the Administration’s goals by creating a framework that deals with the critical components of reform and does it through interconnected initiatives. The proposal calls for: (1) an independent commission to assess and manage future flows, based on labor market shortages that are determined on the basis of actual need; (2) a secure and effective worker authorization mechanism; (3) rational operational control of the border; (4) adjustment of status for the current undocumented population; and (5) improvement, not expansion, of temporary worker programs, limited to temporary or seasonal, not permanent, jobs.
In the coming weeks, representatives from labor will be meeting with key Congressional and Administration staff to discuss the framework and how best to move the issue forward. The groups have also briefed key activists and advocates about the framework and will be working closely with these vital allies in the coming months.
** NOTE: To schedule an interview with Change to Win leaders, please contact Noreen Nielsen at noreen.nielsen@changetowin.org. Text of the Unity Framework follows. **
Roadmap Lays the Groundwork For an Immigration System that Works For America’s Workers; United labor movement shows importance of addressing issue during 111th Congress
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Joseph T. Hansen, International President of the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union (UFCW) and chair of the Change to Win Immigration Task Force, and John Sweeney, International President of the AFL-CIO, today unveiled a unified framework for comprehensive immigration reform legislation.
The joint announcement and proposal is a critical sign of support for the Administration and Congress to address immigration reform – and to ensure that it remains a priority on the legislative calendar. It is also an important sign that immigration reform is an important part of economic recovery.
“We need an immigration system that works for America’s workers,” said President Hansen. “For too long, our nation’s immigration system has fueled discrimination and exploitation of workers. It has driven down wages and working conditions. And it has failed to live up to our nation’s values. We now have an opportunity to change course. This framework is a roadmap toward real reform—reform that addresses the needs of our nation’s workers, families and communities. This framework is about moving America forward. We are a nation that respects hard work, family and the pursuit of the American Dream. Our immigration system must hold true to these principles.”
"Our nation's broken immigration system isn't working for anybody --not immigrant workers who are routinely exploited by companies and not U.S. born workers whose living standards are being undermined by the creation of a new "underclass." As a part of broad-based economic recovery, we need a comprehensive solution -- and soon. The development of a unified labor position, a position centered on workers' rights, puts us on the path to a legislative solution," said President Sweeney. “The labor movement will speak in one voice to address this pressing issue with Congress and the White House to create a system that protects all workers -- those who work in our shadow economy and those who have full rights.”
Sweeney and Hansen also were joined by Eliseo Medina, Executive Vice President of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), and Arturo Rodriquez, President of the United Farm Workers (UFW) in making the announcement. Both Medina and Rodriguez have been national leaders on immigration reform and played a key role in the formation of the immigration framework.
“As we face the most serious recession since the Great Depression—as healthcare costs skyrocket, income disparity grows, and the middle class continues to shrink—the American public wants fundamental reform of economic and social policies that have benefited the few at the expense of the working majority,” said Medina “Immigration reform is no exception. Today’s unified agreement is a major step forward that will, combined with the continued leadership of President Obama, Vice President Biden and bipartisan leadership in Congress, profoundly improve the future of all workers and build a stronger American economy for our children and grandchildren.”
“Today’s unity statement is a recognition of the dire need to have immigration laws that work and work for all workers,” said President Rodriguez. “Too many workers – both U.S. and immigrant are exploited by the current system and that needs to change. The United Farm Workers, Change to Win and the AFL-CIO came together because we can no longer be delayed.”
President Obama recently reiterated his support for immigration reform and stated that real reform cannot be completed in a piecemeal fashion.
The Unity Framework, which was developed in consultation with Former Secretary of Labor Ray Marshall and the Economic Policy Institute, provides a comprehensive plan for addressing immigration reform.
The plan adheres to the Administration’s goals by creating a framework that deals with the critical components of reform and does it through interconnected initiatives. The proposal calls for: (1) an independent commission to assess and manage future flows, based on labor market shortages that are determined on the basis of actual need; (2) a secure and effective worker authorization mechanism; (3) rational operational control of the border; (4) adjustment of status for the current undocumented population; and (5) improvement, not expansion, of temporary worker programs, limited to temporary or seasonal, not permanent, jobs.
In the coming weeks, representatives from labor will be meeting with key Congressional and Administration staff to discuss the framework and how best to move the issue forward. The groups have also briefed key activists and advocates about the framework and will be working closely with these vital allies in the coming months.
** NOTE: To schedule an interview with Change to Win leaders, please contact Noreen Nielsen at noreen.nielsen@changetowin.org. Text of the Unity Framework follows. **
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Journey to Justice, Sacramento : Part Two
WINNEMEM WINTU TRIBE SUES FEDERAL AGENCIES, OFFICIALS
Court Filing Prefaced by Ceremonial War Dance, March and Capitol Rally
For more information, contact Jamie Moss, newsPRos, 201-493-1027 or Brad Wise, 510-466-6229
(April 20, 2008, Sacramento, CA) – The Winnemem Wintu, a traditional California Tribe, filed a Complaint in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California Monday against six federal agencies and two current federal agency heads alleging their actions have resulted in the destruction or damage to the Tribe’s cultural sites in Shasta County, California. The Winnemem are seeking declaratory and injunctive relief, as well as monetary damages.
The Tribe held a Rally at the State Capitol at noon to call attention to the filing of its longstanding grievances against the federal government that began with the construction of Shasta Dam and continues to this day. This event followed three-days of intensive tribal preparation that included ceremonial prayers and fires, including a ceremonial war dance Sunday night and Monday morning. It is the culmination of the ceremony begun in 2004 at Shasta Dam.
“We are a traditional people and have continued our traditional ways throughout the written history of the state of California,” said Caleen Sisk-Franco, the Tribe’s spiritual leader. “We hope this lawsuit and War Dance will protect our basic quality of life and ensure our freedom to maintain our traditions and culture.”
California Assembly Members Jared Huffman (D-San Rafael) and Fiona Ma (D-San Francisco) addressed the rally at noon. Immediately following, Jayne Fleming, Pro Bono Counsel and Human Rights Team Leader at Reed Smith LLP, one of the 15 largest law firms in the world, addressed the Tribe and its supporters at the noon event. Finally, Caleen Sisk-Franco addressed the rally.
The Winnemem and its members are represented pro bono in the court case by a team of attorneys from Reed Smith led by partner James C. Martin. Other members of the team include Heather B. Hoesterey, Cheryl B. Kahn, Eugenia S. Chern and Kevin L. Jayne.
According to Ms. Fleming, “numerous federal laws and policies require federal agencies to consider environmental and cultural values when they assess proposed government projects. These laws also require federal agencies to consult with and fully disclose all the relevant information about their proposed actions to potentially affected individuals, as well as to use all possible means to preserve important historic, cultural and natural aspects of our national heritage. In dealing with the Winnemem, the defendants have blatantly ignored and violated these requirements, and they continue to do so, to the detriment of the Winnemem’s history and culture.”
Defendants include the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Forest Service; and U.S. Department of Agriculture, as well as the current Secretary of the Interior Kenneth Salazar and the current Secretary of Agriculture Thomas Vilsack. The cabinet members are being sued in their official and individual capacities.
The Complaint details numerous U.S. government actions that have forced the Winnemem to retreat from their ancestral homeland on the McCloud and lower Pit Rivers and lose critical elements of their culture. These actions include interfering with the Tribe’s own sacred burial sites; destroying medicinal grapevines and dumping dirt at the Nosoni Creek Cultural Site; bulldozing and filling a vegetated area at Nosoni Creek used for ceremonial storytelling; interfering with the Tribe’s use of an ancient fire pit at Dekkas Cultural Site; allowing trespassing at the Dekkas Cultural Site; destroying ancient Manzanita trees used for sacred fire pit ceremonies at Dekkas; ordering removal of the Tribe’s sacred ceremonial rocks from Dekkas; allowing trespassing at the Coonrod Cultural Site at Ash Creek; destroying ceremonial and medicinal plants at the Gilman road Cultural Site; and, placing a public bike trail through the Tribe’s Buck Saddle sacred prayer site.
According to the Winnemem’s lawyers, these and other actions violate numerous federal laws and policies, including the National Environmental Policy Act, the American Antiquities Act of 1906, the Archeological and Historic Preservation Act, the Historic Sites, Buildings and Antiquities Act, the National Historic Preservation Act, the Archeological Resources Protection Act, the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, the American Religious Freedom Act, and several similar California statutes.
The Complaint details causes of action for negligence, trespass, public nuisance, private nuisance, conversion, emotional distress, invasion of privacy, declaratory relief and injunctive relief. It demands a declaratory judgment, as well as injunctive relief and mandamus, and damages against all defendants.
Court Filing Prefaced by Ceremonial War Dance, March and Capitol Rally
For more information, contact Jamie Moss, newsPRos, 201-493-1027 or Brad Wise, 510-466-6229
(April 20, 2008, Sacramento, CA) – The Winnemem Wintu, a traditional California Tribe, filed a Complaint in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California Monday against six federal agencies and two current federal agency heads alleging their actions have resulted in the destruction or damage to the Tribe’s cultural sites in Shasta County, California. The Winnemem are seeking declaratory and injunctive relief, as well as monetary damages.
The Tribe held a Rally at the State Capitol at noon to call attention to the filing of its longstanding grievances against the federal government that began with the construction of Shasta Dam and continues to this day. This event followed three-days of intensive tribal preparation that included ceremonial prayers and fires, including a ceremonial war dance Sunday night and Monday morning. It is the culmination of the ceremony begun in 2004 at Shasta Dam.
“We are a traditional people and have continued our traditional ways throughout the written history of the state of California,” said Caleen Sisk-Franco, the Tribe’s spiritual leader. “We hope this lawsuit and War Dance will protect our basic quality of life and ensure our freedom to maintain our traditions and culture.”
California Assembly Members Jared Huffman (D-San Rafael) and Fiona Ma (D-San Francisco) addressed the rally at noon. Immediately following, Jayne Fleming, Pro Bono Counsel and Human Rights Team Leader at Reed Smith LLP, one of the 15 largest law firms in the world, addressed the Tribe and its supporters at the noon event. Finally, Caleen Sisk-Franco addressed the rally.
The Winnemem and its members are represented pro bono in the court case by a team of attorneys from Reed Smith led by partner James C. Martin. Other members of the team include Heather B. Hoesterey, Cheryl B. Kahn, Eugenia S. Chern and Kevin L. Jayne.
According to Ms. Fleming, “numerous federal laws and policies require federal agencies to consider environmental and cultural values when they assess proposed government projects. These laws also require federal agencies to consult with and fully disclose all the relevant information about their proposed actions to potentially affected individuals, as well as to use all possible means to preserve important historic, cultural and natural aspects of our national heritage. In dealing with the Winnemem, the defendants have blatantly ignored and violated these requirements, and they continue to do so, to the detriment of the Winnemem’s history and culture.”
Defendants include the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Forest Service; and U.S. Department of Agriculture, as well as the current Secretary of the Interior Kenneth Salazar and the current Secretary of Agriculture Thomas Vilsack. The cabinet members are being sued in their official and individual capacities.
The Complaint details numerous U.S. government actions that have forced the Winnemem to retreat from their ancestral homeland on the McCloud and lower Pit Rivers and lose critical elements of their culture. These actions include interfering with the Tribe’s own sacred burial sites; destroying medicinal grapevines and dumping dirt at the Nosoni Creek Cultural Site; bulldozing and filling a vegetated area at Nosoni Creek used for ceremonial storytelling; interfering with the Tribe’s use of an ancient fire pit at Dekkas Cultural Site; allowing trespassing at the Dekkas Cultural Site; destroying ancient Manzanita trees used for sacred fire pit ceremonies at Dekkas; ordering removal of the Tribe’s sacred ceremonial rocks from Dekkas; allowing trespassing at the Coonrod Cultural Site at Ash Creek; destroying ceremonial and medicinal plants at the Gilman road Cultural Site; and, placing a public bike trail through the Tribe’s Buck Saddle sacred prayer site.
According to the Winnemem’s lawyers, these and other actions violate numerous federal laws and policies, including the National Environmental Policy Act, the American Antiquities Act of 1906, the Archeological and Historic Preservation Act, the Historic Sites, Buildings and Antiquities Act, the National Historic Preservation Act, the Archeological Resources Protection Act, the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, the American Religious Freedom Act, and several similar California statutes.
The Complaint details causes of action for negligence, trespass, public nuisance, private nuisance, conversion, emotional distress, invasion of privacy, declaratory relief and injunctive relief. It demands a declaratory judgment, as well as injunctive relief and mandamus, and damages against all defendants.
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Journey to Justice, Sacramento
Tribal War Dance and March Next Steps in Winnemem Wintu Tribe’s Journey to Justice Ceremonies Initiate Federal Lawsuit on behalf of Tribe.
Who: The Winnemem Wintu Tribe, a traditional California Tribe. The Winnemem have been fighting for years to sustain their culture and address generations of broken promises by the federal government.
What: War Dance, march and press conference from Sacramento River to the State Capitol.
Winnemem war dancers and tribal leaders will perform a traditional ceremonial War Dance next to the Sacramento River and will then march to the State Capitol building. The march and War Dance initiate the federal lawsuit the Tribe is filing, asking for compensation for damages done by federal land management policies, including the construction of the Shasta Dam.
Schedule of events:
Sunday, April 19th: War Dance begins at 6:00 PM on Sacramento River
Monday, April 20th: Ceremony and address by Tribal leaders.
The place is Camp Pollock - street address is 1501 Northgate Blvd, Sacramento.
We have been asked if folks walking with us are to be in regalia or street clothes: if you have "Indian indicators" wear them, banners etc. fine. We are going to caravan to Old Sac (in the parking area) and then we will walk up to Capitol Mall (we are looking at the best routes now). This is an historic event in the history of the tribe and I am glad to share it with you all.
10:00 AM March from Camp Pollock to State Capitol.
12:00 to 1:00 PM Press Conference with Tribal leaders and community members State Capitol Location 27 West side of capitol building
More Information
The Winnemem Wintu Tribe is filing a lawsuit against Department of The Interior; Department of Agriculture; United States Forest Service; Bureau of Reclamation; Bureau of Indian Affairs; Bureau of Land Management; Ken Salazar, Secretary of The Interior; Assistant Secretary for Water and Science; Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks in The Department of Agriculture; and Tom Vilsack, Secretary of Agriculture asking for redress for decades of injustices and harm related to federal land management policies which have destroyed Winnemem cultural practices and sacred places.
The Winnemem began a journey to justice in 2004 with a War Dance at Shasta Dam. Today we continue that journey with another War Dance and this lawsuit. Our people are a traditional people, steeped in our culture and traditional lifeways, who have continued our cultural practices throughout the written history of the state of California. With this lawsuit and War Dance, we continue our journey to ensure our basic quality of life and freedom to maintain our traditions and culture.
Winnemem Wintu Tribe
14840 Bear Mountain Road, Redding, CA 96003
530-275-2737 Office 530-275-4193 Facsimile
www.winnememwintu.us
winnemem@msn.com
Who: The Winnemem Wintu Tribe, a traditional California Tribe. The Winnemem have been fighting for years to sustain their culture and address generations of broken promises by the federal government.
What: War Dance, march and press conference from Sacramento River to the State Capitol.
Winnemem war dancers and tribal leaders will perform a traditional ceremonial War Dance next to the Sacramento River and will then march to the State Capitol building. The march and War Dance initiate the federal lawsuit the Tribe is filing, asking for compensation for damages done by federal land management policies, including the construction of the Shasta Dam.
Schedule of events:
Sunday, April 19th: War Dance begins at 6:00 PM on Sacramento River
Monday, April 20th: Ceremony and address by Tribal leaders.
The place is Camp Pollock - street address is 1501 Northgate Blvd, Sacramento.
We have been asked if folks walking with us are to be in regalia or street clothes: if you have "Indian indicators" wear them, banners etc. fine. We are going to caravan to Old Sac (in the parking area) and then we will walk up to Capitol Mall (we are looking at the best routes now). This is an historic event in the history of the tribe and I am glad to share it with you all.
10:00 AM March from Camp Pollock to State Capitol.
12:00 to 1:00 PM Press Conference with Tribal leaders and community members State Capitol Location 27 West side of capitol building
More Information
The Winnemem Wintu Tribe is filing a lawsuit against Department of The Interior; Department of Agriculture; United States Forest Service; Bureau of Reclamation; Bureau of Indian Affairs; Bureau of Land Management; Ken Salazar, Secretary of The Interior; Assistant Secretary for Water and Science; Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks in The Department of Agriculture; and Tom Vilsack, Secretary of Agriculture asking for redress for decades of injustices and harm related to federal land management policies which have destroyed Winnemem cultural practices and sacred places.
The Winnemem began a journey to justice in 2004 with a War Dance at Shasta Dam. Today we continue that journey with another War Dance and this lawsuit. Our people are a traditional people, steeped in our culture and traditional lifeways, who have continued our cultural practices throughout the written history of the state of California. With this lawsuit and War Dance, we continue our journey to ensure our basic quality of life and freedom to maintain our traditions and culture.
Winnemem Wintu Tribe
14840 Bear Mountain Road, Redding, CA 96003
530-275-2737 Office 530-275-4193 Facsimile
www.winnememwintu.us
winnemem@msn.com
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Labor Accord on Immigration Bills
April 14, 2009
Labor Groups Reach an Accord on Immigration
By JULIA PRESTON and STEVEN GREENHOUSE
The nation’s two major labor federations have agreed for the first time to join forces to support an overhaul of the immigration system, leaders of both organizations said on Monday. The accord could give President Obama significant support among unions as he revisits the stormy issue in the midst of the recession.
John Sweeney, president of the A.F.L.-C.I.O., and Joe T. Hansen, a leader of the rival Change to Win federation, will present the outlines of their new position on Tuesday in Washington. In 2007, when Congress last considered comprehensive immigration legislation, the two groups could not agree on a common approach. That legislation failed.
The accord endorses legalizing the status of illegal immigrants already in the United States and opposes any large new program for employers to bring in temporary immigrant workers, officials of both federations said.
“The labor movement will work together to make sure that the White House as well as Congress understand that we speak about immigration reform with one voice,” Mr. Sweeney said in a statement to The New York Times.
But while the compromise repaired one fissure in the coalition that has favored broad immigration legislation, it appeared to open another. An official from the United States Chamber of Commerce said Monday that the business community remained committed to a significant guest-worker program.
“If the unions think they’re going to push a bill through without the support of the business community, they’re crazy,” said Randel Johnson, the chamber’s vice president of labor, immigration and employee benefits. “There’s only going to be one shot at immigration reform. As part of the trade-off for legalization, we need to expand the temporary worker program.”
The common labor position is also unlikely to convince many opponents that an immigration overhaul would not harm American workers. When Obama administration officials said last week that the president intended to push Congress this year to take up an immigration bill that would include a path to legal status for the country’s estimated 12 million illegal immigrants, critics criticized the approach as amnesty for lawbreakers.
“In our current economic crisis, Americans cannot afford to lose more jobs to illegal workers,” said Representative Steve King, an Iowa Republican who sits on the House Judiciary subcommittee on immigration. “American workers are depending on President Obama to protect their jobs from those in America illegally.”
The two labor federations have agreed in the past to proposals that would give legal status to illegal immigrants. But in 2007 the A.F.L.-C.I.O. parted ways with the service employees and several other unions when it did not support legislation put forth by the Bush administration because it contained provisions for an expanded guest-worker program.
In the new accord, the A.F.L.-C.I.O. and Change to Win have called for managing future immigration of workers through a national commission. The commission would determine how many permanent and temporary foreign workers should be admitted each year based on demand in American labor markets. Union officials are confident that the result would reduce worker immigration during times of high unemployment like the present.
Mr. Hansen, who is president of the United Food and Commercial Workers Union, said in an interview that the joint proposal was a “building block to go forward to get immigration reform up on the agenda in Congress” sometime this year.
Thousands of immigrant farm workers and other low-wage laborers come to the United States through seasonal guest-worker programs that are subject to numerical visa limits and have been criticized by employers as rigid and inefficient. Many unions oppose the programs because the immigrants are tied to one employer and cannot change jobs no matter how abusive the conditions, so union officials say they undercut conditions for American workers. Highly skilled foreign technology engineers and medical specialists also come on temporary visas.
Advocates for immigrants said a unified labor movement could substantially bolster their position as they push for legislation to restructure the ailing immigration system.
“It shows how important the issue is to the representatives of American workers,” said Frank Sharry, executive director of America’s Voice, an advocate group.
A.F.L.-C.I.O.. officials said they agreed with Change to Win leaders that, with more than seven million unauthorized immigrants already working across the nation, legalizing their status would be the most effective way to protect labor standards for all workers.
“We have developed a joint strategy with the approach framed around workers’ rights,” said Ana Avendaño, associate general counsel of the A.F.L.-C.I.O.
Labor leaders said that they would talk with other groups in coming weeks to nail down details of a common position, and that they would then would work in Congress and with the Obama administration to try to ensure that their proposal was part of any bill offered for debate.
Also supporting the compromise is Eliseo Medina, an executive vice president of the Service Employees International Union, a member of Change to Win with hundreds of thousands of members who are immigrants. The Change to Win federation was formed in 2005 with seven unions that broke away from the A.F.L.-C.I.O.
The plan for a labor commission to monitor and control levels of worker immigration was developed with help from Ray Marshall, a labor secretary under President Jimmy Carter. Over the past year, Mr. Marshall, at the request of the A.F.L.-C.I.O., has been consulting between the two federations and with a variety of Hispanic organizations and advocate groups for immigrants.
“All these groups understand that one of the main reasons they lost before was that they were not together,” Mr. Marshall said.
According to a list of principles the labor leaders will present on Tuesday, they are proposing a “depoliticized,” independent commission that “can assess labor market needs on an ongoing basis and — based on a methodology to be approved by Congress — determine the number of foreign workers to be admitted for employment purposes.”
Mr. Johnson, the Chamber of Commerce official, said, “A commission doesn’t get us there.”
Tamar Jacoby, president of ImmigrationWorks USA, a group that organizes businesses to support comprehensive immigration legislation, agreed that employers would have many questions about the approach.
“The question is, Will the commission work?” Ms. Jacoby said. “Will it be adequately attuned to and triggered by the labor market? A system that may — or may not — supply the workers that business will need in the future after the recession will be a cause of great concern to employers.”
=
UNITED LABOR GOOD FOR
IMMIGRATION REFORM
MAPA and Hermandad Mexicana Latinoamericana applauds the accord reached between the two national labor federations, AFL-CIO and Change To Win, on the basic tenets of federal immigration reform and their commitment to move the reform agenda this year with the U.S. Congress and President Barack Obama. While we haven't reviewed all the details of the agreement, labor's support for the full legalization of those currently in the U.S. and no expansion of contract-labor programs corresponds to the broad sentiment of the immigrant communities who have fought tenaciously for reform. A united approach between labor, church, and the communities of immigrants themselves is the key to a successful campaign. We will report more on this issue as the details are revealed.
Nativo Lopez-Vigil
National President
Labor Groups Reach an Accord on Immigration
By JULIA PRESTON and STEVEN GREENHOUSE
The nation’s two major labor federations have agreed for the first time to join forces to support an overhaul of the immigration system, leaders of both organizations said on Monday. The accord could give President Obama significant support among unions as he revisits the stormy issue in the midst of the recession.
John Sweeney, president of the A.F.L.-C.I.O., and Joe T. Hansen, a leader of the rival Change to Win federation, will present the outlines of their new position on Tuesday in Washington. In 2007, when Congress last considered comprehensive immigration legislation, the two groups could not agree on a common approach. That legislation failed.
The accord endorses legalizing the status of illegal immigrants already in the United States and opposes any large new program for employers to bring in temporary immigrant workers, officials of both federations said.
“The labor movement will work together to make sure that the White House as well as Congress understand that we speak about immigration reform with one voice,” Mr. Sweeney said in a statement to The New York Times.
But while the compromise repaired one fissure in the coalition that has favored broad immigration legislation, it appeared to open another. An official from the United States Chamber of Commerce said Monday that the business community remained committed to a significant guest-worker program.
“If the unions think they’re going to push a bill through without the support of the business community, they’re crazy,” said Randel Johnson, the chamber’s vice president of labor, immigration and employee benefits. “There’s only going to be one shot at immigration reform. As part of the trade-off for legalization, we need to expand the temporary worker program.”
The common labor position is also unlikely to convince many opponents that an immigration overhaul would not harm American workers. When Obama administration officials said last week that the president intended to push Congress this year to take up an immigration bill that would include a path to legal status for the country’s estimated 12 million illegal immigrants, critics criticized the approach as amnesty for lawbreakers.
“In our current economic crisis, Americans cannot afford to lose more jobs to illegal workers,” said Representative Steve King, an Iowa Republican who sits on the House Judiciary subcommittee on immigration. “American workers are depending on President Obama to protect their jobs from those in America illegally.”
The two labor federations have agreed in the past to proposals that would give legal status to illegal immigrants. But in 2007 the A.F.L.-C.I.O. parted ways with the service employees and several other unions when it did not support legislation put forth by the Bush administration because it contained provisions for an expanded guest-worker program.
In the new accord, the A.F.L.-C.I.O. and Change to Win have called for managing future immigration of workers through a national commission. The commission would determine how many permanent and temporary foreign workers should be admitted each year based on demand in American labor markets. Union officials are confident that the result would reduce worker immigration during times of high unemployment like the present.
Mr. Hansen, who is president of the United Food and Commercial Workers Union, said in an interview that the joint proposal was a “building block to go forward to get immigration reform up on the agenda in Congress” sometime this year.
Thousands of immigrant farm workers and other low-wage laborers come to the United States through seasonal guest-worker programs that are subject to numerical visa limits and have been criticized by employers as rigid and inefficient. Many unions oppose the programs because the immigrants are tied to one employer and cannot change jobs no matter how abusive the conditions, so union officials say they undercut conditions for American workers. Highly skilled foreign technology engineers and medical specialists also come on temporary visas.
Advocates for immigrants said a unified labor movement could substantially bolster their position as they push for legislation to restructure the ailing immigration system.
“It shows how important the issue is to the representatives of American workers,” said Frank Sharry, executive director of America’s Voice, an advocate group.
A.F.L.-C.I.O.. officials said they agreed with Change to Win leaders that, with more than seven million unauthorized immigrants already working across the nation, legalizing their status would be the most effective way to protect labor standards for all workers.
“We have developed a joint strategy with the approach framed around workers’ rights,” said Ana Avendaño, associate general counsel of the A.F.L.-C.I.O.
Labor leaders said that they would talk with other groups in coming weeks to nail down details of a common position, and that they would then would work in Congress and with the Obama administration to try to ensure that their proposal was part of any bill offered for debate.
Also supporting the compromise is Eliseo Medina, an executive vice president of the Service Employees International Union, a member of Change to Win with hundreds of thousands of members who are immigrants. The Change to Win federation was formed in 2005 with seven unions that broke away from the A.F.L.-C.I.O.
The plan for a labor commission to monitor and control levels of worker immigration was developed with help from Ray Marshall, a labor secretary under President Jimmy Carter. Over the past year, Mr. Marshall, at the request of the A.F.L.-C.I.O., has been consulting between the two federations and with a variety of Hispanic organizations and advocate groups for immigrants.
“All these groups understand that one of the main reasons they lost before was that they were not together,” Mr. Marshall said.
According to a list of principles the labor leaders will present on Tuesday, they are proposing a “depoliticized,” independent commission that “can assess labor market needs on an ongoing basis and — based on a methodology to be approved by Congress — determine the number of foreign workers to be admitted for employment purposes.”
Mr. Johnson, the Chamber of Commerce official, said, “A commission doesn’t get us there.”
Tamar Jacoby, president of ImmigrationWorks USA, a group that organizes businesses to support comprehensive immigration legislation, agreed that employers would have many questions about the approach.
“The question is, Will the commission work?” Ms. Jacoby said. “Will it be adequately attuned to and triggered by the labor market? A system that may — or may not — supply the workers that business will need in the future after the recession will be a cause of great concern to employers.”
=
UNITED LABOR GOOD FOR
IMMIGRATION REFORM
MAPA and Hermandad Mexicana Latinoamericana applauds the accord reached between the two national labor federations, AFL-CIO and Change To Win, on the basic tenets of federal immigration reform and their commitment to move the reform agenda this year with the U.S. Congress and President Barack Obama. While we haven't reviewed all the details of the agreement, labor's support for the full legalization of those currently in the U.S. and no expansion of contract-labor programs corresponds to the broad sentiment of the immigrant communities who have fought tenaciously for reform. A united approach between labor, church, and the communities of immigrants themselves is the key to a successful campaign. We will report more on this issue as the details are revealed.
Nativo Lopez-Vigil
National President
Sunday, April 05, 2009
Wednesday, April 01, 2009
May Day 2009
Why Immigrant Workers Will Fill the Streets This May Day
Friday 27 March 2009
by: David Bacon, t r u t h o u t | Perspective
In a little over a month, hundreds of thousands, perhaps even millions, of people will fill the streets in city after city, town after town, across the US. This year these May Day marches of immigrant workers will make an important demand on the Obama administration: End the draconian enforcement policies of the Bush administration. Establish a new immigration policy based on human rights and recognition of the crucial economic and social contributions of immigrants to US society.
This year's marches will continue the recovery in the US of the celebration of May Day, recognized in the rest of the world as the day recognizing the contributions and achievements of working people. That recovery started on Monday, May 1, 2006, when over a million people filled the streets of Los Angeles, with hundreds of thousands more in Chicago, New York and cities and towns throughout the United States. Again on May Day in 2007 and 2008, immigrants and their supporters demonstrated and marched, from coast to coast.
One sign found in almost every march said it all: "We are Workers, not Criminals!" Often it was held in the calloused hands of men and women who looked as though they'd just come from work in a factory, cleaning an office building or picking grapes. The sign stated an obvious truth. Millions of people have come to the United States to work, not to break its laws. Some have come with visas, and others without them. But they are all contributors to the society they've found here.
The protests have seemed spontaneous, but they come as a result of years of organizing, educating and agitating - activities that have given immigrants confidence, and at least some organizations the credibility needed to mobilize direct mass action. This movement is the legacy of Bert Corona, immigrant rights pioneer and founder of many national Latino organizations. He trained thousands of immigrant activists, taught the value of political independence, and believed that immigrants themselves must conduct the fight for immigrant rights. Most of the leaders of the radical wing of today's immigrant rights movement were students or disciples of Corona.
Immigrants, however, feel their backs are against the wall, and they came out of their homes and workplaces to show it. In part, their protests respond to a wave of draconian proposals to criminalize immigration status, and work itself for undocumented people. But the protests do more than react to a particular congressional or legislative agenda. They are the cumulative response to years of bashing and denigrating immigrants generally, and Mexicans and Latinos in particular.
In 1986, the Immigration Reform and Control Act made it a crime, for the first time in US history, to hire people without papers. Defenders argued that if people could not legally work they would leave. Life was not so simple.
Undocumented people are part of the communities they live in. They cannot simply go, nor should they. They seek the same goals of equality and opportunity that working people in the US have historically fought to achieve. In addition, for most immigrants, there are no jobs to return to in the countries from which they've come. Rufino Dominguez, a Oaxacan community leader in Fresno, California, says, "The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) made the price of corn so low that it's not economically possible to plant a crop anymore. We come to the US to work because there's no alternative." After Congress passed NAFTA, six million displaced people came to the US as a result.
Instead of recognizing this reality, the US government has attempted to make holding a job a criminal act. Some states and local communities, seeing a green light from the Department of Homeland Security, have passed measures that go even further. Last summer, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff proposed a rule requiring employers to fire any worker who couldn't correct a mismatch between the Social Security number the worker had provided an employer and the SSA database. The regulation assumes those workers have no valid immigration visa, and therefore no valid Social Security number.
With 12 million people living in the US without legal immigration status, the regulation would lead to massive firings, bringing many industries and businesses to a halt. Citizens and legal visa holders would be swept up as well, since the Social Security database is often inaccurate. Under Chertoff, the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement has conducted sweeping workplace raids, arresting and deporting thousands of workers. Many have been charged with an additional crime - identity theft - because they used a Social Security number belonging to someone else to get a job. Yet, workers using another number actually deposit money into Social Security funds, and will never collect benefits their contributions paid for.
The Arizona legislature has passed a law requiring employers to verify the immigration status of every worker through a federal database called E-Verify, which is even more incomplete and full of errors than Social Security. They must fire workers whose names get flagged. And Mississippi passed a bill making it a felony for an undocumented worker to hold a job, with jail time of 1-10 years, fines of up to $10,000, and no bail for anyone arrested. Employers get immunity.
Many of these punitive measures were incorporated into proposals for "comprehensive immigration reform" that were debated in Congress in 2006 and 2007. The comprehensive bills combined increased enforcement, especially criminalization of work for the undocumented, with huge guest worker programs under which large employers would recruit temporary labor under contract outside the US, bringing workers into the country in a status that would deny them basic rights and social equality. While those proposals failed in Congress, the Bush administration implemented some of their most draconian provisions by executive order and administrative action.
Together, these factors have produced a huge popular response, which has become most visible in the annual marches and demonstrations on May Day. Nativo Lopez, president of both the Mexican American Political Association and the Hermandad Mexicana Latinoamericana, says "the huge number of immigrants and their supporters in the streets found these compromises completely unacceptable. We will only get what we're ready to fight for, but people are ready and willing to fight for the whole enchilada. Washington legislators and lobbyists fear the growth of a new civil rights movement in the streets, because it rejects their compromises and makes demands that go beyond what they have defined as 'politically possible.'"
The marches have put forward an alternative set of demands, which include a real legal status for the 12 million undocumented people in the US, the right to organize to raise wages and gain workplace rights, increased availability of visas that give immigrants some degree of social equality, especially visas based on family reunification, no expansion of guest worker programs, and a guarantee of human rights to immigrants, especially in communities along the US/Mexican border.
At the same time, the price of trying to push people out of the US who've come here for survival is that the vulnerability of undocumented workers will increase. Unscrupulous employers use that vulnerability to deny overtime pay or minimum wage, or fire workers when they protest or organize. Increased vulnerability ultimately results in cheaper labor and fewer rights for everyone. After deporting over 1,000 workers at Swift meatpacking plants, Homeland Security Secretary Chertoff called for linking "effective interior enforcement and a temporary-worker program.'' The government's goal is cheap labor for large employers. Deportations, firings and guest worker programs all make labor cheaper and contribute to a climate of fear and insecurity for all workers.
The May 1 actions highlight the economic importance of immigrant labor. Undocumented workers deserve legal status because of that labor - their inherent contribution to society. The value they create is never called illegal, and no one dreams of taking it away from the employers who profit from it. Yet the people who produce that value are called exactly that - illegal. All workers create value through their labor, but immigrant workers are especially profitable, because they are so often denied many of the union-won benefits accorded to native-born workers. The average undocumented worker has been in the US for five years. By that time, these workers have paid a high price for their lack of legal status, through low wages and lost benefits.
"Undocumented workers deserve immediate legal status, and have already paid for it," Lopez says.
On May 1, the absence of immigrant workers from workplaces, schools and stores demonstrates their power in the national immigration debate and sends a powerful message that they will not be shut out of the debate over their status. They have rescued from anonymity the struggle for the eight-hour day, begun in Chicago over a century ago by the immigrants of yesteryear. They overcame the legacy of the cold war, in which celebrations of May Day were attacked and banned. They are recovering the traditions of all working people for the people of the United States.
David Bacon is a writer and photographer. His new book, "Illegal People - How Globalization Creates Migration and Criminalizes Immigrants," was just published by Beacon Press.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)