My Photo

Press Credentials

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter

    June 29, 2009

    Barack Obama and Alvaro Uribe, Chapter 1

    "600 Words by Esther J. Cepeda"

    President Barack Obama met with Colombian President Alvaro Uribe earlier today in the Oval Office around 3:40 p.m. EST. Seated in chairs in front of the fire place – beneath the George Washington photo – Presidents Obama and Uribe made remarks, paused for translations and photos, then took two questions. Sorta boring, really, in terms of theater.

    But the drama of the developing situation in Honduras – against the backdrop of a White House administration furiously attempting to forge closer ties with the Latin American countries that were largely ignored by the Bush administration – made for a head-craning afternoon for those of us who care about our foreign policy toward Latin America.

    I’m passing this along because – if today’s opening White House press conference question about whether the Obamas mailed a written condolence to the late Michael Jackson’s father is any indication – you won’t read much about it in the mainstream media. All quotes came from the White House Office of the Press Secretary, and my special thanks to today’s trusty pool reporter , USA Today’s David Jackson.

    Obama started with the niceties, then zoomed in: "We discussed, most prominently, the interests of both countries in moving forward on a free trade agreement.  This is something that has been discussed for quite some time.  I have instructed Ambassador Kirk, our United States Trade Representative, to begin working closely with President Uribe's team on how we can proceed on a free trade agreement.  There are obvious difficulties involved in the process and there remains work to do, but I'm confident that ultimately we can strike a deal that is good for the people of Colombia and good for the people of the United States."

    Then President Obama made a quite bold statement, one that will surely be argued more in the coming days:

    "I commended President Uribe on the progress that has been made in human rights in Colombia and dealing with the killings of labor leaders there, and obviously we've seen a downward trajectory in the deaths of labor unions and we've seen improvements when it comes to prosecution of those who are carrying out these blatant human rights offenses," Obama said. "President Uribe acknowledges that there remains more work to be done, and we look forward to cooperating with him to continue to improve both the rights of organized labor in Colombia and to protect both labor and civil rights leaders there.

    Along those same lines, we obviously think that the steps that have already been made on issues like extrajudicial killings and illegal surveillance, that it is important that Colombia pursue a path of rule of law and transparency, and I know that that is something that President Uribe is committed to doing."

    Obama, taking a page from Hillary Clinton’s book when she spoke in Mexico back in April, Obama too, took responsibility on behalf of the American People for the drug violence gripping so much of Latin America:

    "It's important that the United States steps up and cooperates effectively in battling the adverse effects of drug trafficking. 

    And that includes, by the way, the United States reducing demand for drugs.  We have responsibilities.  We have responsibilities to reduce the trafficking of guns into the south that help strengthen these cartels and the flows of money and money laundering that at times involves not just the south – Southern Hemisphere but also the Northern Hemisphere.  And so looking for additional ways that we can cooperate on those issues is very important."

    The action then stopped, according to Jackson, "In what is beginning to become a tradition, the Colombian press corps requested and received a group photo with the president."

    Apparently, Obama teased members of the pool for not wanting a picture of their own.

    "You guys don't want to take a picture with me?," reporter Jackson quoted Obama as saying. "When a media member informed him that we're ‘too cool’ for that sort of thing, Obama said: ‘You're too cool, exactly - you guys are just too cool.’"

    Uribe took the podium and, speaking in English, added his own bold statements:

    "In the case of human rights, Colombia is rule of law in the utmost expression of public opinion participation.  We -- I am the first with a duty to support of our armed forces, but for that reason of their honor, every soldier, every policeman in Colombia understands that we need credibility for this policing of democratic security, and credibility depends on effectiveness and on transparency.  And transparency is a question of human rights.

    Therefore, we are open, we are very receptive, to receive any advice, any suggestion on how we are going to fulfill our goal of ceasing civil violations of human rights in Colombia."

    Wow, really? That’s a pretty humbled stance. What does that really mean? I have no idea.

    Uribe, a president who enjoys a 70% approval rating in Colombia, followed up on a question from a reporter: "We have a recognition to advance in security, human rights, state restructure, to advance in economics, to advance in social cohesion, and for all these things it is very important to have the permanent support of President Obama, of the government of the United States, of the Congress of the United States."

    During further Q&A, President Obama made this statement regarding the situation in Honduras:

    "Well, let me first of all speak about the coup in Honduras, because this was a topic of conversation between myself and President Uribe.

    All of us have great concerns about what's taken place there.  President Zelaya was democratically elected.  He had not yet completed his term.  We believe that the coup was not legal and that President Zelaya remains the President of Honduras, the democratically elected President there.  In that we have joined all the countries in the region, including Colombia and the Organization of American States.

    I think it's -- it would be a terrible precedent if we start moving backwards into the era in which we are seeing military coups as a means of political transition rather than democratic elections.  The region has made enormous progress over the last 20 years in establishing democratic traditions in Central America and Latin America.  We don't want to go back to a dark past.  The United States has not always stood as it should with some of these fledgling democracies, but over the last several years, I think both Republicans and Democrats in the United States have recognized that we always want to stand with democracy, even if the results don't always mean that the leaders of those countries are favorable towards the United States.  And that is a tradition that we want to continue.

    So we are very clear about the fact that President Zelaya is the democratically elected President, and we will work with the regional organizations like OAS and with other international institutions to see if we can resolve this in a peaceful way."

    (Earlier in the day at the press briefing, Robert Gibbs the press secretary had confirmed that President Obama had not had any contact with President Zelaya Monday morning. He did say the White House had been working to avert the coup previous to the Friday incident, but didn’t give specifics on that or on whether there is a working plan for incentives or consequences for resolution of the incident.)

    President Obama continued:

    "With respect to the free trade agreement, obviously a lot of work has already been done on the free trade agreement, and we are hopeful that we can -- we can move forward to completion.  I don't have a strict timetable, because I'm going to have to consult with Congress obviously on this issue.  We've got a lot on our plates, if you haven't noticed.  And I think that the burden is not simply on Colombia; I think Colombia has done a lot of excellent work.  It is a matter of getting both countries to a place where their legislatures feel confident that it will be ultimately to the economic benefit of these countries.

    I have noted a special concern that is bipartisan and shared both by this administration and Congress, that the human rights issues in Colombia get resolved.  President Uribe has assured me that he is interested in resolving those issues.  And, as I said, great progress has been made.  I trust that we can make more progress.  And I think that will help shape the overall environment in which this issue is being debated in Congress."

    Asked by a Colombian reporter about term limits and whether Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez should be limited in any way from running for re-election, Obama gave his standard answer about not getting involved in other countries’ democratic elections.

    President Uribe, took the question as platform to discuss Colombia’s brand of democracy:

    I said to President Obama, first, I am concerned, because I am a member of one generation of the four or five generations that have not lived one single day in peace in Colombia or prosperity.  Therefore, I consider that Colombia needs to extend in that time security, democratic values, investment in social responsibility and social cohesion – with adjustments.

    And I have said to President Obama what I want to say to you.  Colombia is a country of solid democratic institutions.  When we speak about institutions, we cannot speak in abstract about institutions.  We have to speak about institutions in concrete terms.  We have 1,102 mayors directly elected by the people; 32 governors.  The regions in Colombia invest 51 percent of the public expenses.  My government has built governments with all the regional governors and mayors regardless their political regions, and they have many, many political regions.

    The justice, administration is independent in Colombia.  Colombia has solid free press.  Colombia has bodies, independent bodies, for control.  Colombia is a country with very solid institutions.

    I beg you, journalists, to separate the convenience or inconvenience of perpetuating the precedent with the qualification of our institutions.  Anyway, our democratic institutions are totally solid."

    Barack Obama and Alvaro Uribe, Chapter 2, to come.



    Esther J. Cepeda writes the "600 Words" & "Pregunta del Dia" columns, and is also the Chief Marketing and Communications Officer for the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. Her views and reporting do not necessarily reflect those of ISAC. "600 words" is a registered trademark of EeJayCee, Inc., Copyright 2008. May be reprinted with permission, contact eejaycee@600words.com

    June 24, 2009

    Ten who are making a big difference for us all – Chicago Latino List 2009

    “Way more than 600 Words by Esther J. Cepeda”

     

    Long story short: nearly every time there’s any sort of Who’s Who/Mover-Shaker/One-to-Watch list in “mainstream” publications there are few, if any, Hispanics on it despite there being a ton of awesome Latinos doing truly amazing things here in Chicago.

     

    So, in order to help blunt this perceived shortage of Latino superstars I decided to start one.

     

    I asked for nominations, got about 120, threw out the “usual suspects” – like elected officials and already well-publicized business and community leaders – narrowed the field to get a diverse group of immigrants, U.S.-born, younger, older, community, and business types, then did one-on-one interviews.

     

    At the conclusion, I found five men and five women all dedicating their personal and professional excellence to making Chicago, Illinois, the U.S. – and sometimes the world – a better place.

     

    Let me say it again: these people are not merely engaged in the noble task of empowering the Hispanic community, they have their sights set on making life better for blacks, whites, multi-ethnics, rurals, suburbans, urbans, immigrants, U.S.-born, and everyone in between.

     

    And, yeah, these rock stars just happen to be Hispanic.

     

    Please join me in getting your inspiration on as you read the stories of the ten incredible people who comprise the first annual “Chicago Latino List.”

     

    Click on the title to read the full profile:

     

    Concepcion Rodriguez, 45 – Scare-you-straight Caretaker of the Dead

    Concharodriguez A bilingual Funeral Director and embalmer, reformed gang member and volunteer gang intervention specialist, Rodriguez shows children and teens the grisly ravages of drugs, alcohol and the gang culture. She also talks to communities, affluent and needy alike, about how to reach out to kids they might not even think are at risk. Through her work, she has single-handedly saved the lives of hundreds of Chicago children.

     

     

    Cynthia La Boy, 37 – Conqueror of All Obstacles

    Cynthialaboy A single mother and professional living with a traumatic brain injury after a brutally violent crime, La Boy was told by her doctors she’d never be able to care for herself – much less go to college or have a career. Today she works at the Lake County Housing Authority as a bilingual assistant property manager connecting families to clean, safe living conditions and teaching them how to be responsible homeowners. A living miracle, she’s an award winning advocate and authentic voice for people living with disabilities.

     

     

    Antonio Martinez Jr., 36 – Charmer of Benefactors

    Antoniomartinez Martinez walked away from a successful dream career in sports marketing to become one of a very few Latinos in the field of professional fundraising. As Assistant Director of Development with the Chicago Community Trust, Martinez raises money to serve the basic human needs of the entire Chicago metropolitan region by supporting vitally-necessary community-based non-profit organizations.

     

     

    John Viramontes, 57 – Voice to the Voiceless

    J._Viramontes_Chicago_Latino_List_2009_photo_by_Daisy_Urbieta An accountant by trade and lifelong community activist by heart, Viramontes dedicates his time to major issues including predatory lending, housing parity, rights for visual artists, and immigration. On an eternal quest for social justice, he’s devoted to improving the quality of life in Chicago neighborhoods and empowering struggling artists nationally by being a community presence and passionate spokesperson.

     

     

    Dr. Ana Gil-Garcia, 54 – Leveler of Educational Inequalities

    Anagilgarcia A tenured University Professor at Northeastern Illinois University, author, esteemed community leader, and forerunning advocate for Latino educational leaders, Gil-Garcia is a three time Fulbright scholar and an internationally acclaimed professional.  Gil-Garcia, a published author, works tirelessly for a variety of community organizations and devotes most of her passion to ensuring the Chicago Public School system is a nationally-recognized leader in employing school administration leaders who accurately represent the diversity of their student communities.

     

     

    Jose Oliva, 36 – Restaurant Worker Sentinel

    JoseOliva A Policy Coordinator with Restaurant Opportunities Centers United, Oliva is a driving force behind the legislative push to earn restaurant workers such common benefits as paid time off and job opportunity training. As the voice of both affluent teens working summer food service jobs and adults who support families with their back-of-house restaurant jobs, Oliva labors to fight poverty, racism and sexism while mobilizing local worker organizations. He not only teaches these groups how to become active and engaged in the federal political process, but he represents them in Washington, DC, as well.

     

     

    Veronica Arreola, 34 – Professional Feminist

    VeronicaArreola2 As Assistant Director for the UIC Center for Research on Women and Gender and the Director of Women in Science and Engineering Program, Arreola is a dedicated advocate for women’s rights, helping them maneuver professions that even today are still dominated by men. As a mother, accomplished blogger, and activist for women’s reproductive rights, she has won numerous awards for her work and is dedicated to helping women and girls advocate for themselves in Chicago and around the country.

     

     

    Roberto Cornelio, 51 – Large Business Incubator

    Robertocornelio The Chief Operating Officer of the Illinois Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, Cornelio – a former top executive at Fortune 500 companies – works to raise the funds, nurture the relationships and promote the programs that drive Hispanic business growth and foster the next generation of Hispanic business and business leaders. His work makes it possible for the Latino community’s instinct for entrepreneurship to thrive and, in turn, deliver jobs and opportunities to contribute to the overall economic development and job creation in Chicago and across Illinois communities.

     

     

    Nelly Aguilar, 33 – Esquire to the Special

    NellyAguilar1 Attorney and dedicated special education advocate, Aguilar – mother to a son with Autism – works to protect the educational rights of children with disabilities. One of only approximately 15 lawyers specializing in the rights of students with special education needs, she campaigns for State and Federal law reform to help families’ secure medical, educational and recreational opportunities for their special needs children. Better still, she trains the next generation of attorneys who will serve the hundreds of thousands of Illinois children with disabilities.

     

     

    Matthew Montez, 22 – De-myth-ifier of the Path to College

    MatthewMontez A former Pilsen/Little Village caseworker, recent college graduate and eternal optimist, Montez has just committed the next two years of his life to the Illinois Student Assistance Corps. After a seven-week training camp, he’s moving to Rockford to teach high school students how to prepare for, apply to and pay for college. Inspired most by those who avoid controversy and succeed despite adversity, his mission is to connect with high school students who will be the first in their family to go beyond a HS diploma, and teach them how to build enough social capital to get themselves into and through the rigors of college.

     

    “Chicago Latino List 2009” was generously sponsored by the Chicago Sinfonietta, the Chicago White Sox, and Lettuce Entertain You Enterprises Restaurants. All nominees were independently nominated for this recognition; their rejection and/or selection to “Chicago Latino List 2009” was not, in any way, influenced by any disclosed or undisclosed personal or professional proximity to Esther J. Cepeda or to any sponsor of “Chicago Latino List 2009”.



    Esther J. Cepeda writes the "600 Words" & "Pregunta del Dia" columns, and is also the Chief Marketing and Communications Officer for the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. Her views and reporting do not necessarily reflect those of ISAC. "600 words" is a registered trademark of EeJayCee, Inc., Copyright 2008. May be reprinted with permission, contact eejaycee@600words.com

    Chicago Latino List 2009 – Concepcion Rodriguez, Scare You Straight Caretaker of the Dead

    “600 Words by Esther J. Cepeda”

     

    Concharodriguez She’s big, she’s loud, and she scares children to death.

     

    Well, almost…better said is that 45-year-old Concepcion

     

    “Concha” Rodriguez scares kids who don’t really understand the dangers of gang culture with real-life stories about real dead gangbangers.

     

    “I talk to kids and tell them about the reality of the gang life, about families seeing their children cold, wrapped in plastic, cut up from an autopsy, and about their screams which will haunt me ‘til the day I die,” Rodriguez told me.

     

    A bilingual funeral director and embalmer, the third-generation Mexican-American Rodriguez has worked for Zefran Funeral Home on the South side of Chicago since August 1995. Born in Texas but raised in the inner city of Chicago, by age 16, she was a member of the Lady Aces gang in Pilsen.

     

    “I got out of the gang when my 15 year-old girlfriend was shot and killed as she walked with her boyfriend,” Rodriguez recalls. “They buried her in her quinceanera dress.”

     

    “I made the choice to leave that lifestyle and become somebody, rather than a statistic.”

     

    These days when the 5’10” self-described loudmouth walks into a room of unruly kids who firmly believe they will live forever no matter what, she makes an indelible impression.

     

    “Usually the casket I bring gets their attention,” she told me. She takes that casket to schools and community organizations for her presentation “Don’t be Grounded by Age 18 (Tough talk straight from the Funeral Home),” and has a mirror in it, giving one pause when opened.

     

    If that doesn’t get them she tells her own story. And if that isn’t enough she’ll get into the gross anatomy aspect. “I show the “Y” incision starting in the clavicle and how you cut from neck to navel, then from ear to ear to open your scalp and saw your skull to pull out your brain,” Rodriguez said.

     

    And if that doesn’t get them (she talks to some seriously tough crowds!) she aims for the heart.

     

    “Then I go into description when a mother and father has to go identify their loved one at the morgue – with your face cut up, THAT’s how your mother and father are going to see you,” Rodriguez warns. “If that’s ok for you, fine, but I tell them that when you’re in a gang so is your whole family. What if it’s your mother, little sister, or little brother who dies because of your gangbanging? Then their whole demeanor changes.”

     

    But she doesn’t always stop there – she can’t. Rodriguez gets a shot at the worst kids: the ones who are on the precipice of real harm, real crime, the ones who could still be saved.

     

    “I tell ‘em, ‘you WILL get violated, you WILL get beaten, girls DO get raped. I talk to them about maybe it’s too late for you but keep this away from your brother or sister,”

     

    Her message isn’t just for those who live on the rough streets of the inner-city, though, she travels to some verrrrry nice middle-class and affluent communities, brought in by community organizations who know that today’s gangsta, thug culture holds allure for kids who have it all, too.

     

    “Some bad seeds will be transplanted to the suburbs, or some bad kid’s going to corrupt your kids who’ve got everything and are bored,” she warns parents and grandparents. “I tell parents how they can get involved make a difference these people who live comfortably, ‘go give one hour of your time at the library,’ don’t just call them ‘bad kids’ lets all get together to make a difference. Besides, showing love and giving respect doesn’t cost money.”

     

    But Rodriguez is tame with the adults in the suburban libraries. The really tough kids get an unwelcome trip to her funeral home where the lesson is a little more tangible.

     

    “I tell them that if the walls of my funeral home could talk they’d hear the cries of parents, brothers, sisters,” Rodriguez said. “But when they walk out the door they have the chance to get out.”

    “Chicago Latino List 2009” was generously sponsored by the Chicago Sinfonietta, the Chicago White Sox, and Lettuce Entertain You Enterprises Restaurants. All nominees were independently nominated for this recognition; their rejection and/or selection to “Chicago Latino List 2009” was not, in any way, influenced by any disclosed or undisclosed personal or professional proximity to Esther J. Cepeda or to any sponsor of “Chicago Latino List 2009”.



    Esther J. Cepeda writes the "600 Words" & "Pregunta del Dia" columns, and is also the Chief Marketing and Communications Officer for the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. Her views and reporting do not necessarily reflect those of ISAC. "600 words" is a registered trademark of EeJayCee, Inc., Copyright 2008. May be reprinted with permission, contact eejaycee@600words.com

    Chicago Latino List 2009 - Antonio Martinez Jr., Charmer of Benefactors

    “600 Words by Esther J. Cepeda”

     

    Antoniomartinez Consider this life: there you are; a young guy, working a dream job in sports marketing, making tons of money, hanging out with cool people and one day you say to yourself “yeah this is cool but, I think I’m going to quit and find a way to feed the poor instead.”

     

    Yeah, that’s pretty much what Tony Martinez, a 36-year-old fourth generation Mexican-American did about six months ago after having worked a decade in the pretty-darned-fun specialty of Marketing for such internationally-recognized brands as the Chicago Cubs, the Museum of Science and Industry, and the American Bar Association.

     

    Oh he’s still getting people to part with their hard-earned money, but these days it’s as the Assistant Director of Development with the Chicago Community Trust. There, Martinez raises money to serve the basic human needs of the entire Chicago metropolitan region by providing financial support to community-based non-profit organizations who, very often, fill needs no other state or city agencies can fill.

     

    “As a fundraiser my job is to motivate individuals or corporations to allocate dollars to the Trust. I inspire and connect philanthropists at all levels with non-profit organizations that serve the needs of our community.” Martinez told me, “It involves relationship building, cultivating donors, matching their interests to the community needs, and then stewardship of their gift.”

     

    Just to give you a flavor of the scale of Martinez’ task, for the fiscal year ending September 2007, the Chicago Community Trust and their donors awarded $115 million to the region's not-for-profit arts/culture, basic human needs, community development, education, and health organizations.

     

    Wonderful stuff, of course, but what kind of person gives up the glamorous Sports Marketing life to give succor to the sick and clothe children?

     

    “OK, it’s true – and the most exciting was working with the Cubs – but even then, I needed to do something more. I needed to give back somehow,” Tony said, a brilliant halo forming over his well-coiffeured head. “Growing up my family didn’t have much to give, but whenever someone came to them for assistance whether it was financial or just someone to listen to, they always found a way to give. That giving was always engrained in me.”

     

    “I was raising money for sponsorships for some great events, but I felt like there wasn’t a higher purpose so I decided to raise money for those who need it most.” An exotic breed, Martinez verified that professional fundraisers are very rarely Latino. I’d never actually met or spoken with one before.

     

    I asked him what sort of community organizations were in his portfolio, and he got where I was going with it – “I’m not a Hispanic person working for Hispanic money for the Hispanic community,” Martinez said. “The sad reality is that the needs are there for all Chicago residents – I tell people in the most polite way possible that we all need to wake up to meet this drastic need. If we don’t take care of our own, if we don’t invest in our region – in the basic human needs in our region – its going to go down and go down quick.

     

    And where are those people going to end up? These needs make the whole region more vulnerable,” Martinez said. “Connect all the dots.”

     

    Well sure, connecting dots – that sounds easy enough. But how do you, in the most catastrophic economic downturn since the Great Depression, ask for money?

     

     “We have to persevere in telling the stories of the people who are in need,” Martinez said. “It is hard to ask people for money but I think of it this way: if I’m not going to do it who else will?”

     

     

    “Chicago Latino List 2009” was generously sponsored by the Chicago Sinfonietta, the Chicago White Sox, and Lettuce Entertain You Enterprises Restaurants. All nominees were independently nominated for this recognition; their rejection and/or selection to “Chicago Latino List 2009” was not, in any way, influenced by any disclosed or undisclosed personal or professional proximity to Esther J. Cepeda or to any sponsor of “Chicago Latino List 2009”.



    Esther J. Cepeda writes the "600 Words" & "Pregunta del Dia" columns, and is also the Chief Marketing and Communications Officer for the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. Her views and reporting do not necessarily reflect those of ISAC. "600 words" is a registered trademark of EeJayCee, Inc., Copyright 2008. May be reprinted with permission, contact eejaycee@600words.com

    June 16, 2009

    “600 words” is number 19 of 60 on Chicago’s “NEW News” list

    "600 Words by Esther J. Cepeda"

    "Pregunta del Dia" translates from Spanish into "Question of the Day" and today’s comes from Richard Steele (no, not the British author or the WBEZ radio show host), a long-time fan:

    Q. "

    Esther, what’s #19 in a list of Chicago 60?  I looked on your website but didn’t see any reference.  You’re #1 on my list!!!  Best, Richard"

    A.

    Last week was one of those ridiculously busy weeks where good things happened and there wasn’t any time to stop and smell the roses.

    I hate to be self-referential but I’ve gotten several inquiries on what in the world this "Number 19" means even though I hadn’t intended to create a mystique by mentioning it in my weekly e-blast (subscribe here for free…I won’t share your email).

    Last Wednesday June 10, the Chicago Community Trust published a special report "The New News: Journalism We Want and Need," about local online news outlets. It was researched and written by a team led by Thom Clark and Gordon Mayer of the Community Media Workshop (download copy here).

    Cmw_tnn_cover_thumb_button Basically, the report is an outgrowth of the hand-wringing that seems to accompany any discussion that involves media or journalism "what’s going to happen to news in the internet age?!" The report seeks to provide a directory and assessment of local online news publications and was "based primarily on a survey of bloggers, citizen journalists, and others using an approach that blends self-reported data, Google page rank and Alexa.com traffic ranking, and a qualitative assessment of each site," according to the Community Media Workshop’s press release.

    It went on to conclude that the journalism "we want and need" has three characteristics: it’s vetted by editors for accuracy, clarity and to reduce bias, it’s selected from among the mountains of available data to entertain and inform, and it helps frame one regional conversation about challenges and opportunities.

    Happily, my editor and the editorial board of NewsTex, Content on Demand – which distributes my work far and wide – provide me with the vetting, and I kick in the entertainment, original reporting and thought-leadership.

    So the results look like this, of 60 local Chicago news sources, "600 Words by Esther J. Cepeda" is number 19 and pulling down three-and-a-half stars out of a possible five based on the 6 criteria points gathered from self-reports, third-party sites (like Alexa and Google), and qualitative assessment from Community Media Workshop. I’m also sporting an almost-7,000 e-mail subscriber list, and a Google page rank of 6.

    Not too shabby. And thanks for asking, Richard, it’s constant readers like you who keep me going!


    Esther J. Cepeda writes the "600 Words" & "Pregunta del Dia" columns, and is also the Chief Marketing and Communications Officer for the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. Her views and reporting do not necessarily reflect those of ISAC. "600 words" is a registered trademark of EeJayCee, Inc., Copyright 2008. May be reprinted with permission, contact eejaycee@600words.com

    June 14, 2009

    Comparing the jilted hearts of Iranian, Mexican, and U.S. voters

    "600 Words by Esther J. Cepeda"

    How must it feel in the streets of Tehran today?

    How must it feel to walk around, stunned, at the fresh bout of violence gripping this country that only days before was looking, to the rest of the world at least, like it was going to pull a u-turn under the leadership of a new president who might have been expected to not spew hatred toward the United States at every turn.

    Don’t misunderstand – not everyone in Iran is upset today, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had many supporters, not the least of which were the poorer, working class, and many rural residents of the Middle Eastern country which lies snuggled between the Caspian and Arabian Seas.

     Burningtehran Still, the images are indelible: yound green-clad students, fans of the losing candidate Mir Hussein Moussavi, setting fires to cars and throwing stones, older, black-draped women literally weeping and gnashing their teeth in what the New York Times, and many other news outlets, have called the worst street protests in a decade.

    There’s anger, disappointment, and I imagine, a little something like what Charlie Brown felt every single time Lucy bamboozled him into thinking she wasn’t going to yank that football away from him at the last moment; loss. Loss of the hope that had seemingly blanketed Iran in the last weeks, the loss that comes with the feeling that an important election has been stolen from voters.

    It reminded me of July 2006, when Mexican President Felipe Calderon and his opponent Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador (AMLO) wrestled with the razor-thin margins for months to see who won the Mexican presidency. After several nail-biting months of re-counts, allegations of corruption and general uproar, Calderon was declared the winner on September 5, 2006, winning by a mere 243,934 votes (0.58%).

    That July election set off nightmarish, sometimes violent protests that literally shut the city down for months and months as AMLO set up a shadow presidency and his supporters occupied the streets of Mexico vowing not to leave until justice was carried out.

    I mentioned this parallel as a Tweet yesterday morning: "Crap! In Iran, Ahmadinejad claim's victory, as does his opponent. Hope it’s not another months-long drama like Calderon/AMLO in MX" to which one interested observer said, "right... or Florida in 2000!"

    That gave me pause...No, I don’t think so.

    Oh, I recall being as disheartened and angry as the next (non-Republican) guy that Al Gore lost to George W. Bush, and that the victory appeared to have been either the result of some horrible mechanical mishap or that – gasp – the people had gotten what they’d asked for and were about to get it good and hard.

    But I don’t remember anyone getting into the streets for a good old-fashioned riot. Endless late-night talk show skits about "hanging chads" and "butterfly ballots" yes; fires and overturned cars like what happened in Chicago when the Bulls won the 1992 basketball championship – no.

    I’m not saying we should have, I’m not saying violence is a good answer to any disappointment – no matter how devastating to a people or a country – but we are a long, long way from the Sam Adams tactics of our Founding Fathers.

    There had been those who were very concerned that if President Barack Obama lost the 2008 election that all hell would break loose (read my column on Chicago election night plans here), but we can’t know what would have happened because our home-town boy won. In any case, I can’t imagine the sort of passion being aroused like what we’re seeing in Iran today.

    God bless America, that security is our American privilege. Our thoughts should be with the people of Iran tonight.



    Esther J. Cepeda writes the "600 Words" & "Pregunta del Dia" columns, and is also the Chief Marketing and Communications Officer for the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. Her views and reporting do not necessarily reflect those of ISAC. "600 words" is a registered trademark of EeJayCee, Inc., Copyright 2008. May be reprinted with permission, contact eejaycee@600words.com

    June 10, 2009

    White House TV Blackout Warning: This is not a test

    "600 Words by Esther J. Cepeda"

    It’s not like today was a slow news day around the White House; a Monday June 15 health care speech at the Chicago American Medical Association was announced, there was a tragic shooting at the Holocaust Museum, tons of details to iron out in terms of the GM situation, TARP funds, and the bank bail-out dollar pay-backs, and, of course, more scuttlebutt about angry Republicans trying to slow down the Sotomayor hearings.

    But today’s White House press briefing spent enormous amounts of time on…drumroll please…the digital TV transition – coming to an oldie set near you this Friday June 12.

    Press Secretary Robert Gibbs trotted out Secretary of Commerce Gary Locke and subjected the poor fella to the grueling mosh-pit of a press briefing and the questions on the TV timetable ensued.

    As you know, we all got a reprieve in the analog-to-digital switch in February (read my column "The End of Television As We Know It!" here) but it’s now time to pay the piper.

    Secretary Locke said 2.5 percent of American households, or 2.8 million households are still unprepared, according to his Neilsen data. Are you?

    "If you currently have cable, satellite, or some other paid-for television service, you have nothing to worry about," Locke said. "You are prepared; you don't need to do anything, and June 12th you'll see no change in your television reception or programming."  

    ok…

    "If you have a new television set purchased, let's say, within the last one year, those new television sets come automatically with a digital tuner.  So if you have a television set a year old or newer, you're prepared; you don't need to do anything, you don't need to worry," Locke continued.

    uuummmmm…


     "But if you have a television set more than a year old and you're not on cable or satellite, and you're relying basically on free over-the-air service, you are not ready," Locke said. "And you will lose your television service this Friday if you don't act now."

    Ouch! Looks like I’m S-O-L; outta luck.  (What can I say? I read a lot! Besides, who has time for appointment TV when there’s YouTube and Hulu?)


    Locke continued:

    "So you have three options:  You can subscribe to cable or satellite; you can purchase a newer television set that has these automatic digital tuners built in; or you can purchase a converter box.  The Recovery Act provided Commerce with money to help consumers having trouble affording a digital converter box. Millions of households have applied for and received the $40 coupons to cover the cost of these converter boxes.  And the converter boxes start at $40 and we mail out two coupons per household, requesting household.  So that basically means that with the coupons you get a free converter box."


    Alright, so, never mind that I ordered one and got one and then let it expire - ooops.

    More from Locke:

    "While coupons are still available for eligible households, it will take some nine days for us to process and send out, first-class mail, these coupons, and so they will not arrive in time for this Friday's conversion.  We will have these coupons available until the end of July -- July 31st -- or as long as supplies last.  The coupons are good for 90 days each.


    If you already have a coupon, please make sure to purchase the converter box immediately at a partnering retail store like Target, RadioShack, Circuit City, or Wal-Mart.  Take it home, hook it up right away -- in fact, you can use these converter boxes now and receive the digital signal now."

    (Someone check this guy’s e-trade account, I’ll betcha he bought some Radio Shack stock last week.)


    All right, so enough with the smart-alecky "ha-ha." The reason why I’m actually passing this on is that just because I watch my "TV" the same place I read my newspaper – on a high speed broadband internet connection – doesn’t mean real people won’t actually be left with no immediate home or work access to breaking news.

    I hate to put the bad vibe out but, around midnight on Friday June 12 would be a perfect time for some ne’er-do-well to strike some pandemonium and showcase just how many low-income and non-English fluent people would get left out of the loop in an emergency.

    According to Locke, the propensity to be unprepared for the switch is primarily on the West Coast and the Southwest. He said:

    "Los Angeles, while having a small percentage of families unprepared, a small percentage of a huge market is about a quarter-million households that are unprepared.

    We're also finding that it's -- ethnic groups are more unprepared than the general population:  African American, Hispanic, almost twice the national average; Asian Americans just slightly above the national average. 

    Ethnic minorities, for whatever reason -- it may be due to language -- are not as prepared as others.  But we've been reaching out using Hispanic -- Telemundo, Univision; held a press conference with Mayor Villaraigosa in Los Angeles, Mayor Kevin Johnson in Sacramento. 

    Surprisingly enough, seniors are prepared.  And it's the younger generation, households of under 30 that are also more unprepared than the national average."

    So here’s my public service announcement…make sure you help your less-technically savvy family and acquaintances with this transition. You may think no one who isn’t living under a rock will be affected by this change but I will be experiencing life without regular TV starting Friday.

    And if I don’t have cable, a new TV, or a converter box, what are the chances you don’t know an uncle, grandma, or neighbor who’s going to be reallllllly upset that they’re going to miss Wheel of Fortune on Friday?


    Apply for a coupon or find a place to buy a converter by calling 1-888-DTV-2009 or call the FCC if you can’t get the danged thing to work, call 1-888-CALL-FCC.

    Esther J. Cepeda writes the "600 Words" & "Pregunta del Dia" columns, and is also the Chief Marketing and Communications Officer for the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. Her views and reporting do not necessarily reflect those of ISAC. "600 words" is a registered trademark of EeJayCee, Inc., Copyright 2008. May be reprinted with permission, contact eejaycee@600words.com

    June 08, 2009

    Where in Chicago is Ecuador?

    "600 Words by Esther J. Cepeda"

    I’m taking a look at the presence of Ecuador in Chicago because in less than one month, Ecuador will find a piece of Chicago in it.

    That’s right, I’m going to miss out on the barbecue and the fireworks (my first 4th of July outside the U.S.) because I’ll be travelling to the "Center of the World" with no itinerary and no reservations, just a rumpled piece of paper my aunt gave me last week at a family picnic with some long-lost uncle’s email and phone number. And I haven’t been there since I was four.

    Ecuadorflag The plan is to land at Mariscal Sucre International Airport and let my stomach and eyes lead the way to the peaks of the Andes mountains, the monument to the Center of the World – where one can straddle the southern and northern hemispheres at once – and the Galapagos Islands – celebrating the 200th anniversary of Charles Darwin’s "Origin of Species" – in no particular order. In a two-week time period, not including en-route stops to Miami and Panama.

    So my first natural instinct (once I realized I’m less than 30 days from this trip I’ll literally pack for in twenty minutes time) was to look at my own birth place for insight.

    According to the Chicago Community Trust’s Latino Landscape 2008, Chicago is home to 18,796 Ecuadorians who make up 1.09% of Chicago’s Hispanic community (these numbers are from 2006). We are the fifth largest national-origin group in Chicago behind Mexico, Puerto Rico, Guatemala, and Cuba.

    My dad was part of the first wave in 1965–1976 (though he came from Quito via Mexico City where he’d lived for several years) who came and worked mainly in factories, retail and service industries and a second wave arrived in the 1990’s, frequently to join family, and to work in the restaurant, hotel, and garment industries.

    Like the majority of Ecuadorians in Chicago, my half-Ecuadorian-half-Mexican family lived on the Northwest side – in Logan Square, Albany Park, Uptown, Lakeview, Irving Park, Belmont Cragin, Edgewater, and West Ridge – which, not surprisingly, is where all of the Ecuadorian restaurants in Chicago can be found.

    One thing no one will tell you about Ecuadorians is that though they are intelligent, generous, and kind, they are also incredibly flighty! They are internationally-known for their tardiness, and in fact, Ecuador tried a campaign to eradicate "unpunctuality" but it flopped. And their government, well, let’s just say their new, University of Illinois-educated president Rafael Correa has now been around longer than many other presidents past.

    Just as a quick example, I tried to call the office of the Ecuadorian Consul General in Chicago to verify the stats I cite here and none of the four phone numbers listed on various search engines and Ecuador-centric web pages actually worked. Tsk-tsk.

    But we’re here, by golly, and in a few weeks I’ll be there.

    I’ve already researched the fine points of the bull-penis soup and roasted guinea pig dishes I’ll surely confront in the local restaurants (though I’ll stop in a McDonald’s to see if everyone there eats Big Macs like my cousins do when they visit here: in layers starting from the top down!).

    And I logged onto Tu Babel, the on-line regional Spanish dictionary to refresh myself on all the Ecuadorian-specific slang I grew up with in my grandmother’s house that I’ve since forgotten (I still get to hear "achachai!" every once in a while from my dad when he gets cold, but other words – like "canguil" for popcorn and "guagua" for child – will jar me into nostalgia).

    Mitad_del_mundo2_tSo, I’m pretty much all set; now all I need is for any of the 18,796 Chicago-dorians to tell me where to go (or where to stay away from) while I find the other half of myself at the center of the world.


     


    UPDATE: This came to me at 7:30am 6/11/09 from the White House Office of the Press Secretary:

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

    June 11, 2009

     

    Statement by the Press Secretary on the President’s call with President Rafael Correa of Ecuador

     

    The President spoke with President Correa yesterday to congratulate him on his recent reelection and to commend the people of Ecuador for their commitment to democracy.  The President stated his desire to deepen our bilateral relationship and to maintain an ongoing dialogue that can ensure a productive relationship based on mutual respect.  President Obama expressed his support for a vibrant democracy in Ecuador that includes a free and independent press as the means of promoting human prosperity, security and dignity, which are important goals for both of our countries and for the people of the Americas.


    Esther J. Cepeda writes the "600 Words" & "Pregunta del Dia" columns, and is also the Chief Marketing and Communications Officer for the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. Her views and reporting do not necessarily reflect those of ISAC. "600 words" is a registered trademark of EeJayCee, Inc., Copyright 2008. May be reprinted with permission, contact eejaycee@600words.com

    June 03, 2009

    Sotomayor’s treatment in the media; on being talked about but not being allowed to talk

    "600 Words by Esther J. Cepeda"

    Tom Rosenstiel, the Director at the Project for Excellence in Journalism, puts out a report every week about what was covered in the news the preceding week. Yesterday when I cracked it opened, it came as no surprise that for May 25-31, 2009, "Sotomayor Spin Wars Dominate[d] the Narrative."

    His opening statement stood in awe of how big a story this was, "based on [the] velocity and ferocity of the new media ecosystem in 2009, one forged by the election, by the rise of social media and cable, and even more than ever defined by speed, political surrogates, diversity and argument."

    The report said Sotomayor’s nomination filled 24% of the newshole the week of May 25-31 and ethnicity played a central role in that coverage. "Fully 40% of stories about the nominee referenced her cultural background, meaning her Latina heritage accounted for at least 25% of those stories."

    And what was bugging me all week about that coverage? This was very much missing in Rosensteil’s analysis: most of the media ecosystem talking heads helping to fill that news hole were not as diverse as, perhaps, the people they’re covering.

    They were pro – like Neil Steinberg in the Chicago Sun-Times who agreed with me that the media should have focused on her qualifications more than with her backstory. And they were con, like the Chicago Tribune’s John Kass who followed the "reverse racist" storyline. And they were even black, like Clarence Thomas who gawked at the drama, and also female, like Kathleen Star Parker who said we should wait to see what the woman has to say for herself before declaring her guilty of a leftist Latino agenda.

    Hmmmm…let’s see who are we missing here?…I’ll give you a hint. Here’s what media columnist Richard "Journal-isms" Prince pointed out in his piece "Latino Commentators Scarce on Sotomayor" when referring to the number of Hispanic journalists who spoke about Sotomayor’s nomination on the Sunday morning political talk-shows:

    "There are no Latino journalists on that list.

    It's not just this Sunday. In an analysis of the four Sunday broadcast shows this year through April 12, Media Matters for America found that black Americans had been on the Sunday shows 40 times.

    "Media Matters also measured the number of Latino guests or panelists on 'Meet the Press,' 'This Week,' 'Face the Nation' and 'Fox News Sunday' this year for the same period," wrote David Bauder of the Associated Press, which commissioned the study.

    "The count?

    "Zero."

    Playing Devil’s advocate as I so often like doing, I contacted Kevin Olivas, the National Association of Hispanic Journalists’ Parity Project Director, and asked whether this even mattered, since a good reporter can report on anything.

    He responded in an email:

    "It is true that there are good journalists out there who do not happen to be Hispanic who have done a good job in covering the Latino community," Olivas said, "This may mirror Judge Sotomayor’s now infamous quote, but it is very difficult to relate the experiences of Latinos when you have not lived that experience yourself.

    If we were back in time and there was an opportunity to have a panel on the civil rights struggle for African Americans and the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. or Ralph Abernathy or Rosa Parks were available, but someone said, ‘Nah, let’s just go with a panel of people who are not African American to discuss this issue,’ how representative would that be?"

    Kevin makes an excellent point. I explained it this way to someone else who was having a hard time understanding where Latino journalists – rare as we are – are coming from regarding this slight.

    Look at it this way: You know how English-only speakers dislike it when Spanish-speakers chatter away within earshot? The natural human instinct is to imagine that the chatterers are talking about them but they can’t understand so therefore it makes them uncomfortable.

    Now imagine how Hispanics feel in a similar situation: here’s a national story about the first Latina Supreme Court Justice nominee and there are plenty of us who can objectively articulate the pros and cons of her merits – with the bonus of a culturally diverse viewpoint – but we’re not allowed to speak. We have to let non-Hispanic news and opinion journalists speak for us, even though we’re very much within ear shot and capable of answering for ourselves.

    "How is it possible that Latinos can be left out of the discussion among journalists regarding such a historic event as the nomination of the first Hispanic to the U.S. Supreme Court," Olivas said. "Are there no qualified Latino journalists who could take part in this discussion?"

    Of course, I’d have been more than happy to help Meet the Press’ David Gregory pronounce Sonia’s last name – it’s "Soto-‘my’-or" – but I guess I’ll just have to wait until next time.

    "Latinos are part of the American experience," Olivas commiserated, "Leaving out our voices means telling an incomplete story."



    Esther J. Cepeda writes the "600 Words" & "Pregunta del Dia" columns, and is also the Chief Marketing and Communications Officer for the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. Her views and reporting do not necessarily reflect those of ISAC. "600 words" is a registered trademark of EeJayCee, Inc., Copyright 2008. May be reprinted with permission, contact eejaycee@600words.com

    May 31, 2009

    Living in Label Land: Are you Hispanic or Latino?

    "600 Words by Esther J. Cepeda"

    Among the many issues that President Barack Obama dredged up in nominating the United States’ first Hispanic U.S. Supreme Court Judge was the dreaded "Hispanic" vs. "Latino" label debate.

    Sigh.

    The minute Sonia Sotomayor was announced as the nominee there was a mad scramble by some to label her an immigrant (she isn’t, her parents came to the U.S. from Puerto Rico which – surprise! – is part of the U.S.) and a mad scramble by others to debate whether, in fact, she would be the first given that the ancestors of Justice Benjamin Cardozo, who served on the U.S. Supreme Court from 1932-1938, may or may not have come from Portugal.

    And that alone was enough to inspire the Pew Hispanic Center to dissect the issue in a report they released late last week titled "Who’s Hispanic?"

    The answer:

    1) any member of an ethnic group that traces its roots to 20 Spanish-speaking nations from Latin America and Spain itself (but not Portugal or Portuguese-speaking Brazil)

    2) no one who says they aren’t

    3) anyone who says they are. Like me.


    I had no less than three emails by Wednesday morning asking me what I call myself. I’ve made many people grit their teeth by responding, "I’m an American, honey." Rarely does that go over well – curious how people tend to not accept that as an appropriate answer – so I stick to "Hispanic."

    "Latina" makes me grind my teeth – it sounds so militant to me. "What – my dry cleaning isn’t ready? It’s because I’m a Lat-ee-na, isn’t it?!" Eeewww.

    "Chicana" elicits revulsion – I can’t stand it (again, waaaay too militant) and it doesn’t apply to me, anyway – not only am I not from the Southwest, I’m only half-Mexican. (But maybe I can popularize "Ecuamexian?" Maybe "Mexuadorian?")

    Despite the fact that the Spanish language is gender-based – spoons are female, "cuchara" and plates are male, "plato" – I of the man-brain prefer to stick to the gender-neutral descriptor "Hispanic."

    Hooray! I’m not in the, ahem, minority on this one…according to the Pew report:

    "The labels are not universally embraced by the community that has been labeled. A 2006 survey by the Pew Hispanic Center found that 48% of Latino adults generally describe themselves by their country of origin first; 26% generally use the terms Latino or Hispanic first; and 24% generally call themselves American on first reference.

    As for a preference between ‘Hispanic’ and ‘Latino’, a 2008 Center survey found that 36% of respondents prefer the term ‘Hispanic,’ 21% prefer the term ‘Latino’ and the rest have no preference."

    An unpublished Notre Dame Institute for Latino Studies study that was referenced in the Chicago Community Trust’s Latino Landscape 2008 (see my column "A statistical portrait of Chi-Town Hispanics") says that in Chicago in 2003:

    "those who preferred the term ‘Hispanic’ were more likely to be college-educated, somewhat older (36-60 years old), very interested in politics, and members of nontraditional religions. Those who prefer ‘Latino’ are generally younger."

    You may roll one way, or the other – it’s all good. I know it’s not a very ethnic thing to say but call me whatever you want, just don’t call me late for supper.

    Esther J. Cepeda writes the "600 Words" & "Pregunta del Dia" columns, and is also the Chief Marketing and Communications Officer for the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. Her views and reporting do not necessarily reflect those of ISAC. "600 words" is a registered trademark of EeJayCee, Inc., Copyright 2008. May be reprinted with permission, contact eejaycee@600words.com

    May 26, 2009

    U.S. Supreme Court Nominee Sotomayor is a superstar judge who just happens to be Hispanic

    "600 Words by Esther J. Cepeda"

    Sotomayor National news today: a Puerto Rican daughter of the streets overcomes all obstacles including childhood death of her third-grade educated factory-worker father, a mother who had to work six days a week to buy her and her brother a set of encyclopedias that sat in the concrete block room of her Bronx housing project apartment, makes it big as a nominee on the U.S. Supreme Court.

    God Bless America!

    Oh and by the way, Sonia Sotomayor is a badass judge.

    Missed that part didn’t ya? I certainly did – during President Obama’s press conference and in coverage immediately afterwards. It was all about the First Hispanic U.S. Supreme Court Judge, and about the Second Woman for the Supreme Court, and about triumph over adversity and childhood Nancy Drew adventure dreams dashed because of diabetes, and not about one woman’s stunning talent and determination culminating in a seat in this country’s highest court.

    Now don’t get me wrong – as many did when I wrote that the best nominee should be accomplished and wonderful despite gender or ethnicity – I’m thrilled! And humbled and inspired by this woman’s tremendous achievement and professional excellence, but gosh I wish this morning’s exciting news had focused more on that professional excellence and not just on her stunning personal story.

    Sure, President Obama started off his presser by noting his nominee was chosen because of: "First and foremost… a rigorous intellect – a mastery of the law, an ability to hone in on the key issues and provide clear answers to complex legal questions.  Second is a recognition of the limits of the judicial role, an understanding that a judge's job is to interpret, not make, law; to approach decisions without any particular ideology or agenda, but rather a commitment to impartial justice; a respect for precedent and a determination to faithfully apply the law to the facts at hand."

    But then it was all about her triumph over adversity. Again, an incredibly awesome achievement – and darned heart-warming to see Sotomayor thank her mami publicly: "I am all I am because of her," Judge Sotomayor said, "and I am only half the woman she is," I got teary with pride – but where was the gushing about her professional achievements?

    Sonia Sotomayor was appointed to the U.S. District Court by a Republican President, George H.W. Bush, and promoted to the Federal Court of Appeals by a Democrat, Bill Clinton.  Walking in the door she would bring more experience on the bench, and more varied experience on the bench, than anyone currently serving on the United States Supreme Court had when they were appointed.


    Judge Sotomayor is a distinguished graduate of Princeton and Yale, would be the only justice with experience as a trial judge, has presided over roughly 450 cases and brings with her a stamp of approval from none other than George H.W. Bush who appointed her to the District Court for the Southern District of New York in 1992 – when she was still in her 30’s!

    According to the White House backgrounder, "If confirmed, Sotomayor would bring more federal judicial experience to the Supreme Court than any justice in 100 years, and more overall judicial experience than anyone confirmed for the Court in the past 70 years." Oh how I wish that was the predominant headline!

    It goes without saying that some will harshly criticize her – that just goes with the territory. They’ll do so because she’s perceived as liberal, or because she’s a woman, or because she once made the following disturbing comment: "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life."

    Oh there’s more: allusions to a "Latino agenda," controversy regarding Fire Department promotion tests…it will all come out in the following weeks, it’s open season; heck at the afternoon press conference a reporter asked White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs if the White House was sure she’d paid her taxes. He replied, "I have not seen anything on that."

    Sotomayor is President Obama’s pick, and if she should become the 111th U.S. Supreme Court Justice, let’s not let Sotomayor be labeled the "best Hispanic Supreme Court judge" around but, rather, the best choice to represent the people of United States on the Supreme Court who just so happens to be Hispanic.



    Esther J. Cepeda writes the "600 Words" & "Pregunta del Dia" columns, and is also the Chief Marketing and Communications Officer for the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. Her views and reporting do not necessarily reflect those of ISAC. "600 words" is a registered trademark of EeJayCee, Inc., Copyright 2008. May be reprinted with permission, contact eejaycee@600words.com

    May 23, 2009

    Latinos demand Supreme Court nominee - almost to their own detriment

    "600 Words by Esther J. Cepeda"

    Oh god, I can’t wait until Obama picks already, I’m tired of the endless speculation and even more tired of the whole "Hispanics are lobbying for a Latino justice" story line.

    Can we give that a rest? Do Hispanics really feel that insecure about their political clout that they want a Latino judge so badly they can taste it? Really, it’s not that big a deal.

    My pal John and I were talking about it last Wednesday when he proclaimed, "Are you kidding me? It’s going to be a white person, that’ll be on the front page of your New York Times, ‘Old, White Man Appointed.’ - if Obama’s smart. He needs to pick an extremely liberal white man if he wants that person to be accepted, otherwise that Judge will spend the rest of their tenure being the person who was picked because they were black, Hispanic, or a woman."

    I’d certainly hate that. Really, it wouldn’t do Latinos any favor for either California Supreme Court Justice Carlos Moreno or U.S. Appeals Court judge Sonia Sotomayor to get the nod if there is the appearance that they got it because of their ethnicity, rather than their scholarship and level-headedness.

    So, Latino groups, stop making it look that way. The usual Hispanic empowerment groups have been banging the "First Hispanic Supreme Court Justice" drum for weeks, but I see little upside in some of the quasi-damning statements I’ve heard on the subject.

    Never mind the emails I get and the comments I see on Twitter and Facebook, here’s a quote from current Hispanic National Bar Association president Ramona Romero regarding the "First Hispanic Supreme Court Judge" barrier not being yet broken: "It was a lack of will, a lack of commitment. It was not because of the absence of qualified candidates."

    This time, she says, "there is an enormous sense of urgency" behind making sure the opportunity is not lost during a Barack Obama presidency.

    On Nov. 14, 2008, Romero wrote a letter to Obama urging him to "make history yet again" by nominating a Hispanic justice, thereby erasing the "unfortunate message" conveyed by a Supreme Court with no Hispanic members. "The presence of a Latino or Latina at the conference table could add a needed 'special voice' to the Supreme Court's deliberations and decisions -- a voice that can speak about the law as it affects U.S. Hispanics with the authority that only firsthand knowledge can provide."

    A "special voice"? Eeewww! What does that even mean? Those are exactly the types of statements that make white people, frankly, scared that a Latino on the Supreme Court will bring a Hispanic agenda to bear on cases, rather than rule from a solid scholarship and ideology. I’m not saying that is true in anyway, but…I’m telling you "special voice" sounds creepy, even to me. Obama, however, has struck the right tone for me.

    "You have to have not only the intellect to be able to effectively apply the law to cases before you," Obama said today in an interview carried Saturday on C-SPAN television, according to the CNN story. "But you have to be able to stand in somebody else's shoes and see through their eyes and get a sense of how the law might work or not work in practical day-to-day living."

    He wants empathy and the ability to see life from the position of the powerless. Thankfully, Obama has, at least publicly, said he’s interested in the best nominee regardless of what adjectives can be placed before their name. "[I don’t] feel weighted down by having to choose ... based on demographics," Obama said Saturday.

    Well, thank goodness for that.

    According to a recent CNN story, "Hispanic groups quietly press for supreme court pick," leading Hispanic groups have been careful not to create the perception they’re demanding a Latino be nominated, nor that they are seeking direct political payback for their election support.

    Yeah…well, that’s not how I’m seeing it. From mass chain emails, to Latino authored op-eds in Southwest newspapers, to morning Spanish-language shock jocks, some people are not simply rooting for a Hispanic nominee, but rather, ready to blow their stack if they don’t get one.

    For a voting bloc anxious to make real progress on immigration law reform, this is not the best battle to choose. Not this round anyway.

    To these people I say: take a deep breath, trust the guy you take so much credit for getting elected in the first place, and may the best man or woman Supreme Court Justice candidate win.



    Esther J. Cepeda writes the "600 Words" & "Pregunta del Dia" columns, and is also the Chief Marketing and Communications Officer for the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. Her views and reporting do not necessarily reflect those of ISAC. "600 words" is a registered trademark of EeJayCee, Inc., Copyright 2008. May be reprinted with permission, contact eejaycee@600words.com

    May 21, 2009

    Backstage with “Bruiser”- “Legally Blonde” Chihuahua hits Chi-Town

    "600 Words by Esther J. Cepeda"

    If you know nothing about "Legally Blonde - The Musical" here’s the skinny: it’s every bit as pink and perky as the 2001 Reese Witherspoon/Luke Wilson confection about the chipper sorority sister who gets into Harvard Law School and finds love, laughter and blah, blah, blah…there’s a Chihuahua involved.

    Movieposter  Ahh, yes, Bruiser. You remember Bruiser from the film, right? Stoic, spoiled, and stylish from classic, apple-shaped head to teeny-tiny-dog-toe.

    Well, from the moment I heard the soaring-pop-lietmotif stage production would be coming to Chicago, I harassed the show’s PR people until they granted me an exclusive, behind-the-scenes interview with his-highness.

    Imagine my surprise Wednesday when I showed up at the Oriental Theater’s stage door for our lunch date only to find…drumroll please…TWO Chihuahuas!

    "There’s Frankie who works with the lead "Elle" but like with people, there is an understudy – that’s Roxie," Marjorie Fitzsimmons, the show’s Chihuahua handler explained to me in the comfort of the doggie dressing room which, incidentally, was marked with a bright yellow "Chihuahua crossing" sign.

    Roxieanfranki Frankie, a one-and-a-half year old dark-muzzled boy Chihuahua who was "discovered" as a stray in Meriden, Connecticut, and Roxie, a three-year-old girl Chihuahua with lighter facial features who was a stray rescued in rural Louisiana with a nasty case of the heartworm, surprisingly never yapped at me like my own two do.

    "Frankie is very friendly, very sweet, a little bit coy," Marjorie shared, "Roxie is a much braver little dog." And did I mention uncharacteristically mellow and quiet?

    I was expecting rock-star grade amenities; giant brandy snifters filled with Pupperonis and Beggin’ Strips, and designer toilet-bowl-flavored water but, clearly, these Chihuahuas are Equity actors – their room was Spartan, accented only by Roxie’s gleaming pink crate and the dressing table which holds their extremely fashionable wardrobe.

    In fact, Frankie and Roxie share their room with the two stunning English Bulldogs Nellie and Lewis (star and understudy – both also rescued strays) who play Rufus. "

    Bd1wRob The crew has travelled over 17,000 miles with this show and Lewis hasn’t been in a live show because Nellie has not missed a single performance," said Rob Cox the Bulldog handler. "Of over 700 shows! No one else in the cast and crew can say that!"

    Here’s the real dirt on the dogs of Legally Blonde:

    ·

    all the dogs rehearse with the full cast and crew – who, themselves, are trained by the handlers on how to interact with the canine talent – they perform 8 full shows a week.

    ·

    small cues earn the doggies small bits of beef jerky, big cues and curtain calls earn them pieces of hamburger or chicken

    ·

    all four of the pups are lovin’ Chicago – "Nellie and Rufus are very much city dogs, they prefer pavement, they think doing their business in the grass is weird," Rob said. "The buses and trains don’t bother Frankie and Roxie one bit," Marjorie added.

    ·

    yes, people do wait at the Stage Door after performances to catch a glimpse, or a picture, with them after performances but Pupperazzi are strictly prohibited. "They’re great with people and they love it when moms and their children interact with them on a leisurely walk," Marjorie said, "but after a performance the energy is just too high for them to handle full crowds."

    Frankieandroxie I was going to try to get a good quote from Frankie or Roxie about how it feels that first moment Bruiser comes on stage and crowd goes wild with the collective "awwww!!!!!" but by the time I finished taking my notes, they’d curled up in Frankie’s crate for the afternoon siesta.

    So does all the glory and adoration go to their heads? In stark contrast to my own two Chihuahuas, Frankie and Roxie are purported to be "not really that spoiled." These are working professionals after all.

    "They get a lot of love and attention, but it’s not a show to them," Marjorie said, "it’s real life."


    Legally Blonde – The Musical at the Ford Center for the Performing Arts Oriental Theater began May 12 and runs through June 7

    Esther J. Cepeda writes the "600 Words" & "Pregunta del Dia" columns, and is also the Chief Marketing and Communications Officer for the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. Her views and reporting do not necessarily reflect those of ISAC. "600 words" is a registered trademark of EeJayCee, Inc., Copyright 2008. May be reprinted with permission, contact eejaycee@600words.com

    May 18, 2009

    Another midnight run - Foreclosure crisis hits close to (my) home

    "600 Words by Esther J. Cepeda"


    I felt like I got hit in the chest with a two-by-four when my neighbor Greg broke the news. The reason why the lawn of the family who lives across the street from me looks like such crap these days is because they’re gone.

    Gone.

    Marc and Marcy – high school sweethearts clocking in at year 15 of wedded bliss – young Jacob who at the tender age of eight could pluck out "Smoke on the Water" on his tiny electric guitar, and Zoe the baby girl who was born less than a year after we all moved into our brand-spanking-new homes in our suburban subdivision are gone. Grandma and Frank the big black lab, too – all gone.

    No "For Sale" sign in front of the house, no moving trucks, no teary goodbyes to us neighbors who’d had the extra cup of sugar for these last eight years, just a silent midnight run.

    I’d heard they’d hit a rough patch – Marc losing hours at work and Marcy pulling double-shifts at the hospital to make all the ends meet – but I never once imagined that the intermittent vanloads of stuff leaving the house these last few weeks signified any more than just your standard spring cleaning.

    Overgrownlawn Greg filled in the details: in November Marcy had confided that things had gotten desperate with the money situation and they were looking for a new school for the kids. Then last Thursday night when he was mowing his own grass, passing close to their house’s windows, he noticed everything was just…gone.

    He called me over and we peeked through windows where just two weeks ago a happy, vibrant, upper-middle class white family had dwelled – apparently suffering in silence and so scared to lose it all that they pulled a preemptive strike and took off.

    This is what foreclosure feels like from the outside…all of a sudden, trusted neighbors whose children I was watching grow up were gone and all that’s left is a littered, empty home. Not that it’s the only one in my upper middle class neighborhood.

    There are at least 18 empty townhomes in my little slice of subdivision. Of the single-family homes, there are four abandoned and empty homes literally rotting away from mold and disrepair. Like my other neighbors do, I will now have to mow Marc and Marcy’s front yard so the house doesn’t look abandoned.

    According to a Chicago Tribune story last week, 13,647 Illinois homes received a foreclosure filing in April, 54 percent higher than they were a year ago, according to data released May 13 by RealtyTrac. Mary Ellen Podmolik’s story further reported that nationally, foreclosure filings were flat for the month but up 32 percent from a year ago.

    Marc and Marcy’s house will be in that pile in the coming months, the orange flyer pasted to their front door like the others on my block.

    "Why, why," I lamented, "the worst thing you can do is dump your house!" I called the good folks over at The Resurrection Project, a Chicago community development organization that frequently hosts workshops on avoiding home foreclosure, to get their take on the midnight run.

    "That’s the worst thing you can do," Kristen Komara, Director of Financial Services told me last Friday. "You’re still the owner – at least attempt to keep your home. The foreclosure process in Illinois is lengthy and can take as long as a year…"

    "Nobody’s going to come into your house in the middle of the night and tell you to leave your home," Komara explained, pinpointing everybody’s worst nightmare, "you still have rights as a homeowner. If you know your back is to the wall and you’re not going to be able to do anything because you have no income then at least you can put a plan into place with a sensible time frame to how you’re going to make a soft landing into a new home, or start saving money for a security deposit for a rental."

    As a young homeowner who lost her job 16 months ago (but luckily landed on her feet, avoiding this tragedy) I know the fear that can grip even the most level head, and asked Komara for her best advice to others thinking of running from their house problems.

    "When people are facing missed mortgage payments there is so much hurt, pain, frustration and vulnerability," Komara said. "The first step is to not panic and understand that you have rights. Don’t make irrational decisions, stop and learn where to go for solid information and talk to someone knowledgeable in these issues – there may be several options available to you."

    How I wish Marc, Marcy, and the brood I’ll miss on warm summer nights, had found Komara and her optimistic advice.



    Esther J. Cepeda writes the "600 Words" & "Pregunta del Dia" columns, and is also the Chief Marketing and Communications Officer for the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. Her views and reporting do not necessarily reflect those of ISAC. "600 words" is a registered trademark of EeJayCee, Inc., Copyright 2008. May be reprinted with permission, contact eejaycee@600words.com

    May 13, 2009

    Trippin’ the light Hispanic: Introducing “Chicago Latino List 2009”

    "600 Words by Esther J. Cepeda"

    On May 4, Crain’s Chicago Business – a publication I pay for and happily read cover-to-cover every week – published "2009 Women to Watch," their annual roundup of female Chicago movers and shakers. I leafed through it and proceeded to hit the roof.

    Here’s the full text of my Letter to the Editor which Crain’s was kind enough to print in the Opinion section of the May 11 edition:

    "It strikes me as absolutely unbelievable that a world-class city like Chicago – a town with no less than 1.7 million residents of Latino heritage – could possibly have zero women of Hispanic background worth watching ("Women to Watch," Focus, May 4)

    The dynamic, accomplished, and beautiful women featured represent an impressive array of talent, but Crain’s couldn’t find a single Latina "bright star" this year?

    I consider myself to be imminently watchable. Yet, I certainly pale in comparison to the fine selection of Hispanic VPs, college presidents, legislators, and entrepreneurs around Chicago."

    They cut it down and took some of the sting out of it – and made it sound like it was about me rather than about the many, many incredible Hispanic women who toil away in the blind spots of those who decide "Who’s who" in this town – but you get the point.

    That all came on the heels of me hitting the roof about BusinessWeek magazine’s story from the May 11 issue called "CEO’s of Tomorrow." Here’s an excerpt of the stinging Letter to the Editor I sent them back on May 4 when my copy arrived in the mail:

    "I wasn’t disappointed by the high caliber of the 19 individuals BusinessWeek chose to focus on; they were dynamic, diverse, and already shouldering tremendous responsibility in major corporations. But there wasn’t a single Latino professional who might be a CEO of Tomorrow?

    Not a single Hispanic CEO, President, VP, CFO, or COO who might be an innovative leader "tomorrow" when Latinos will make up a third or more of the population in the United States? I don’t think so."

    I’m happy to report that Diane Brady, BusinessWeek’s Senior Editor/Content Chief immediately called me and we had a smart, in-depth conversation about the difficulty of achieving a perfectly diverse mixture of gender, race, ethnicity, industry, etc. in a spread like "CEO’s of Tomorrow –" and the difficulty of finding qualified Latino candidates.

    I won’t quote her because I didn’t know I was going to write about this until I heard from so many of my own readers, but she truly was responsive to my explanation that I’m not interested in a "Hispanic leaders" story in BusinessWeek but rather to have Latinos be included in their regular stories.

    Let me repeat it loudly and clearly: whether you’re talking about "Women to Watch" or "CEOs of Tomorrow," great Latino leaders are not "really great…for a Latino" but, instead, "great leaders who just happen to be Hispanic."

    In order to help blunt this perceived shortage of Latino superstars I’m taking action.

    Despite there being, in my mind, a ton of awesome Hispanic people doing truly amazing things here in Chicago, there seems to be no "official" list that mainstream publications can refer to when trying to find great Hispanic candidates to be profiled as Who’s Who/Mover-Shaker/Rising Star/One-to-Watch in "mainstream" publications.

    So, I’m starting one.

    On June 24, I will publish the first annual compilation of totally awesome Hispanic Chicagoans making this world a better place through personal or professional excellence, and I’m calling it "Chicago Latino List 2009" – or something better, if any of you have a pithier title.

    You will nominate Chicago-area residents of any age, from any walk of life, who are doing something to make this world a better place, and I will pick and profile 10 of the best.

    Rules: Your nominations must be emailed to me by May 29 and include:

    ·

    the name of this wonderful human being

    ·

    a short blurb about how they’re making the world a better place

    ·

    contact information so I can talk to them myself

    ·

    nominees can be Hispanic in any way, immigrant or U.S.-born, of any age, and working in any occupation

    There WILL be prizes…not that my story-telling abilities aren’t prize enough…which I’ll announce along with the winners. Click on the "CHICAGO LATINO LIST 2009" page in the left-hand column for more info., and to read about other opportunities to participate.

    Send your nominations to eejaycee@600words.com by 5/29/09. We’ll show ‘em all!



    Esther J. Cepeda writes the "600 Words" & "Pregunta del Dia" columns, and is also the Chief Marketing and Communications Officer for the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. Her views and reporting do not necessarily reflect those of ISAC. "600 words" is a registered trademark of EeJayCee, Inc., Copyright 2008. May be reprinted with permission, contact eejaycee@600words.com

    May 12, 2009

    Why “English-only” laws look so good

    "600 Words by Esther J. Cepeda"

    People, bear with me here, I’m only a few days removed from having completed a frustrating and maddening master’s level class in effective teaching strategies to help English language learners pick up our baffling but beloved language, and a report that was just released has me climbing the walls.

    But more about that in a moment, let me vent some more:

    It was the kind of class where the teacher framed everything in terms of "cultural respect" and where all the students felt it was imperative to teach kids in their native language and that to insist otherwise was to buy into the evil construct of the "white man" trying to keep poor Latinos "down."

    Much like my experience being an actual teacher in a classroom of non-native English-language speakers, where I was castigated as the lone weirdo who insisted on talking to and teaching her students in English, I was the freakish anomaly in this class.

    I was the nutcase in the back of the room advocating for the hundreds of thousands of non-Spanish speaking students in school districts across the country, insisting that segregating students into Spanish-speaking sheltered classes was a recipe for a permanent underclass.

    Every week we discussed interesting language acquisition stories in the media and I almost wish I could have one more Saturday to beg the others to understand the perils of "bilingual classes" taught exclusively in Spanish and how damaging it can be to those who need to learn flawless English in order to thrive in this country (this was my idea of "fun" if you can conceive it!).

    My pleas surely would have fallen on deaf ears – after all, who is more committed to the status quo than "bilingual teachers" whose main claim to fame and employment is the ability to teach solely in Spanish? – but check this out: a report from the National Center for Education Statistics on Basic Reading Skills and the Literacy of America’s Least Literate Adults.

    You can go directly to the PDF here, but let me just give you a taste of the horrifying statistics, gleaned from the 2003 National Adult Literacy Survey which was designed to measure functional literacy and administered to more than 19,000 adults (ages 16 and older) in households and prisons:

    · Basic reading scores were highest for White adults and lowest for Hispanic adults

    · Among adults with Below Basic prose literacy scores, 39 percent of those who spoke only English before starting school read fewer than 60 words correctly per minute (i.e., at the lowest Basic Reading Score level), compared with 72 percent of adults with a Spanish language background

    · 30 million adults have Below Basic prose literacy; of those, 7 million are Hispanic

    · Among adults who spoke a language other than English before starting school, BRS scores were lowest for adults who learned English at a later age. The average score was lowest for adults who learned to speak English after they turned 21 and highest for adults who learned English at age 10 or younger

    · The BRS score of adults who learned to speak English after age 20 was 35 points lower than the BRS score of adults who learned to speak English at age 10 or younger.

    I’ll cut the numbers off right there, though you should plow into this report if you’re interested in knowing at just how much of a disadvantage some people in this country are.

    But the point I’m trying to make is illustrated by those last two bulleted items – and you didn’t need a fancy report to tell you this – it is absolutely crystal clear beyond any doubt that the key to Hispanic and Latino success in the United States is fluency in the English language.

    It doesn’t require giving up culture, giving up a native language, or giving up speaking a native language in the home – it very simply requires a country single-mindedly dedicated to making learning English the number one objective for public school students. By hook or by crook.

    Some people reflexively rail at the very thought of "English-only" legislation; there is currently a bill called the "English Language Empowerment Act" being bandied about in New York state. Pro-Spanish-language education advocates are already complaining that such a move would make it mandatory to teach children in – gasp!!!! – English.

    But the unacceptable alternative is hoards of students who get dumped into public school "bilingual ed" classes and, after years of sheltered Spanish immersion classes, walk out of high school still not fluent in English (read more about my experiences as a bilingual ed teacher here).

    And that alternative is a denial of the American Dream. It is, in fact, an American tragedy – and not just for them, but for us all.



    Esther J. Cepeda writes the "600 Words" & "Pregunta del Dia" columns, and is also the Chief Marketing and Communications Officer for the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. Her views and reporting do not necessarily reflect those of ISAC. "600 words" is a registered trademark of EeJayCee, Inc., Copyright 2008. May be reprinted with permission, contact eejaycee@600words.com

    May 05, 2009

    To boldy go where few Hispanics have gone before – to watch a Star Trek movie!

    "600 Words by Esther J. Cepeda"

    There I was, sitting inside my favorite Mexifood joint, Tacos El Norte, last Saturday enjoying my steak torta, watching the Phillies/Mets game on Fox en Espanol when I heard the play-by-play guy say something surprising, in Spanish:

    "Don’t forget, opening this Friday – Star Trek like you’ve never seen it before!" My immediate reaction was: but I’ve never seen it before – at all.

    Startrekposter Thinking it was some freakish anomaly, I went back to my torta when I heard it again – this time with a logo, indicating to me that it was a planned thing. The announcer said, in Spanish, "This isn’t your father’s Star Trek!" Uh, yeah, I know, because my dad never watched it!

    My lunch companion, a gentleman as pasty-white and as "Trekkie" as a man who could actually score lunch with a woman could be was perplexed by my reaction. "Why’s that so weird?" he asked innocently.

    "Latinos don’t watch Star Trek!" I gasped. Then I did two things:

    1) I ranted, for a full three minutes (he timed me – this happens quite often and he’s keeping track as a sort of science experiment) about marketers who decide to spend money on advertising to Spanish-speaking audiences but don’t bother to create culturally-relevant messages to maximize their ad buy.

    Sure, Star Trek went viral before "going viral" meant "global internet sensation" but the vast majority of Latin American immigrants to this country are from Mexico and, based on my own life experiences, Mexicans weren’t exactly saying "lo estoy dando todo lo que tengo capitan" – "I’m givin’ ‘er all she’s got captain" – in times of duress.

    And here in the U.S., well, let’s just say William Shatner is no Don Francisco!

    Star Trek was never on in my house and when it was I never got interested. I’ve written before about how in my honors science class our final project was based on the "prime directive" and I was clueless, and ultimately got a bad grade. (Read more on William Shatner as Jesus here)

    2) I sent out a Tweet calling for Latino Star Trek Fans and I got a few interesting remarks:

    Luis said: "Beam me up - esse!" Alexander said: "Esther Live long and prosper. There is no bigger fan than me. " Gerardo chimed in with: ""To boldly go where no man has gone before. That was my motto in high school too. HA!" And Gabriel added: "I'm a Mexican Star Trek fan!"

    I did speak to two people, though who had something more to add. Victor Soto, a 29-year-old freelance TV producer whose parents emigrated here from Mexico before he was born told me, "Yeah, I obviously didn’t watch it with my dad – he probably didn’t even really know it existed so he’s definitely not a fan."

    Victor, however, is a different story, "I’m a guy, y’know, I think it’s a cool show, I like the gadgets. I grew up watching ‘Next Generation’ with Patrick Stewart and all them. I’m definitely going to go see the new one."

    I also had an interesting back-and-forth with labor-rights activist Jorge Mujica, the mastermind of the March 15 Movement and immigration reform rallies in Chicago. He said he’s definitely going if he can score some tickets and shared this about his deep love for Star Trek:

    "Lemme put it this way: they had a black woman, an Asian, a Russian and an [assload] of "aliens" – now, that's diversity! The miniskirts played a role, also," Mujica said. He then brought up a great question: "Let's see if they have Latinos now."

    ZoesST You’re in luck Jorge! The miniskirted hottie this time around is indeed a Latina – Zoe Saldana, a Jersey girl from the Dominican Republic. The stars aligned!

    Then Jorge said one more thing that made me really re-think the impact Star Trek has had on past and will on future generations:

    "No, I don’t think my dad saw "Viaje a las Estrelas" ever in his life. I watched it at my cousin's because we didn’t have a TV and I always loved it," Mujica said.

    "After being Tarzan and Robin Hood, I became Spock, I guess it always helped me imagine there had to be a better future than our present."



    Esther J. Cepeda writes the "600 Words" & "Pregunta del Dia" columns, and is also the Chief Marketing and Communications Officer for the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. Her views and reporting do not necessarily reflect those of ISAC. "600 words" is a registered trademark of EeJayCee, Inc., Copyright 2008. May be reprinted with permission, contact eejaycee@600words.com

    April 29, 2009

    Cure for Hispanic Hysteria and Swine Flu is the same - chill out

    "600 Words by Esther J. Cepeda"

    I have the diagnosed cure for the Mexican Swine Flu Heebie-Jeebies, folks: take a chill pill.

    Yes, just relax…all this stress about whether Juan Gonzalez is going to sneeze on you and make you sprout a pig-snout is just weakening your immune system.

    Swineflu And it’s not just the light-skinned, bilingually-challenged among us that are nervous about heading down to 26th street for the Wednesday night enchilada run, the brown-skinned, soccer-skill-blessed among us are trippin’ too – I’ve gotten several email messages from Latinos all over the country who are re-interpreting every sideways glance as some sort of anti-Mexican snub.

    Not that it takes much for some to get freaked out, but there is, if you’ll pardon the pun, a germ of truth there. Since Sunday, the nation has gone from zero to hysterical and the "dirty Mexicans" everyone has been fretting about since the illegal-immigration issue reared its ugly head exactly four years ago just got dirtier.

    Sunday, the press corps at the White House were nearly hyperventilating about whether Obama had been tested for Swine Flu since he’d been cavorting in the United States of Mexico with the likes of President Felipe Calderon two weeks before. Then they freaked out Monday when they found out one of the dignitaries whom Obama met while in Mexico dropped dead last Thursday. Not to worry, Mr. Felipe Solís, Director of Mexico’s National Anthropology Museum, died of a non-Swine-related pre-existing condition.

    There’s been something for everyone in this almost-crisis: mainstream media have been having a field-day with this health scare because it’s made them feel necessary and relevant, immigrant bashers who’ve been waiting for just such an occasion to gleefully announce that THIS is exactly why we should have sealed the borders after the 86 amnesty are lovin’ it, and the special interest groups who are offended by everything are enjoying rightfully calling these extremists, um, extreme.

    This press release arrived in my inbox from the National Council on La Raza today: "NCLR CONDEMNS THE SHAMELESS EXPLOITATION OF A PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCY: NCLR today condemned the assertions made by some members of the media that the outbreak of swine flu is linked to immigrants."

    Tip for NCLR, don’t dignify the likes of a Michael Savage – who makes his dinero on talking smack about people – when, in reference to a U.S. outbreak that might well be linked to rich kids who went to Mexico on Spring Break, says something silly like: "Make no mistake about it: Illegal aliens are the carriers of the new strain of human-swine avian flu from Mexico."

    Whatever.

    It’s items like the one the Sun-Times News Group reporter Nick Firchau ran Wednesday about the Club America Mexican soccer team being asked to wear face masks as they walked through O’Hare airport that creep me out. They were also asked not to touch the fans, but you gotta admit, that’s probably decent advice.

    In other bummer Mexican news, this city has canceled a Cinco de Mayo celebration this weekend over concerns over the swine flu. We’ve got all manner of travel between Mexico and the U.S. suspended – which is a downer for the 1,357,353 people of Mexican descent living in the Chicago area.

    And the organizers of this year’s Million Mexican May Day March might be disappointed with a low turnout at Friday’s rally – they city is pressuring them to cancel or at the very least promise to wear face masks – though I’d imagine it’s hard to get too wound up for that sort of thing anyway, seeing as how the President and his whole administration have solemnly vowed to fix the U.S.’ batty immigration laws.

    Nope, like a May 6 Dos Equis and Jose Cuervo hangover, this too shall pass. Scary Mexican Swine Flu 2009 (has FOX composed a special ominous theme jingle yet?) is no Captain Tripps, it will come and go like the Avian Flu scare did.

    Remember, just relax. Keep your wits about you and like 99.9% of your continent-mates, you’ll be just fine.



    Esther J. Cepeda writes the "600 Words" & "Pregunta del Dia" columns, and is also the Chief Marketing and Communications Officer for the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. Her views and reporting do not necessarily reflect those of ISAC. "600 words" is a registered trademark of EeJayCee, Inc., Copyright 2008. May be reprinted with permission, contact eejaycee@600words.com

    April 27, 2009

    Ode to Patrick Fitzgerald: A Man’s Man

    “600 Words by Esther J. Cepeda”

    I was innocently flipping through Esquire Magazine’s May “How to be a Man” edition when I spotted…him.

    Patrickfitzgerald There, on pg 65, among such notables as Bob Dylan, Rep. Barney Frank, Chris Rock and James Caan is our very own U.S Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald, one of the many manlys who made Esquire Magazine’s 2009 List of Men (“because just being male doesn’t make you a man”).

    Described as someone who “does his job” and “tells the truth,” there he was – stone-faced Patrick, lovingly etched in this century’s computerized version of pen and ink, with this lovely caption:  “When Fitzgerald serves you, consider yourself served. He brought down Scooter Libby, Conrad Black, and then Blago. Whither thou goest, Alberto Gonzalez, we all hope Fitz goes with thee.”

    I gushed – what can I say, I’m a fan and he has many. Here’s the New York Times on December 9, in an article which described Fitzgerald as a "folk hero" in "prosecutorial spurs": "It has become a cliché to compare him to Eliot Ness, the Chicago Prohibition agent whom television and movies made into a symbol of incorruptible law enforcement."

    I went way back into my archives and dug up this nugget from a piece I wrote in October of 2007 when it was, ahem, “leaked” that Patrick “Sexiest Man Alive” Fitzgerald would soon marry: “Patrick’s in love and we’re in trouble, love’s bliss will rose-color his glasses and I forsee a white-collar crime-spree while he’s on his honeymoon.”

    Thank goodness I was so wrong – we all now know his first true love is putting away bad guys.

    For your enjoyment here are a few quotes I’m ripping off from Time Magazine, who was kind enough to put them all together in their post-Blagojevich-bust issue, December 2008:

     

    What Fitzgerald Says: 

    • "One day I read I was a Republican hack. One day I read I was a Democratic hack. The only thing I did between those two nights was sleep."
    — During his investigation into the leak of CIA operative Valerie Plame's identity (TIME, October 30, 2005)

     

    • "I've played a lot of practical jokes on people for a lot of years and they all got even at once. OK, new topic!"
    — On being named one of PEOPLE magazine's "Sexiest Men of 2005" (Chicago
    Tribune, November 18, 2005)

    • "You're reading tea leaves. Don't. I don't draw a very good tea leaf."
    — Dismissing reporters' questions after announcing his first indictment in the Plame scandal (
    San Francisco Chronicle, October 29, 2005)

     

    • "Do I have zeal? Yes. I don't pretend I don't. If you're not zealous, you shouldn't have the job. Now, sometimes zealous becomes a code word for overzealous, and I don't want to be overzealous. I hope I'm not."
    — On his enthusiasm for the job (Washington
    Post, February 2, 2005)

      

    If you’re not getting enough Patrick Fitzgerald in your life, I beg you to go to “From the Desk of Patrick J. Fitzgerald” http://patrickjfitzgerald.blogspot.com/ I promise you won’t be disappointed!



    Esther J. Cepeda writes the "600 Words" & "Pregunta del Dia" columns, and is also the Chief Marketing and Communications Officer for the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. Her views and reporting do not necessarily reflect those of ISAC. "600 words" is a registered trademark of EeJayCee, Inc., Copyright 2008. May be reprinted with permission, contact eejaycee@600words.com

    April 23, 2009

    R.I.P “Digital divide” – Latinos are all over Internet

    “600 Words by Esther J. Cepeda”

    Laptop This rant is dedicated to all the people out there who are innocently laboring under the misperception that the vast majority of Hispanics in the United States are living in such crushing poverty that they are not able to access information on the Internet. 

    These people – distinguished academics, misguided do-gooders, and everyday Joes alike– go around with a picture in their mind of what a Hispanic person is and it involves challenges in language, lack of education, and low access to resources. Sadly, this is true in many cases. However, it is not when it comes to access to the internet.

    And to the concerned parties, Nice Esther says: stop fretting about our electronic habits, we’re OK. To others who aren’t as benevolent toward the U.S.’s exploding Latino community and prefer to think of us all as illiterate immigrants, Mean Esther says: Take your “digital divide” and shove it up your assumptions.

    Let me ply you with statistics:

    • In a recent report called The Power of the Hispanic Consumer On-line, Scarborough Research says that the majority (54%) of Hispanics are now online.

    • In fact, Internet access among Hispanics has been increasing at a faster rate than it has among total adults in the U.S - growing 13% (on a relative basis) since 2004 - from 48% in 2004 to its current penetration of 54%.  By contrast, Internet access by all consumers nationally grew 8% during the same time period. (In 2004, 64% of all consumers accessed the Internet, and this increased to 69% in 2008.)

    Of course, it’s not abuelita - 18-34 year-old Hispanics are more likely to access the Internet than Hispanics overall, and their rate of Internet access is growing at a faster pace than that of the total Hispanic population. Scarborough says:

    “Younger consumers are more likely to download content online. Forty-nine percent of 18-34 year-old adult Internet Users downloaded digital content in the past month, compared to 35% of the total online population. Similarly, it is no surprise that when you examine this younger demographic of Hispanics, the percentage is even higher. 51% of 18-34 year-old Hispanics downloaded digital content during the past 30 days.”

    And no, it’s not some tired dial-up connection made from a pre-historic machine in someone’s basement. This same report says, “Hispanics have been taking advantage of the expansion of broadband, and their rate of adoption has mirrored that of the total U.S. population. Currently, 68% of Hispanic Internet Users have a broadband connection in their household. This grew from 13% in 2002 – an increase of more than fivefold.”

    In late March, Chicago-based research firm Mintel released results from a survey showing :

    • Hispanics are more likely to have profiles on social networking sites than non-Hispanics: 48% of them have one versus 43% of black Americans and 31% of whites.

    • Web-surfing Hispanics ages 18-34 visit social networking sites 3.6 times a week on average, versus just 1.3 times per week for over-35s.

    • More than a third of all Internet-using Hispanics were age 24 or younger in 2006.

    • Other findings from the survey suggest that Hispanics adopt new media technology more quickly than non-Hispanics, spend more time listening to Internet radio and downloading music than non-Hispanics and devote more time weekly to Internet browsing than non-Hispanics.

    • The firm says Hispanics spend more time using electronic readers like Amazon's Kindle; playing multiplayer games online (although not single-player); and blogging or commenting online than other groups.

    Then just last week, comScore, Inc., a leading Internet-usage research firm released numbers showing that:

    • During the past year, the growth of the U.S Hispanic Internet audience outpaced that of the total U.S. online population in terms of number of visitors, time spent and pages consumed, an increase of 6 percent from the previous year.

    Alright, say it all together with me now: “There is no ‘Digital Divide’ when it comes to Hispanics.” We know how to boot up, log on, and surf the web – in two languages!

    And never mind the computer part of it, Hispanics – much like people who live in poverty and affluence all over the world – access their internet information via that little marvel we call the cellular phone.

    Here’s what the Scarborough paper had to say on that topic: “Hispanics are avid cellular phone users. They are more likely than the typical adult to have a cell phone, and they are in the top spending brackets for cellular usage. Hispanics have been at the forefront of using the expanded functionality and technology in cellular devices, such as picture taking, text messaging and downloading ring tones or games. They are also more likely to use cell phones for tasks such as email or utilizing other Internet features.”

    "As technology prices drop and the number of bilingual Hispanics in the U.S. grows, we see more Hispanic adults relying on the Internet for day-to-day communication and learning," comments Leylha Ahuile, multicultural expert at Mintel. "U.S. Hispanics who get online via their cell phones provide a great opportunity for marketers who want to reach them in a personal, direct way."

    But I’m not here to tell you everything is perfect and, no need to look after the members of Latino communities who don’t yet have access to decent internet or even a computer, thank-you-very-much. Far from it!

    There are still many, many great challenges for Latinos of varied socio-economic backgrounds and educational levels who, in all honestly, wouldn’t know a Mac from a PC if the Mac grew teeth and bit them. But that’s where I circle back to the greatest opportunity for growth in communicating with Latinos of all stripes and types: the cell phone.

     What you’ll see, though, is that the cell phone will revolutionize Hispanics’ access to information on the web, making for infinite more connections to vital information that will bring access to social services, higher education, and political empowerment. Sort of like what Novelas Educativas, a Burbank, California-based digital entertainment company has done on YouTube, and in cell-friendly social platforms for the National Council on La Raza and for “Amigos de Obama” during last year’s elections.

    "Today kids are all about cell phones just like we were about Air Jordans back in the day – popular and everywhere,” Miguel Orozco, Co-Founder, Novelas Educativas told me when we met a few weeks back. “And now that the digital gap is closing, the real issue we should be concerned about is the information gap.  We should all be asking, 'How do we leverage access into knowledge.'"

    Ahhh, yes, how DO we leverage access into knowledge? Well, I don’t have any easy answer for that one, but whatever the answer turns out to be, that lever will probably be translated to at-risk families via a broadband or cellular connection – and most likely into the palms of their hands.



    Esther J. Cepeda writes the "600 Words" & "Pregunta del Dia" columns, and is also the Chief Marketing and Communications Officer for the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. Her views and reporting do not necessarily reflect those of ISAC. "600 words" is a registered trademark of EeJayCee, Inc., Copyright 2008. May be reprinted with permission, contact eejaycee@600words.com

    April 21, 2009

    Tempest in a taco shell – the Mexi-centric fast food blues

    "600 Words by Esther J. Cepeda"

    If you know me at all, you know I like to eat. A lot. My runs to the Taco Bell border are legendary – don’t get me started on the cinnamon twists, we’ll be here all night.

    And so in that vein, I bring you some fast foodie news, one involving a pathetic and cowardly caving to political correctness and another violating the sanctity of two all-beef patties!

    Exhibit A:

    Burger King’s pathetic caving to lunatic political correctness.

    Texicanwhopper Here’s the recap; so, according to The Nation’s Restaurant News, a restaurant industry trade paper, Burger King sells a thing called "the Texican Whopper" in Europe. It’s a flame-grilled patty topped with chile-con-carne, spicy jalapenos, onion, crispy lettuce and Cajun mayonnaise on a sesame seed bun, but that wasn’t the controversial part.

    BK created an ad campaign featuring – gasp!!! – a tall "American cowboy" next to a midget (oops, I meant to say "little person") lucha libre wrestler with a Mexican flag cape.

    Long-story-short (if you’ll pardon the pun – I just couldn’t resist!) Mexican ambassador to Spain Jorge Zermeno – who clearly hasn’t been to ANY lucha libre matches because he’d see all manner of tall and tiny luchadores wearing Mexican flag underwear, capes, masks, etc. – complained about the ads denigrating Mexico’s national image and improperly using Mexico’s national flag.

    O.K., so I guess no more girlies wearing Mexican flag thong bikinis at Cinco De Mayo celebrations, huh? Darn.

    But, I’m not going to complain about Jorge "I’ve got a stick up my butt" Zermeno, it’s his job to defend his mother country’s honor, ahem, abroad.

    Nope, I reserve my disgust for Burger King – they’re cowards to bow to the pressure of a humorless bureaucrat. Their PR flacks released a statement Tuesday that said the commercials "were not intended to offend anyone." Duh.

    It further stated: "Burger King Corp. values and respects all of its guests as well as the countries and communities we serve…With regard to the Texican Whopper advertisement shown in Spain and the United Kingdom, it was our intention to promote a product whose culinary origin lies in both the American and Mexican cultures, and was meant to appeal to those who enjoy the flavors and ingredients that each country offers."

    Apparently Burger King will, from now on, appeal only to those who cannot bear to laugh at Mexican midgets who dress up in their country’s flags to make money off people who come out to laugh at them.

    What’s this world coming to?

     Exhibit B: Darn that Jim Skinner, what the heck is he doing to my Big Mac’s honor? Doesn’t he know wrapping it in a flour tortilla is going to make the racists hate Mexicans even more?!?!?!

    BigmacsnackwrapO.K., so it’s not quite that serious. But, if you hadn’t heard, according to Advertising Age magazine, our pals at Oakbrook-based McDonald’s are testing the "Snack Wrap Mac," a half –beef-patty, with lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions that’s smothered in "special sauce" and wrapped in a flour tortilla. For a buck-forty-nine.

    Huh?

    Why would they do this? And, more importantly, why can’t I get one?

    Of the 400 of the chain's 14,000 locations who get to take the new snack for a spin, our neighbors in Wisconsin, and those crazy Texas Hustonians get to feast their tastebuds on the Big tortilla-clad Mac but Chicago doesn’t get to take a taste test – that’s just plain loco.

    Note to Jim Skinner: like the geniuses who combined peanut butter and chocolate, you might just have created my newest taste treat sensation by mixing my Taco Bell needs with my Mac daddy love…so let me at it, already.

    Perhaps a trip to the Oak Brook McLaboratory for a quickie taste?

    Esther J. Cepeda writes the "600 Words" & "Pregunta del Dia" columns, and is also the Chief Marketing and Communications Officer for the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. Her views and reporting do not necessarily reflect those of ISAC. "600 words" is a registered trademark of EeJayCee, Inc., Copyright 2008. May be reprinted with permission, contact eejaycee@600words.com

    April 19, 2009

    Behind the scenes of Obama’s April 17 2009 trip to Latin America

    “600 Words by Esther J. Cepeda”

    Don’t get me wrong, I didn’t go with his Obamaness to Trinidad and Tobago but I am privileged enough to get readouts of press briefings and press releases delivered straight from the White House to my inbox, so I’ve had the opportunity to experience this trip to Latin America from a different perspective than most.

    It’s been a whirlwind important trip and, as some media outlets have opined, probably the only time Latin America will get this much attention for some time, since there are so many pressing domestic issue for Obama to contend with.

    I published the full transcript of the Joint Press Conference: President Obama and Mexican President Felipe Calderon on April 16 2009 because I knew it wouldn’t get covered extensively in Chicago even though there are a breath-taking 1,357,353 Mexican – or Mexican-descended people, like me – in the Chicago metro area (and those were just 2006 numbers!).

    But there are tons of Cubans here too – 18,875, to be specific (the fourth largest Latin American group in Chicago) – not to mention another 346,615 people from all the countries that gathered at Port of Spain in Trinidad and Tobago this weekend to be awed by the newest President of the United States.

    Of course, all of the usual suspects came out including Evo Morales of Bolivia, Lula or Brazil, Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign-educated prez of Ecuador (my father’s mother country) Rafael Correa, and Daniel Ortega of Nicaragua.

    But some of the juiciest bits that happened this weekend were comments made by White House representatives – and Obama himself – during pressers in response to questions from pool reporters. Here are a few:

    Friday April 17 Obama said this during the opening ceremony of the Summit of the Americas:

    "To move forward, we cannot let ourselves be prisoners of past disagreements.  I am very grateful that President Ortega -- (applause) -- I'm grateful that President Ortega did not blame me for things that happened when I was three months old.  (Laughter.)  Too often, an opportunity to build a fresh partnership of the Americas has been undermined by stale debates.  And we've heard all these arguments before, these debates that would have us make a false choice between rigid, state-run economies or unbridled and unregulated capitalism; between blame for right-wing paramilitaries or left-wing insurgents; between sticking to inflexible policies with regard to Cuba or denying the full human rights that are owed to the Cuban people."

    Later Friday night, an unnamed Senior Administration official relayed this:

    "And during that time, the President -- as I say, President Obama, walked across the room and introduced himself to President Chavez, and President Chavez said a couple of things. Consistent with the policy I took some heat from Scott for yesterday, I will not read out what President Chavez had to say. But it was very, very short. The President shook his hand, smiled, and then went back to his position in the line.

    While in his position in the line he also had an opportunity to greet President Bachelet of Chile. The President has developed a very good relationship with her over the course of the last several months, and the President was eager to meet her and was glad he had the opportunity to do so. He had a long conversation with President Lula, who, as you all know, he's also developed a very good working relationship with. And while they were all chatting, President Ortega of Nicaragua came in and introduced himself to the President. And I think President Obama said in Spanish, it was his "gusto" to meet him, as well.

    Q Said what?

    SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: It was his "gusto."

    Q His pleasure.

    Q Ortega walked over to him?

    SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Ortega walked into the room, in the back of the room, and since the President was at the end -- back of the line, he basically had to walk past President Obama, and stopped and introduced himself.

    Q They shook hands?

    SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: They did.

    From the Saturday April 18 background briefing before the UNASUR countries meeting:

    ON CHAVEZ:

    Q    A follow-up on that-  Can you say what message you took from Chavez giving a book about the exploitation of South America to President Obama?

    SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  My personal view is, you know, it's a way for Chavez to get press questions and his picture taken again. I don't think, you know, I can really comment on what other individual leaders are trying to do. I think all of the leaders here from South America think that they are leaders of South America.


    Q    No, I understand that, but the platform -- he appears to be getting a -- doing everything he can to insert himself.

     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Well, this is the nature of the person and anybody who's been at international conferences with Chavez knows that if there's a camera around, he's going to find a way to get in it.

     Q  Yes, just a follow-up.  In Mr. Chavez's brief comments, were they anti-U.S. in nature?  And do you have any sense of whether his warmness, I guess you could say, over the last couple days is an indication of a new attitude from him towards the U.S.?

     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Look, I wouldn't want to characterize Chavez's emotions.  He was critical of past U.S. policy.  He was -- his comments about President Obama were -- expressed the hope that things have changed.  He was civil in his remarks; he was critical of the past, however.

     Q    Follow-up on the question that she just asked, do you foresee in the near future or there has been any substance to this closeness between -- or new approach, let's put it that way, between Hugo Chavez and President Obama about exchanging again ambassadors?  As you know, Chavez kicked out the U.S. ambassador last year, and the U.S. did the same.  Do you think that, since there's a new chapter here, that the relationship between Venezuela and the United States could normalize with ambassadors?

    SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  That question did not -- that issue of exchanging ambassadors did not come up.  I think in a more general sense, given what the President is saying about dialogue with these countries, dialogue has obviously helped when ambassadors are in place.  And that might -- that is something that's pretty obvious, it seems to me.  But the kicking out of ambassadors is something that the Venezuelans did in solidarity with the Bolivians, actually.  And it seems to me that it's -- the ball is in their court to try to fix that issue if we're going to have real dialogue.

    SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  I'm sorry, what?

    Q    Is it the President's intention to actually read the book that was offered by Mr. Chavez?  And I have another one on Cuba.

    SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  The President is a very well-read man; I don’t know what his reading list is, though.

    ON CUBA:

    Q    When you say -- when you say the President wants dialogue, do you think the President might go to Cuba soon to speak with the Cubans?

    SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  No.  There was absolutely no discussion of that.

    Q    Did the discussion get past kind of microphone rhetoric -- did anybody bring an actual message from Cuba?

    SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  No.

    Q    And on Cuba, the President has said for some time that Cuba has to take concrete steps for the U.S. to engage more with Cuba.  Does that position still stand, that Cuba has to take those additional steps or concrete steps?

    SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Look, I think what we are is at a beginning, an initiation of a new process.  The President has been clear that our goals are to see a democratic Cuba.  He's also been clear that there are many issues that we have that we could discuss with Cuba -- human rights being one of them -- but there are other issues that relate to just the nature of a relationship between two countries in the same hemisphere.  Migration, for instance, is a big issue that I don=t believe we've had recent talks with Cuba about.

    So, no, there's no concrete benchmarks that have been laid out.  What we're talking about is a process here.

    Q    The President has been asking for help to -- the other countries to participate in this process towards Cuba.  I would like to know what kind of help can they offer.  Do you expect, for example, Brazil to be a mediator, a facilitator, or what kind of support?

    SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  There is no request on the table by the President for any other country to be a mediator.

    Q    But when he speaks about helping, well, what does he mean?

    SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Well, I think when he speaks about helping is the concern that we have that we live in a hemisphere of democracies, and for many of the countries, including many of the countries at the table this morning -- although he did not say it this way, I'm not putting words in the President's mouth -- they've lived through periods of dictatorship themselves and have a real understanding of what it means not to have a free press and open discussion and political parties and what have you.  And that experience, perhaps, should in some way be reflected in how they deal with another dictatorship.


    This from the Sunday April 19, 2009 background briefing after Obama’s meeting with President Preval of Haiti and President Bachelet of Chile:

    Q    A question about something that happened yesterday.  Evo Morales charged that Americans were behind the assassination plot against him and that he would only restore diplomatic relations with the U.S. when the President publicly repudiated that attempt.  Do you guys have a comment on that?

     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  I'm not aware of the comment that you attribute to President Morales.  I can try to get smart on that.  I can tell you that I think it's President Obama's view that we do not engage in activities of the sort that are alleged in what you just read to me.  But I'll try to get -- I'll take a look at what the assertion is.

    Q    I had one other question, I guess for any of you gentlemen, big picture.  Can you talk about how many of the leaders -- if you don’t have a specific number, at least an idea -- how many of the leaders that President Obama has actually got to meet and maybe chat with?  And how would you characterize their reaction to President Obama in meeting him for the first time?

    SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  You know, I couldn't put an exact number on it, Ben.  I can say that the President has gone out of his way to introduce himself to a lot of the members -- a lot of the Presidents, heads of state here.  I mean, you saw that in action the other night.  But in terms of an exact number, I'm not able to do it.

    I can tell you that the general atmosphere in the meetings, in the working sessions and in the -- working sessions of the entire summit and the side meetings and multilateral meetings, and then in the conversations the President has had, the pull-asides and so forth -- generally have been remarkable for both their candor and their collaborative demeanor and collaborative outlook.

    So I'll leave it to you to determine how that compares to past summits.  They have all indicated that this strikes them as a new tone.

    Q    So there's a lot to be said for the exchanging of pleasantries?

    SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Well, I think there's a lot to be said to getting the heads of government and heads of state of 34 countries together.  They all represent a lot of people who are suffering at the moment a particularly difficult situation as it relates to the economy.  And I think -- at least I can say for President Obama, as he has said to you all many times, he gets up every day trying to figure out what he can do to help those people, to create jobs.  And I think this weekend was a good opportunity to press on his colleagues on the same topics.

    Q    One last -- you said "remarkable" for their candor.  Why is it remarkable?  I mean, I guess what I'm wondering is wouldn't it be expected that a new U.S. President would be greeted that way, would have that kind of candor?  Or is it the history of this region maybe that makes that remarkable?

    SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Ben, I actually confess to be saying that it's remarkable because this is the first summit that I've been to with the President.  (Laughter.)

    Q    Glad I asked.  (Laughter.)

    SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  You know, as I said, I leave it to you guys to put this -- you all have been to these before.  I leave it to you all to put this in the context of the other summits.  I did note that it was relatively cooperative.  We elucidated for you last night some of the disagreements, and there's going to be disagreements, and disagreements on some very important issues.  But it doesn’t mean that you can't disagree without being disagreeable.

    Q    Would you describe the summit in general as it comes to a close now as a success for the United States?

    SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  You know, I would, Jeff.  And I think that we had a lot of reporting in the run-up about how there would be this big clash.  We didn't see that.  Saw a lot of run-up about how there will be a lot of fighting over Cuba.  We didn't see that.  Because frankly I think the President set a tone in making clear that there are certain things that all the people represented here today hold in common, and it's the one thing -- it's one of the things that Cuba doesn’t have, namely, democracy, freedom of the press, freedom of association.

    And so some of the worries that people set up didn't materialize.  I think that's because the President came down with a very senior team -- not necessarily represented in this room.  (Laughter.)  He came down with a very robust agenda on issues that are of intense mutual interest:  security, narcotics trafficking and energy and climate.  So I think the President wanted to -- as he made clear in his opening statement -- look forward, not look back, not get dragged into these stale debates of the past that marked for him and for many of us social studies projects in high school, but now these are actually people's lives that are in the balance.  And I think they had a very workmanlike, work-person-like summit.

    Q    Speaking of Cuba, was there any discussion today -- can you tell us if there was any discussion today in the SICA meeting?

    SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  The word was never uttered in the room.

    Q    Which word?

    SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Cuba.  It didn't come up in the SICA meeting at all.

    Q    Okay.  The other question I have is, any readout of -- anything more than what the State Department put out last night about the Venezuela return -- and U.S. returning ambassadors to their respective posts?

    SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  No.

    Q    You mentioned that immigration was brought up.  I was curious if you could expand on that a little bit -- what sort of issues specifically to do with immigration?  What were they asking of the President?

    SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Certainly.  The issue of immigration is one that is important to the President.  He has spoken on a number of occasions of his commitment to moving the debate forward on comprehensive immigration reform, first and foremost, to ensure that we have an immigration system that has a secure border, respects the laws of the United States and also respects our tradition as a nation of immigrants.

    Obviously our immigration policy has a significant impact, particularly on the countries of Central America.  The conversation was focused on -- and again, we don't read out what other Presidents said -- but they discussed as a general matter their interest that they follow this issue very closely, that it has significant implications for their own economies, in the form of remittances and other economic contacts between the United States and Central America.

    It's an issue of central importance to these Presidents and they had a good conversation, where the President was able to lay out what he has laid out on a number of occasions in public about the work that he is doing to ensure that we have a 21st century immigration system in the United States.

    Esther J. Cepeda writes the "600 Words" & "Pregunta del Dia" columns, and is also the Chief Marketing and Communications Officer for the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. Her views and reporting do not necessarily reflect those of ISAC. "600 words" is a registered trademark of EeJayCee, Inc., Copyright 2008. May be reprinted with permission, contact eejaycee@600words.com

    April 17, 2009

    Full transcript of Joint Press Conference: President Obama and Mexican President Felipe Calderon April 16 2009

    THE WHITE HOUSE
    Office of the Press Secretary

    (Mexico City, Mexico)

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
    April 16, 2009

    JOINT PRESS CONFERENCE WITH PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA

    AND PRESIDENT FELIPE CALDERÓN OF MEXICO

    Los Pinos

    Mexico City, Mexico


    4:29 P.M. CDT

    PRESIDENT CALDERÓN: (As translated.) Ladies and gentlemen of the press, of the media, I would like to give the warmest welcome to Mexico to President Barack Obama, and to the delegation accompanying him. This is an historic event that will inaugurate a new era, a new relationship between our two countries.


    Today in the meetings that we have held we have confirmed the determination of both governments to consolidate the very, very close contacts and links that join and bring together Mexico and the United States. We have new projects in important affairs such as security, migration, competitiveness, and global affairs.


    As never before we have decided that the fight against multinational organized crime must be based on cooperation, shared responsibility, and in trust, a mutual trust.


    Both governments recognize that the Merida Initiative is a very good starting point in order to strengthen cooperation in security. But we want to go beyond, we want to go further in order to liberate, to free our societies from the criminal activities that affect the lives of millions of people.


    We have also agreed to expedite the times so that we can have available the resources for this Merida Initiative, and we have also decided to launch other activities that are in the hands of our governments. For example, we can adopt new measures for preventing illicit flows at the border, particularly the flow of weapons and of cash. We will also be strengthening our cooperation in information and intelligence in order to more efficiently fight against money laundering.


    On the other hand, we have also agreed that both governments should produce propositions -- proposals for our cooperation so that we can eventually have reform in the United States with full respect to the sovereign decisions of both congresses -- of both nations, that is. Our governments will work in this sense to make migration an orderly, respectful process of human rights, a process in which human rights will be respected.


    In energy and climate change, we have agreed to work together in order to guarantee a legal framework of certainty, transparency for the future; better use of cross-border resources such as gas and energy. And I have given to President Obama concrete proposals on climate change. One of them has to do with the integration of a bilateral market of carbon emissions, which coincides a lot with proposals that he has made to the U.S. audience, and other cooperation, ways of cooperation in climate change, such as something that Mexico has proposed, called the Green Fund.


    We have also said that in addition to discussing our goals for carbon emissions that are linked in the fight against climate change globally, we must also act very soon in the design of new instruments, of new tools in order to fight against climate change. That is really the central proposal of the Green Fund.


    And in a gesture of recognition, of acknowledgment on this topic, we know that President Obama and his government have made considerable efforts to provide new arguments to the discussion of this topic. We would also like to thank -- to welcome the possibility that Mexico might be the seat of the 16th U.N. conference on climate change that will be taking place in 2010.


    We have recognized and acknowledged, ladies and gentlemen, that Mexico and the United States do not have to compete among themselves, but rather they must be able to take advantage of the complementary nature of their economies in order to compete as partners with regard to other parts of the world. We have the chance to make our region more competitive and to have greater, more agile production.


    And we will be working in three areas. First, in the strengthening of the border infrastructure, I have also given to President Obama a proposal to facilitate the economic flows between both countries to improve the quality of life of the residents in the border areas, and to foster the development of our two nations through very specific projects on infrastructure at the Mexican-U.S. border.


    Secondly, we believe it is essential to increase our cooperation and customs so that we can have a more efficient trade. And thirdly, we have also proposed to improve our cooperation in regulatory matters regarding tariff or non-tariff issues that very often make difficult our trade between two countries.


    We have agreed with President Obama that we seek agreements to truly improve the economic situation not only of the United States but of the entire region and the world. We have stated our cooperation to strengthen the democracy of the market and of regional security.


    In relation to President Obama's recent security to lift the restrictions for people from the U.S. to travel to Cuba and to be able to send remittances, Mexico acknowledges that this is a very constructive, positive step for the hemispheric relations, particularly for the region.


    And finally, my friends, ladies and gentlemen, I want to tell you that I am absolutely convinced that President Obama's visit is just an initial step, the beginning of a relationship between two countries that are friends, neighbors, and must also be partners and allies.


    Thank you so much. Thank you so much, President Obama, for your visit. The President Barack Obama now has the floor.


    PRESIDENT OBAMA: I want to begin by thanking the people of Mexico for their gracious welcome. And I want to thank President Calderón for the hospitality he has shown as a host.


    You know, this is my first trip to Mexico as President, and I see this visit -- as I know President Calderón does -- as an opportunity to launch a new era of cooperation and partnership between our two nations, an era built on an even firmer foundation of mutual responsibility and mutual respect and mutual interest. We had a productive and wide-ranging conversation and I think we have taken some very important steps down that path.


    It's difficult to overstate the depth of the ties between our two nations or the extraordinary importance of our relationship. It's obviously a simple fact of geography that we share a border, and we've always been bound together because of that geography. But it's not just that shared border that links us together. It's not only geography, but it's also culture, it's also migration patterns that have taken place that have become so important.


    Our deep economic ties mean that whenever -- whatever steps that we're going to take moving forward have to be taken together. And that's why we worked hard, hand in hand at the G20 summit. And that's what we will continue to do at the Summit of the Americas and beyond, so that we can jumpstart job creation, promote free and fair trade, and develop a coordinated response to this economic crisis.


    We also discussed our shared interest in meeting an immigration challenge that has serious implications for both the United States and for Mexico. My country has been greatly enriched by migration from Mexico. Mexican Americans form a critical and enduring link between our nations. And I am committed to fixing our broken immigration system in a way that upholds our traditions as a nation of laws but also as a nation of immigrants. And I'm committed to working with President Calderón to promote the kind of bottom-up economic growth here in Mexico that will allow people to live out their dreams here, and as a consequence will relieve some of the pressures that we've seen along the borders.


    We also discussed what our nations can do to help bring a clean energy future to both countries. This is a priority for the United States. I know it's a priority for President Calderón. And I want to commend him for the work that he's already made in cutting greenhouse gas emissions, the commitment that he's made even though Mexico is not required to do so under the Kyoto Protocol. And together, we're establishing a new Bilateral Framework on Clean Energy and Climate Change that will focus on creating green jobs, promoting renewable energy, and enhancing energy efficiency. I look forward to strengthening our partnership in the upcoming Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate and in next year's U.N. climate negotiations, which I hope will be held here in Mexico.


    Now, as essential as it is that we work together to overcome each of these common challenges, there's one particular area that requires our urgent and coordinated action, and that is the battle that's taking place with -- with respect to the drug cartels that are fueling kidnappings and sowing chaos in our communities and robbing so many of a future, both here in Mexico and in the United States.


    I have said this before; I will repeat it: I have the greatest admiration and courage for President Calderón and his entire cabinet, his rank-and-file police officers and soldiers as they take on these cartels. I commend Mexico for the successes that have already been achieved. But I will not pretend that this is Mexico's responsibility alone. A demand for these drugs in the United States is what is helping to keep these cartels in business. This war is being waged with guns purchased not here, but in the United States. More than 90 percent of the guns recovered in Mexico come from the United States, many from gun shops that line our shared border.


    So we have responsibilities, as well. We have to do our part. We have to crack down on drug use in our cities and towns. We have to stem the southbound flow of guns and cash. And we are absolutely committed to working in a partnership with Mexico to make sure that we are dealing with this scourge on both sides of the border.


    And that's why we're ramping up the number of law enforcement personnel on our border. That's why, for the first time, we are inspecting trains leaving our country, not just those entering it. That's why our Department of Homeland Security is making up to $59 million available to defend our common border from this threat to both of our countries.


    Now, as we discussed in our meeting, destroying and disrupting the cartels will require more than aggressive efforts from each of our nations. And that's why the United States is taking the following steps: We've begun to accelerate efforts to implement the Merida Initiative so we can provide Mexico with the military aircraft and inspection equipment they need when they need it.


    Yesterday, I designated three cartels as Significant Foreign Narcotics Drug Traffickers under U.S. law, clearing the way for our Treasury Department, working together with Mexico to freeze their assets and subject them to sanctions.


    My National Homeland Security Advisor, who is here, General Jim Jones, as well as my Homeland Security Secretary, Janet Napolitano, and my top advisor on homeland security and counterterrorism, John Brennan, are all meeting with their Mexican counterparts to develop new ways to cooperate and coordinate their efforts more effectively.


    In addition, as President Calderón and I discussed, I am urging the Senate in the United States to ratify an inter-American treaty known as CIFTA to curb small arms trafficking that is a source of so many of the weapons used in this drug war.


    Now, there are some of the common challenges that President Calderón and I discussed in our meeting and that we're going to be working on to overcome in the months and years ahead. It will not be easy, but I am confident that if we continue to act, as we have today, in a spirit of mutual responsibility and friendship, we will prevail on behalf of our common security and our common prosperity.


    So I think that this is building on previous meetings that we've had. In each interaction, the bond between our governments is growing stronger. I am confident that we're going to make tremendous progress in the future. Thank you.


    Q Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Mr. President, as well.


    President Obama, as a candidate for your office, you said that you wanted to see the assault ban weapon -- the ban on assault weapons reinstated. Your Attorney General has spoken in favor of this. Mexican officials have also spoken in favor of it. But we haven't heard you say that since you took office. Do you plan to keep your promise? And if not, how do you explain that to the American people?


    And, President Calderón -- I'm sorry, if I may -- would you like to see this ban reinstated? And have you raised that today with President Obama? Thank you.


    PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, first of all, we did discuss this extensively in our meetings. I have not backed off at all from my belief that the gun -- the assault weapons ban made sense. And I continue to believe that we can respect and honor the Second Amendment rights in our Constitution, the rights of sportsmen and hunters and homeowners who want to keep their families safe to lawfully bear arms, while dealing with assault weapons that, as we now know, here in Mexico, are helping to fuel extraordinary violence -- violence in our own country, as well.


    Now, having said that, I think none of us are under any illusion that reinstating that ban would be easy. And so, what we've focused on is how we can improve our enforcement of existing laws, because even under current law, trafficking illegal firearms, sending them across a border, is illegal. That's something that we can stop.


    And so our focus is to work with Secretary Napolitano, Attorney General Holder, our entire Homeland Security team, ATF, border security, everybody who is involved in this, to coordinate with our counterparts in Mexico to significantly ramp up our enforcement of existing laws. And in fact, I've asked Eric Holder to do a complete review of how our enforcement operations are currently working and make sure that we're cutting down on the loopholes that are resulting in some of these drug trafficking problems.


    The last point I would make is that there are going to be some opportunities where I think we can build some strong consensus. I'll give you one example, and that is the issue of gun tracing. The tracing of bullets and ballistics and gun information that have been used in major crimes -- that's information that we are still not giving to law enforcement, as a consequence of provisions that have been blocked in the United States Congress, and those are the areas where I think that we can make some significant progress early.


    That doesn’t mean that we're steering away from the issue of the assault guns ban, but it does mean that we want to act with urgency, promptly, now. And I think we can make significant progress.


    PRESIDENT CALDERÓN: Thank you for your question. I want to say that, in effect, on this topic -- not only on this topic, but on many of the other thorny topics of relations between the U.S. and Mexico, we have had an open, frank, trusting conversation between President Obama and myself. We have spoken of assault weapons. He is well aware of our problems.


    And we have described it as it is from the moment that the prohibition on the sale of assault weapons a few years ago, we have seen an increase in the power of organized crime in Mexico. Only in my administration, in the two years and four months, we have been able to see -- or rather we have seized more than 16,000 assault weapons. And in the efforts we have made to track their origin -- and President Obama has referred to that -- we have seen that nearly 90 percent of those arms comes from the United States -- those weapons come from the United States. There are about 10,000 sales points in the U.S.-Mexico border -- only at the border.


    On the other hand, I do believe that our relationship -- the new era we must build in our relationship between Mexico and the United States must be one with trust and respect. And we definitely respect the decision of the U.S. Congress and of the U.S. people in this regard, because they are very well aware of President Obama and his government's willingness to move forward on these issues.


    We know that it is a politically delicate topic because Americans truly appreciate their constitutional rights, and particularly those that are part of the Second Amendment. I personally believe that as long as we are able to explain clearly what our problems in Mexico are, then we might also be able to seek a solution respecting the constitutional rights of the Americans, at the same time will prevent -- or rather avoid that organized crime becomes better armed in our country.


    But we have to work on it. We have to work on it. But we fully respect the opinion of the U.S. Congress and we know that there's a great deal of sensitivity regarding this topic.


    But there are many, many things that we can definitely move forward in. For example, in armament, it is not only a matter of seeing whether we can change the legislation on assault weapons -- we have already said what our position is -- but we might also be able to see whether they can apply existing legislation in Mexico and the United States on armament. For example, in Mexico it's a matter of enforcement, with the Export Control Act, for example -- this is in the United States -- I'm sorry -- prohibits the export of weapons to those countries where those weapons are prohibited.


    And that is the case of Mexico. If we actually comply with the U.S. law -- or rather if everybody complies with the U.S. law that prohibits the sale of these weapons and their export to Mexico, we can move a great deal forward.


    President Obama has made recent decisions in the last few weeks, and we value them and appreciate them -- for example, to reinforce the operational capability of U.S. border agencies in order to comply with this legislation and with other laws, in order to review the flows of entry not only into the United States, but also the outgoing flows, outgoing from the U.S., to make sure that there is no illicit money, in strict compliance with United States legislation. I think these are very important steps.


    But there is a problem, and only as long as we build on this trust and we clearly explain to citizens of both countries how we must find a solution, we will be able to achieve one. We do so respectfully, presenting our position, knowing full well how the U.S. people feel about this and being fully respectful of the sovereign decisions that the United States might make, or that any other country might make.


    One more thing -- one more thing I forgot to mention. One other thing we can do is to track the weapons that we have in Mexico. If we manage to detect weapons sold illegally in the United States in violation of this law on the control of weapons exports, or if, in the United States, they can have -- probably move forward on a good registry of armament or on the prohibition of certain massive sales of weapons, for example, to a hunter or to a common citizen -- we know that these people do not usually buy hundreds of rifles or assault weapons or grenades -- if we can move forward in those areas, I do believe that security both of the United States and Mexico will improve because those weapons are pointing against Mexican people and Mexican officials today.


    But crime is not only acting in Mexico. It is also acting in the United States. Organized crime is acting in both countries. And I do hope that those weapons that are sold today in the United States and are being used in Mexico, I hope the day will never come in which they will also be used against the North American society or against U.S. officials, just like they are now being used in Mexico.


    Q (As translated.) Good afternoon, Presidents. You are going to share four years of an administration, and there can be an in-depth change in this fight against organized crime in these four years. As of today, how can we establish the concrete objectives that in 2012 will allow us to say, fine, a new era began between Mexico and the United States back then?


    Particularly I'm addressing this to you, President Obama. In addition to the chance that you will invest your political capital in being able to stop the flow of these weapons to Mexico, what can we hope for, what can we expect to see in terms of arresting the drug lords, the kingpins, in the U.S.? Because there are laws against corruption, but this is enabling now -- in other words, the U.S. market is now the biggest for drugs. And former President of Mexico, ex-President Fox, said that in the back they have only gotten little pats in the back from his predecessors. Can we hope for more from your administration?


    And to you, President Calderón, with this new era, how can you measure the detention, the arrest of drug lords in the United States, and also putting a stop to the flow of weapons? How can you measure this?


    PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, I think that we can measure this in terms of the reduction in violence; in the interdiction of drugs; in the interdiction of weapons coming south; in the dismantling of the financial structures that facilitate these drug cartels; in the arrest of major drug kingpins.


    So I think we know how to measure progress. The challenge is maintaining a sustained effort. And as I said, something that President Calderón and myself absolutely recognize, is that you can't fight this war with just one hand. You can't just have Mexico making an effort but the United States not making an effort. And the same is true on the other side.


    I think both our efforts have to be coordinated; both of our efforts have to be strengthened. I've made some very concrete commitments, already sending additional resources, already making additional investments. These are measurable in millions and, ultimately, billions of dollars over several years. And I believe that President Calderón has used enormous political capital to deal with this issue.


    Obviously the Mexican people, particularly along the borders, have suffered great hardship. And as a consequence, if we partner effectively -- and that's why I brought many of my top officials on this trip, to interact with their counterparts -- I'm confident that we're going to make progress. Now, are we going to eliminate all drug flows? Are we going to eliminate all guns coming over the border? That's not a realistic objective. What is a realistic objective is to reduce it so significantly, so drastically, that it becomes once again a localized criminal problem as opposed to a major structural problem that threatens stability in communities along those borders and that increases corruption and threatens the rule of law -- that's the kind of progress that I think can be made.


    And so, we are going to -- we're going to work as hard as we can and as diligently as we can on these issues -- always mindful, though, that the relationship between Mexico and the United States cannot just be defined by drugs. Sometimes there's a tendency for the media to only report on drug interdiction or immigration when it comes to U.S.-Mexican relations. And one of the things that we talked about is the extraordinary opportunities for us to work together on our commercial ties; on strengthening border infrastructure to improve the flow of goods; on working on clean energy, which can produce jobs on both sides of the border.


    So we're going to stay very focused on this. We're going to make this a top priority, but we just always want to remember that our relationship is not simply defined by these problems; it's also defined by opportunities. And that's what we want to take advantage of as well.


    PRESIDENT CALDERÓN: Thank you, President. I agree a great deal with you and I fully thank you for your support and understanding in this very difficult topic. I think the question is very relevant. I see a big opportunity for President Obama and myself, since we are going to be sharing the next four years as heads of our administrations, I see a big opportunity here.


    And on this issue, what I hope to see at the end of my administration is actually many things. One is a reduction in the levels of criminal activities in our countries related to organized crime, which is also related to drug trafficking -- they go hand in hand. We have a strategy with short-, midterm, and long-term objectives.


    In the short term, for example, we have set out to recuperate the security and tranquility of our citizens, particularly in those areas that have been harder hit by the crime. And this is where we have the joint operations, where we are mobilizing not only our federal police but also the army -- and this, regardless of the fact that it is not an easy matter and it hasn't been and it can change in the course of time, but at least we begin to see fruitful results in some areas.


    For example, in the last quarter -- or rather compared to the last quarter of last year, our first quarter of this year, there was already a drop of 27 percent in criminal activities. That is as an average for the entire country, only in Ciudad Juarez -- as of the joint operation that we launched in February, between February and March violent deaths in Ciudad Juarez, crime-related -- violence related to crime dropped by 80 percent.


    Of course I understand that the spectacular nature of some of these operations has really attracted worldwide attention. But with a very difficult crime rate that we had last year, despite them, crime in Mexico was 10.7 deaths because of crime for every 100,000 inhabitants. It is less than what it is in Guatemala, El Salvador, Colombia, Venezuela, or Brazil in Latin America, and it is also a lower number than the crime rates of many U.S. cities.


    I believe one issue has to be, of course, that we have to cut down on crime in Mexico, for sure, but, number two, I hope, in the course of time, to be a safer border and a more efficient border. As long as -- if we are able to stop the flow of drugs, illicit money and weapons, we will have greater progress both in the United States and Mexico. And one way to measure this is by appreciating and valuing the technological capabilities, particularly of nonintrusive detection at the border, so that for those who do want to make business and do want to trade, that the border is open, and those who want to commit crime, the border will be a closed area.


    One way to measure this -- and here U.S. cooperation is essential -- is to have the right technology, particularly nonintrusive technology that will enable us to have safe borders. And the initiative, the Merida Initiative, is very much focused on this.


    Now, in the midterm, we would like a renewal of our police forces in Mexico. At the end of my administration, I would like to be able to have a new federal police that will be worthy of the citizens' trust and that will be efficient. And here U.S. cooperation is also fundamental. Why? Well, because on our side we are cleaning our house, we are sweeping everything from top to bottom so that all the police forces, from the top officials at the Attorney General's office, the army, the navy, that all officials in Mexico, all police officials that we can truly trust in their honesty, and that at the same time, technologically, they will be top-notch, as the rest of the world, in investigation, in databases. We want a scientific police, one that is very well-trained in technology, and U.S. help will be very welcome and it will be essential.


    We also have a judicial plan for oral trials. And I think that as we fulfill these objectives, many of them have already -- are part of our agreement on safety, security and protection. With a shared responsibility that we now have with President Obama and his team, we are certain that we will reach these objectives and that our strategy, which is the correct one, will have many more possibilities of achieving success, and that at the end of our administration we will have a Mexico, a United States, that are much safer and freer of violence -- violence free, rather.


    Of course, drug trafficking cannot be ended by decree. As long as there is a supply of high -- or rather, is high demand, there will be a high supply. But what we can control is the effect of criminal activities in society, to stop the actions of organized crime, and we can also act preventively in order to bring down the consumption of drugs in the United States, and in Mexico, too, which also begins to be a problem of great concern to us.


    Q Mr. President, thank you. Mr. President.


    President Obama, you said in an op-ed that was out today that your new Cuba policy was part of an effort to move beyond the frozen disputes of the 20th century. Why then is it so limited? Why not open the door for all Americans to visit Cuba? And what will you say to your colleagues at the Summit of the Americas who want you to do more?


    And, President Calderón, what do you think the United States should do more on Cuba in order to improve relations with the region? Thank you.


    PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, first of all, I don't think that we should dismiss the significance of the step that we took. We eliminated remittance restrictions and travel restrictions for Cuban Americans who have family members in Cuba. For those families, this is extraordinarily significant. For the people in Cuba who will benefit from their family members being able to provide them help and to visit them, it's extraordinarily significant. We took steps on telecommunications that can potentially open up greater lines of communication between Cuba and the United States.


    And so I think what you saw was a good-faith effort, a show of good faith on the part of the United States that we want to recast our relationship. Now, a relationship that effectively has been frozen for 50 years is not going to thaw overnight. And so having taken the first step, I think it's very much in our interest to see whether Cuba is also ready to change. We don't expect them to change overnight. That would be unrealistic. But we do expect that Cuba will send signals that they're interested in liberalizing in such a way that not only do U.S.-Cuban relations improve, but so that the energy and creativity and initiative of the Cuban people can potentially be released.


    We talk about the ban on U.S. travel to Cuba, but there's not much discussion of the ban on Cuban people traveling elsewhere and the severe restrictions that they're under. I make that point only to suggest that there are a range of steps that could be taken on the part of the Cuban government that would start to show that they want to move beyond the patterns of the last 50 years.


    I'm optimistic that progress can be made if there is a spirit that is looking forward rather than backward. My guidepost in U.S.-Cuba policy is going to be how can we encourage Cuba to be respectful of the rights of its people: political speech and political participation, freedom of religion, freedom of the press, freedom of travel. But, as I said before, I don't expect things to change overnight. What I do insist on is that U.S.-Cuban relationships are grounded with a respect not only for the traditions of each country but also respect for human rights and the people's -- the needs of the people of Cuba.


    And so I hope that the signal I've sent here is, is that we are not trying to be heavy-handed. We want to be open to engagement. But we're going to do so in a systematic way that keeps focus on the hardships and struggles that many Cubans are still going through.


    PRESIDENT CALDERÓN: I would not pretend to give advice or suggestions to President Obama on this matter or any other. Let me just say what I personally believe -- or rather what I believe about the Cuban reality. The question that has to be posed rather is whether the U.S. embargo on Cuba has worked. The reality is that the embargo has been there long before we were even born, and yet things have not changed all that much in Cuba. I think we would have to ask ourselves whether that isn’t enough time to realize that it has been a strategy that has not been very useful to achieve change in Cuba.


    I do think -- I share fully the idea we do not believe that the embargo or the isolation of Cuba is a good measure for things to change in Cuba. On the contrary; the reality that we see there is that the reality has not changed. And it's because of internal factors, mostly, of course, but also because of external reasons, such as the embargo. Because of that, the Cubans have become impoverished.


    I greet -- I welcome the measures that President Obama has taken in order to change this attitude, and to try to attempt -- and the attempt must be appreciated -- to change the policy towards Cuba little by little. But what is clear to me is that we both share the same ideals. I think we would both like to see the world living at some point under a full democracy, a world with full respect for human rights, with no exceptions whatsoever. We would like to see a world working with people being able to take care of their families, to live in peace, and those principles that must protect humanity. That we do share.


    We also share the idea that each nation must be respected in its own decisions. It's like we were saying a moment ago when we were talking about the prohibition of assault weapons. Of course, we do not want those weapons to be out in the streets, but at the same time we want those decisions to come from the people themselves and to be self-determinant. And it's the same for Cuba. But I believe that the steps President Obama has taken are very positive.


    Mexico is a good friend of Cuba, and Mexico is also a good friend of the United States. We want to be a good friend of Cuba and of the United States. We want both things. And we know that one day, the day that these principles we believe in prevail, that day we will be able to be neighbors, the three of us -- the United States, Cuba and Mexico.


    What are the principles we believe in? Democracy, human rights, but also liberty, property, trade, free trade, free economy. And I think as long as those principles can function and bring benefits to the Cuban economy, then things can begin to change. We cannot change anything that has already taken place in the past, but I am certain that as heads of state, we can do a lot to try to make a different future, both for the world, both for our countries, and also in relation to Cuba.


    I told President Obama that the best of luck in this panorama that is now so totally different from what U.S. policy has been in the past. I hope for the best, and I hope that more expeditious steps could be taken so that we can move forward in this regard, and that everything will be done with good understanding. And as Mexico can contribute in any way for two of our friends to work out what they have between themselves, I hope that we can contribute. And if our best contribution is just to maintain our respect, that is fine.


    Last question.


    Q Good afternoon. For President Obama. Mr. President, -- as U.S. senator in 2006 voted in favor of the approval of the construction of the border wall. I would like to know, and I think Mexicans would like to know, what is your real commitment of your administration to present a new migratory -- comprehensive migratory reform? What would be its scope? And when would you approve this reform?


    And on free trade, on NAFTA, it seems that because of the last events there's not a great deal of interest in the U.S. to apply or to comply with all the items in NAFTA. I would like to ask President Calderón whether you spoke of some of those issues during your conversations, whether you addressed the migratory issue and some of the NAFTA issues?


    PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, first of all, with respect to the immigration issue, I think it would be useful to point out that I also voted twice for comprehensive immigration reform that would have provided a pathway for legalization and improvement of the orderly process of migration into the United States.


    I've said before that we have to have a comprehensive approach, recognizing that the United States has a very legitimate concern -- if you've got hundreds of thousands of people from other countries coming into the United States without anybody knowing who they are, who when they arrive can often be exploited and, because they're not protected by various laws, undermine the wages of U.S. workers -- those are legitimate concerns on the part of the United States people and the United States government. And so working effectively with the Mexican government to create an orderly border is very important. And there are a whole host of strategies that we need to pursue.


    What I've also said is that for those immigrants who are already in the United States -- and by the way, we focus a lot on Mexicans who have come into the United States, but the number of immigrants from Central America, from Ireland, from Poland are substantial as well; it's not -- this is not just an issue with respect to Mexico -- for those immigrants who have put down roots, may have come there illegally, I think they need to pay a penalty for having broken the law. They need to come out of the shadows, and then we have to put them through a process where, if they want to stay in the United States, they have an opportunity over time to earn that opportunity, for a legal status in the United States.


    Now, we came close to getting that kind of reform done several years ago and then it became politicized. And my whole goal is to remove the politics of this and take a very practical, common-sense approach that benefits people on both sides of the border -- and creates a secure and safe border so you don't have people who are dying in the deserts as a consequence of a disorderly and illegal migration process. I think that's a goal that President Calderón and I share and one that we discussed during our bilateral meeting.


    With respect to trade, Mexico is one of our largest trading partners. The amount of commerce that flows back and forth creates wealth in Mexico and it creates wealth in the United States. I have said repeatedly that I'm in favor of free trade. I know that there has been some concern about a provision that was placed in our stimulus package related to Mexican trucking. That wasn't a provision that my administration introduced, and I said at the time that we need to fix this because the last thing we want to do at a time when the global economy is contracting and trade is shrinking is to resort to protectionist measures.


    My team is working with President Calderón's team to resolve this issue. I'm hopeful that we can resolve it in an effective way. It's not helpful to a number of U.S. producers who are interested in selling into Mexico and are fearful that they may be subject to countervailing tariffs or retaliation.


    So we're going to see if we can get this fixed. But I can tell you that President Calderón and I are entirely on the same page in believing that we can create greater opportunities for trade and strengthen our commercial relationships between our two countries.


    I have said before in the past, and I will continue to say, that as part of the NAFTA framework, that it would make sense for labor and environmental provisions to be enforceable within that agreement rather than just be viewed as a side agreement. But I recognize that we are in a very difficult time right now economically on both sides of the border and that those kinds of negotiations are going to need to proceed in a very careful and deliberate way, because we don't want to discourage trade; we want to encourage trade right now.


    So I'm confident that our administrations are going to be able to work together, and it's going to be to the benefit both of Mexico and the United States.


    PRESIDENT CALDERÓN: We spoke at length on migration and on trade, and particularly on the economy in general between both nations. President Obama is well aware, is very knowledgeable about the problem, and his position in favor of a comprehensive migratory reform is well known. I would simply repeat the idea -- refrain the idea that we share the objective of achieving an orderly, legal, productive migration between both countries.


    I have said, and I maintain, that as a Mexican, as President of Mexico, it doesn’t make me particularly happy to see our people risk their lives going across a border, because I know that with every migrant that leaves we have the best of our people leaving -- the youngest, the most courageous, the strongest, the hardest-working -- they are the ones that are leaving. Because I have seen in many communities here in Mexico, and particularly the state I come from, where there are phantom towns now, where there are only the elderly, children, women, and no one else is left there.


    So I am working hard to create in Mexico the conditions, the opportunities of work, of employment for our people here in Mexico. That is really the only way out that can put a stop to migration. I think that is the best way out, to create opportunities and employment in our country. But in the meantime, President Obama is very clear on what the problem consists of, and it's very important to establish those instruments that will enable people to come out of the shadows, as he himself has said, and that our region can gradually become more orderly, more legal and better migration flows.


    I think the two of us share the idea that trade produces benefits on both sides of the border. Not only are there many Mexican workers that depend on their exports to the United States today -- by the way, in a very delicate situation that we're going through because of the economic situation, the drop in U.S. industry is very co-related to the drop in our Mexican industry -- but there are also many workers in the United States that depend on the purchases that we make of U.S. products. Today Mexican consumers are among the best buyers of U.S. products. Few consumers in the world buy as many U.S. products as we do here in Mexico.


    So we must protect trade. And the best way of doing so is to allow it to flow naturally, with no restrictions. So going beyond the autonomous decisions that every country can take, and the legitimate exercise of the rights that are part of the pacts and agreements that we have in order to protect free trade, I agree with President Obama, we have to go further. We have to go beyond in order to improve trade between both our countries. And we do not want to restrict it. We can come to agreements; we might have certain differences; I believe that we can move a great deal forward in labor and environmental issues, but it concerns me that to reopen those things that have been proven to work well can merely create further obstacles and worsen the situation we have today.


    Our focus today on practical matters -- and this is why --let me just mention three things that I believe we can work on. One is infrastructure at the border. I have talked to President Obama, I have shown him a list of 200 infrastructure projects of a larger or smaller scale that can generate employment both in the U.S. and Mexico at the border, and improve our competitiveness at the border. So we have focused on six projects of border bridges, border crossing points that can lead to further employment and prosperity for our people.


    The second item is customs cooperation that will enable us to have better cooperation, more expeditious cooperation, with no drop in productivity -- to maybe have one single customs form, whether we're talking about exports or imports from one country to another; to have one single form that will allow us to reduce bureaucracy and make trade more expeditious.


    And then also, third, concrete measures to have a harmonization of standards. Certain U.S. products, for example, need to have the units measured in pounds, and here we need them measured in kilos or in grams, we need to be able to have standards. If certain requirements differ from our two countries, I think we have to work towards a harmonization of these requirements.


    So these practical matters that seem to be minor are actually quite important. And I think they can truly help us.


    And let me wrap up by saying that one of the things we emphasized is that both of us are going through economic problems because of this international crisis that we're undergoing. But if we act intelligently we will understand that if we improve the North American competitiveness as a region that entails Canada, United States and Mexico, if we improve the competitive conditions of our entire region, vis-à-vis other regions such as Asia or Eastern Europe or the rest of Latin America, then I do believe we will be able to come out of this problem much, much faster.


    Trade means opportunities, equal opportunities of employment and of prosperity for our peoples, always, always, and particularly today in these times of crisis and economic difficulties.


    President Obama is undergoing tremendous efforts to improve things in the United States and he is exercising in international leadership to face this economic situation. We firmly support on our side this situation, doing everything we can in order to revert this critical situation. And I do believe one way to do it is by strengthening trade, not restricting it.


    So, ladies and gentlemen, we now bring to an end our press conference. Thank you so much. We thank you.


    END 5:24 P.M. CDT


    ###

    April 15, 2009

    One Chicago Photographer’s Picture Perfect Optimism

    "600 Words by Esther J. Cepeda"

    This isn’t a story about hope – hope is defined as feeling that what you want will happen. Well, guess what? You can forget about the economy magically healing itself and the stock market rallying your money back in the next few months, ‘cause that ain’t gonna happen.

    Nope, way better than that, here is a story for you about a far more useful coping mechanisms: sucking it up, and embracing uncertainty.

    I don’t need to tell you times are tough out there – your best friend’s wife just got laid off, your office is being downsized, and all the money you poured into the stock market back in October 2007 – when the Dow Jones reached its all-time high of 14,087 and unemployment was down to 4.6% – is gone, baby, gone.

    But why whine about it? As Esquire Editor-in-Chief David Granger says in his kick-ass May note to readers: "We’ve become addicted to pessimism. And it has more to do with us than with the fix in which we’ve found ourselves. We’re so stinking self-important that whatever happens to us must be the worst, the terriblest…So from this day forward how ‘bout we suck it up and find a way to deal with it?"

    So I set my mind on finding someone who’s got every reason in the world to complain about how rough times are but is suckin’ it up – and found Dimitre.

    Estherbestdimitre Or, rather, Dimitre – the gorgeous and ridiculously talented Chicago photographer who waltzed into my life for a downtown photo shoot last year and made me look far more glamorous than I am in real life – got back in touch with me to say "hi."

    Thinking that in an era of dirt-cheap, high-end digital cameras and amateur photographer Flickr stars, maybe independent photography wasn’t such a well-paying gig these days, I asked how things were going.

    "It’s definitely slower than normal, it seems like everything from architecture gigs to usage rights for images are down," Dimitre, the mononymously named founder and owner of Dimitre Photography, Inc., told me earlier this week.

    Dimitre1


    As we talked about all the factors impacting his business, from the aforementioned cheap digital cameras, to bargain-hunting clients who want to reprint his work for peanuts, to the glut of unemployed and underemployed photographers competing with him for jobs, he unwittingly spouted some beautiful nuggets of wisdom and I share them here:

    "I came out of college 20 years ago in the 1990’s and I had to struggle to keep myself and my small operation going through some tough times. And I never forget what my college mentor told me when I went to him, completely disillusioned, feeling like the whole world was coming to an end, whining about how great it was in the 70’s and 80’s, that being the best time to be a photographer.

    And he said: ‘No, Dimitre, when times are good anyone can go out, be lousy and still make money; the customers come to you and it’s easy. Now is the best time to build your business. Now is when you’re going to develop the skills, the professionalism, the customer service skills that will make you a success. You’re going to learn how to not cut corners because the only way to succeed is if you do things right. And if you can survive in the economy today, when times are tough, you’ll be around forever.’"


    That’s pretty potent stuff, and considering the man behind the camera got over his newbie angst and made it this far, I asked Dimitre how he felt about his mentor’s advice today.

    "I’m doing all the right things: getting back in touch with old customers, networking, meeting my customers’ needs as best as possible," Dimitre said, "and for right now, I’m thinking out of the box and allowing that things are changing."

    And that’s what hit me – we are all struggling against this moment in time. Struggling against the economy, struggling against uncertainty and struggling against our own fears. But there’s no point in mourning how things "should be," we all need to just accept things as they are, embrace the uncertainty swirling around us, and flow with it rather than struggling against it.

    "I’m staying positive, and I’m lucky!" Dimitre chuckled. "I get to live and breathe my photography because it’s my art, it’s my life, not just some job. I don’t know what I’ll be doing next week or next month but that’s nothing new, that’s how it’s always been. And I love it."



    Esther J. Cepeda writes the "600 Words" & "Pregunta del Dia" columns, and is also the Chief Marketing and Communications Officer for the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. Her views and reporting do not necessarily reflect those of ISAC. "600 words" is a registered trademark of EeJayCee, Inc., Copyright 2008. May be reprinted with permission, contact eejaycee@600words.com

    April 07, 2009

    A meditation on spring

    "600 Words by Esther J. Cepeda"

    Finally, this morning it clicked - it’s no longer January.

    Though technically it’s been spring for several weeks, three bouts of snow disagreed with the printed calendar. Every morning has been a cold, dark slog and rather than being a time of renewal – all pastel colored Easter baskets and jewel-toned tulips – it’s been a time of reusing and recycling. Recycling February and March’s weather, to be specific.

    But today the sun came up like a piece of bronzed bread popping up out of the cosmic toaster and all the gloom that had overtaken me yesterday – as I walked, in the wet wind, over to UIC’s campus for Emmanuel Rosenberg’s discussion about his book "The Anatomy of Buzz" – simply fell away and I’m now on a vacation of the brain.

    Tranquility, while good for the soul, really is bad for the journalist. After all, what’s an opinion leader to say when everything’s coming up roses?

    This morning as I let the sun burn my eyeballs (I can still see the blue spots in the middle of my vision) its warmth melted away all my worldly concerns.

    • No more angst over whether the immigrant tragedy at Binghamton, NY was given adequate or proper media attention…I contacted several immigrant and refugee groups and none of them dared give an on-the-record comment, instead pointing to Obama’s G20 appearance, and the Final Four as adequate reasons for the mainstream media to have effectively ignored the country’s most violent tragedy since the Virginia Tech shootings in 2007 which garnered wall-to-wall coverage in broadcast and print for what seemed like an eternity. So why complain? At least those poor immigrants’ families weren’t exploited in the name of higher per-copy sales and cable ratings. Err, I mean "journalism."

    • No desire to throw stones over this morning’s report that Hispanic pre-schoolers are more likely than their white and black counterparts to be obese (See AP reporter Lindsey Tanner’s story here). Yeah, Latinos need to get their head’s out of their tacos asados and realize that we are killing our children with our terrible eating habits, stunning ignorance on health matters, and our refusal to take responsibility for exercising our own bodies away from Type 2 diabetes. But, hey, I guess we’ll have to tackle that after the Easter morning chocolate bunnies and chocolate-covered marshmallows are scarfed down as a prelude to the Sunday night ham and maybe mami will make me a flan.
    • Heck I won’t even linger on the fact that Easter was always one of those sore-spot holidays in my life. Why? Duh! Because people would call me "Easter" all the time in what they considered a novel way to mispronounce my name. Like it wasn’t bad enough that I spent my entire life having my name misspelled by the "H" omission. Sheesh! I will say this, I’ve lightened up on this point and one year someone sent me the "Esther Bunny" which I share with you here in hopes that you can enjoy making fun of me as much I now enjoy laughing at myself.

    Smallestherbunny

    Happy Spring Break, Passover, Easter, Oestre, Furry Rabbit Night, or whatever other excuse you’ll use to celebrate with friends and family.

    March 31, 2009

    More minorities in suburban schools yet they experience less diversity and more segregation

    "600 Words by Esther J. Cepeda"

    People bashful that they moved out to the suburbs for the better school systems often defend their actions (as if they needed to) by remarking that their child's classroom is a mini-United Nations.

    "You should see Krystyn's school," they gush, "there are Japanese kids, and African kids, and Indian kids – it's so diverse!"

    Sure, although that depends on what you consider "diverse."

    Some people would imagine that a school district sporting a whopping 67% minority count would be offering their kids an education that celebrates the actual make-up of the population it serves, and providing their children with the kinds of experiences with people from different ethnic, racial, and socio-economic backgrounds that will help them thrive in "the real world."

    They'd be wrong.

    According to a report the Pew Hispanic Center released today, though the student population of America's suburban public schools has shot up by 3.4 million in the past decade and a half – and virtually all of this increase (99%) has been due to the enrollment of new Latino, black and Asian students – there has been only a modest increase in the racial and ethnic diversity of student populations at the level of the individual suburban school. 

    The backgrounder for the report says: "For example, in 2006-07, the typical white suburban student attended a school whose student body was 75% white; in 1993-94, this same figure had been 83%.

    So at a time when the white share of student enrollment in suburban school districts was falling by 13 percentage points (from 72% in 1993-94 to 59% in 2006-07), the exposure of the typical white suburban student to minority students in his or her own school was growing by a little more than half that much-or 8 percentage points."

    This is not big news to me. It is a well-documented fact that African American students tend to be labeled as "Special Education" students and shunted off to "special" classes – at a rate of DOUBLE their white counterparts (Current statistics indicate that African American boys represent only 9% of the total student enrollment in public schools, yet in the category of mental retardation their enrollment percentage is more than double 20%).

    Then we can move right along to Hispanics who are also often misdiagnosed as being special education students when, in fact, they have difficulties due to second language acquisition. Or they're simply shoved off into "bilingual classes" where a modified curriculum is presented in Spanish under the guise of "transitioning" the students into English-language classes, a day that rarely comes for too many students.

    The numbers say that the presence of minority students in the suburban schools attended by whites (25%) is much lower than the overall representation of minority students in suburban school districts (41%).

    The net effect is that even though suburban school districts are experiencing unprecedented growth in their minority populations they are not integrated into the schools districts, depriving them, and their classmates of valuable experiences with people who come from different backgrounds. Check this out:

    In 2006-07, the typical suburban black student attended a school that was 44% black, up from 43% black in 1993-94

    ·

    In 2006-07, the typical suburban Asian student attended a school that was 23% Asian, down from 24% Asian in 1993-94.

    ·

    Suburban Hispanic student isolation has significantly increased: in 2006-07, the typical suburban Hispanic student attended a school that was 49% Hispanic, an increase from 42% Hispanic in 1993-94.

    ·

    What's weird is that this is not an area anyone has put much attention on, probably because the numbers, as they so often are, are deceptive.

    The Pew Hispanic Center's Report notes that, "The movement of minority students into suburban schools has had the overall effect of slightly reducing levels of ethnic and racial segregation throughout the nation's 93,430 public schools. 

    Minority students on average are less segregated in suburban school districts compared with city school districts, so the shift toward suburban school districts tends to reduce national segregation levels."

    That these students are less segregated in suburban school districts than they are in city school districts is good, but certainly not great. We can do better.

    But we don't. I can tell you from experience, as a teacher in two different suburban school districts, both experiencing large population shifts, that there is tremendous fear of African-American and Hispanic children in schools.

    The administrators of and community-elected representatives on schools boards across the collar counties of Chicago are simply not adequately prepared to deal with the influx of students representing wildly different cultural and background experiences that have arrived in the past ten to twelve years. But they must.

    And the parents of these children can not wait until school administrators see the light, they must make their voices heard at school board meetings, in principals' offices and in their local media.

    Their message: we're here, we're not leaving, and our children deserve the same quality education as Caucasian students – in integrated classrooms.



    Esther J. Cepeda writes the "600 Words" & "Pregunta del Dia" columns, and is also the Chief Marketing and Communications Officer for the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. Her views and reporting do not necessarily reflect those of ISAC. "600 words" is a registered trademark of EeJayCee, Inc., Copyright 2008. May be reprinted with permission, contact eejaycee@600words.com

    March 25, 2009

    Eternal Sunshine of Chicago’s Mind – TIFs need to be brought into the light

    "600 Words by Esther J. Cepeda"

    Crooked politicians have run Chicago since I was born – that is a fact.

    Google Al Sanchez, "Hired Truck Scandal," Ed Vrdolyak, Jim Laski, "pay-to-play," I could go on and on but won’t bother because we all know this. It’s the stuff of legend. It’s the Chicago Way!

    But we’re supposed to believe that no backroom wheeling and dealing occur when fat cats get together to carve out Tax Increment Financing Districts that take property tax money and supposedly reinvest it in communities?

    And I’m the queen of England, nice to meet you.

    TIF districts make people’s eyes glaze over because they’re difficult to understand, difficult to track, and it takes decades to see the results of bad governance – perfect conditions for pulling the wool over residents’ eyes when it comes to how these things come to pass in their own back yards.

    So Alderman Manny Flores and Alderman Scott Waguespack suggested bringing the whole process out into the klieg lights of this thing we call the internet so everyone who doesn’t have time to hang out in council chambers can wrap their heads around what multi-million dollar deals might happen in their neighborhoods. And where the money will go since TIFs take that money out of local schools, parks, and libraries and put it…somewhere else.

    Slam dunk, right? Ha, not in Chicago it ain’t.

    Nope, all the king’s men…I’m sorry I meant the majority of City of Chicago Aldermen and Women… took a pass on more open, accessible, and accountable government.

    I asked Manny Flores why you should care, given that there’s the sticky business of your husband’s job, the car note, the price of milk, and the entire global economy to worry about.

    "These are Chicago taxpayer dollars we’re talking about," Flores told me over the phone earlier today, "when is enough, enough?"

    "People are looking at AIG nationally but you don’t have to look any farther than the Republic Window company fiasco here," Flores said. "They received $10 million dollars of TIF money, whether they ever really invested into the community as they agreed to is questionable and then when they ran into trouble, they closed their doors – under cover of night – to relocate, and refused to pay the workers their due."

    So we should get mad as all hell and declare we’re not going to take it anymore?

    "We have an opportunity to very easily provide more transparency in our government by publishing what should be public information and letting people participate in making those decisions," Flores said, "the taxpayers need to have better control over how their money is spent."

    Make it happen – find your alderman here and tell him or her that spring is here and it’s time to let the sunshine in.



    Esther J. Cepeda writes the "600 Words" & "Pregunta del Dia" columns, and is also the Chief Marketing and Communications Officer for the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. Her views and reporting do not necessarily reflect those of ISAC. "600 words" is a registered trademark of EeJayCee, Inc., Copyright 2008. May be reprinted with permission, contact eejaycee@600words.com

    March 24, 2009

    Obama disappoints on immigration but Hispanics aren’t talking about it

    "600 Words by Esther J. Cepeda"

    I’ll give you a bit of insight into my world: I get a zillion crazy emails a day from anti- and pro- illegal immigrant interest groups.

    "Stop deportations NOW!!!!!!!!, blah, blah, blah," and "Local Leaders call for REFORM, blah, blah, blah," sprinkled in with, "End Illegal Invasion NOW!!!!!, blah, blah, blah" and "If you ain't mad [about illegal immigration], you ain't payin' attention! blah, blah, blah."

    But I have yet to get one that screams "Obama disappoints on immigration reform!!!"

    That’s OK, that’s why I have subscriptions to actual newspapers and actually read them.

    After getting heat from Latinos far and wide for daring to imply that Obama has been utterly flaccid on the issue of illegal immigration – my Tweet regarding Obama’s March 18 meeting with the Hispanic Congressional Caucus pretty much said it all: "Obama's 1hr "robust and strategic" meeting w/Congressional Hispanic Caucus yielded: we’ll work on [immigration] together…" pretty much said it all – someone else has finally noticed that Obama is not the Latino population’s great savior.

    This is straight from today’s New York Times unsigned editorial:

    March 24, 2009 Editorial - Obama Flinches on Immigration

    In a little-noticed act of political faintheartedness, the Obama administration has pulled back from nominating Thomas Saenz, a highly regarded civil-rights lawyer and counsel to the mayor of Los Angeles, to run the Justice Department’s civil rights division.

    Mr. Saenz, the former top litigator in Los Angeles for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, or Maldef, was privately offered the job in January. The floating of his name led to fierce outbursts from anti-immigrant groups and blogs, which detest him for being so good at what he does.

    He was a leader of the successful fight to block California’s Proposition 187, an unconstitutional effort to deny social services and schooling to illegal immigrants. He has defended Latino day laborers who were targets of misguided local crackdowns, from illegal police stings to unconstitutional anti-solicitation ordinances. An editorial in Investor’s Business Daily slimed Mr. Saenz by calling him "an open-borders extremist" and said Maldef wanted to give California back to Mexico.

    None of it was true, but it was apparently too much for the White House. Mr. Saenz was ditched in favor of Maryland’s labor secretary, Thomas Perez, who has a solid record but is not as closely tied to immigrant rights.

    Immigrant advocates are stuck with the sinking feeling that Mr. Obama’s supposed enthusiasm for immigration reform will wilt under pressure and heat. Representative Luis Gutiérrez of Illinois, a member of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, found it sadly unsurprising that a lawyer could be rejected for the nation’s top civil-rights job because he had stood up for civil rights. "In what other position do you find that your life experience, your educational knowledge and commitment to an issue actually hurts you?" he asked.

    Mr. Obama may have avoided a nasty fight this time. But if he is ever going to win the battle to put 12 million illegal immigrants on a path to citizenship, he will to have to confront and dismantle the core restrictionist argument: that being an illegal immigrant is an unpardonable crime, one that strips away fundamental protections and forgives all manner of indecent treatment.

    The Constitution’s bedrock protections do not apply to just the native-born. The suffering that illegal immigrants endure — from raids to workplace exploitation to mistreatment in detention — is a civil-rights crisis. It cannot be left to fester while we wait for the big immigration bill that may or may not arrive under this president.

    Mr. Saenz would have been an ideal candidate to reaffirm values that have been lost in the poisoned immigration debate, had Mr. Obama dared to nominate him.


    I’m not here to hate on the prez, rather, I’m glad that I’m not the only one who was remotely excited about this new presidency who realizes the man doesn’t actually walk on water.

    Rather than blow his cover, though, all the major Latino organizations have been comedically tepid in their reaction to his stunning silence on the matter. Exhibit A: the press release that probably spurred the NYTimes’ editorial which was released last Wednesday by the National Council of La Raza.

    Titled: "NCLR EXPRESSES PROFOUND DISAPPOINTMENT WITH DECISION AGAINST SAENZ" it quoted their supreme leader Janet Murguia thusly:

    "I am confident that at his confirmation hearing Mr. Saenz would have been able to address any questions related to his litigation work on immigration based on the facts of the cases he argued and the law.  Unfortunately he will not be given that opportunity," Murguía said.  "This action may lead some to question whether the White House is ready to fulfill its promise on immigration reform."

    Oooooh, I’m sure that made the Obama administration quake in their boots. You just wait until some strident activist starts whipping out their standard "If it weren’t for Latinos, Obama wouldn’t have gotten elected" line – and the White House completely ignores it. That’ll be quite the "ouch" moment, just you wait and see.

    I’ve been asked time and time again when the issue of reform for this country’s miserably ineffective immigration laws will be taken up by the Obama administration and I always answer the same way – and as of today see no reason to alter my initial prediction:  "Don’t hold your breath!"



    Esther J. Cepeda writes the "600 Words" & "Pregunta del Dia" columns, and is also the Chief Marketing and Communications Officer for the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. Her views and reporting do not necessarily reflect those of ISAC. "600 words" is a registered trademark of EeJayCee, Inc., Copyright 2008. May be reprinted with permission, contact eejaycee@600words.com

    White House's Announcement of U.S.-Mexico Border Security Policy

    THE WHITE HOUSE Office of the Press Secretary

    March 24, 2009ADMINISTRATION OFFICIALS ANNOUNCE U.S.-MEXICO BORDER SECURITY POLICY: A COMPREHENSIVE RESPONSE & COMMITMENT

    Today, Department of Homeland Secretary Janet Napolitano, Deputy Secretary of State Jim Steinberg and United States Deputy Attorney General David Ogden will lay out the Administration’s comprehensive response to the situation along the border with Mexico. President Obama and his Administration are focused on all aspects of the U.S. relationship with Mexico because it is vital to core U.S. national interests.

    The President is concerned by the increased level of violence, particularly in Ciudad Juarez and Tijuana, and the impact that it is having on the communities on both sides of the border. He believes that the United States must continue to monitor the situation and guard against spillover into the United States. And the President is firmly committed to ensuring our borders are secure and we are doing all we can to reduce illegal flows in both direction across the border.

    We are taking steps on both sides of the border, working with our Mexican partners, to support the Mexican government’s campaign against the violent cartels and to reduce contraband in both directions across the border.

    o

    Under the Merida Initiative, we are investing $700 million this year to work in collaboration with Mexico on law enforcement and judicial capacity.

    o

    DOJ, DHS, and Treasury are all ramping up personnel and efforts directed at the Southwest border.

    o

    We are renewing our commitment to reduce the demand for illegal drugs here at home.

    The President admires President Calderon’s courage and determination to confront and dismantle the drug cartels and we stand shoulder-to-shoulder with him in that fight. Mexico undoubtedly faces serious challenges, but it is vigorously confronting them. Mexico's drug-related violence is carried out among the warring cartels and against government forces. To the extent we have seen related violence in the United States it has been cartel-on-cartel.

    Because this effort has so many facets, the U.S.-Mexico relationship and our efforts to help address the increase in violence in Mexico are being coordinated at the White House through the NSC and HSC. We are investing $700 million this year in enhancing Mexican law enforcement and judicial capacity and working closely to coordinate our efforts against the cartels.

    ·

    Congress has appropriated (FY08 Supp, FY09 Omnibus) $700 million to support Mexico’s security and institution building efforts under the Merida Initiative. These funds will help to improve law enforcement, crime prevention and strengthen institution building and rule of law. That money will provide:

    o

    Increased capacity for Mexican border security efforts to help stem illegal flows in both directions across the border;

    o

    Non-intrusive inspection technology to enhance Mexican interdiction efforts;

    o

    Training for rule of law and judicial reform efforts;

    o

    Information technology to enable Mexican prosecutors, law enforcement, and immigration officials to communicate securely;

    o

    5 helicopters to increase air mobility for the Mexican Army and Air Force, and a surveillance aircraft for the Mexican Navy.

    o

    Support and training for implementation of Mexico’s new legal system and to strengthen observance of human rights by judicial authorities and police; and

    o

    Help for Mexican prosecutors’ offices to develop an effective witness and victim protection programs.

    ·

    DoD has been and is continuing to work with its Mexican counterparts to increase information sharing, interoperability, and training and equipping of counternarcotics forces.

    ·

    The Administration is committed to working with Congress to ensure that we fully fund our commitments under the Merida Initiative.

    ·

    We are also coordinating our efforts with the Mexican government through regular high-level contact and at a working level with nine Merida Initiative working groups overseeing implementation.We are moving to more effectively disrupt illegal flows of weapons and bulk cash to Mexico and to ensure that our border security remains resistant to the flow of drugs and violence into the United States.

    ·

    DHS is developing a plan to supplement resources on the southwest border that includes the following elements:

    o

    Doubling Border Enforcement Security Task Forces (BEST) teams that incorporate foreign, federal and state/local law enforcement and intelligence officers

    o

    Tripling DHS Intelligence Analysts working along the Southwest Border

    o

    Increasing ICE attaché staff in Mexico in support of Mexican law enforcement efforts

    o

    Doubling Violent Criminal Alien teams located in Southwest Border Field Offices

    o

    Quadrupling the number of Border Liaison Officers working with Mexican law enforcement entities

    o

    oIncreasing southbound rail examinations

    o Enhancing the use of technology at ports of entry, including backscatter mobile x-ray

    o Increasing the number of canine units operating on the SW Border

    o Increasing engagement with state and local Southwest border law enforcement

    o

    Making up to $59 million in current Operation Stonegarden funding available to enhance state, local and tribal law enforcement operations and assets along the border

    o

    Increasing the use of mobile license plate readers for Southbound traffic on the SW Border

    ·

    DHS is also continuing Armas Cruzadas – A DHS/ICE-led bilateral law enforcement and intelligence-sharing operation to thwart export of arms from US into Mexico

    ·

    DOJ is confronting the criminal enterprises responsible for violence in Mexico and trafficking drugs, illegal arms and bulk cash across the Southwest border.

    The Mexican Cartel Strategy, led by the Deputy Attorney General, is

    ·

    Working with federal prosecutor-led task forces that bring together all DOJ and DHS law enforcement components to identify, disrupt and dismantle the Mexican drug cartels through investigation, prosecution, and extradition of their key leaders and facilitators, and seizure and forfeiture of their assets;

    ·

    Increasing focus on investigations and prosecutions of the southbound smuggling of guns and cash that fuel the violence and corruption;

    ·

    Addressing any instances of spill-over violence into the U.S.; and

    ·

    Attacking the cartels in Mexico itself, in partnership with Mexico’s PGR and SSP.

    DEA is increasing its efforts:

    ·

    Placing 16 new positions in its Southwest border field divisions (29% of DEA’s domestic agent positions (1,171 agents) are now allocated to the DEA’s Southwest border field divisions.

    ·

    DEA is forming four additional Mobile Enforcement Teams (METs) to specifically target Mexican methamphetamine trafficking operations and associated violence, both along the border and in U.S. cities impacted by the cartels.

    o

    ATF is increasing its efforts by:

    ·

    Relocating 100 personnel to the SW border in the next 45 days, using dedicated resources from the economic stimulus, to fortify its Project Gunrunner aimed at disrupting arms trafficking between the U.S. and Mexico that has resulted in ATF referring more than 1,500 defendants for prosecution involving more than 12,000 weapons; and

    ·

    Continuing its eTrace Initiative which works with Mexican officials to forensically track weapons used in drug cartel violence. In FY07, Mexico submitted approximately 1,112 guns for tracing that originated in TX, AZ and CA.

    FBI is stepping up its efforts along the SW Border by:

    ·

    Creating a Southwest Intelligence Group (SWIG), a clearinghouse of all FBI activities involving Mexico;

    ·

    Increasing its focus on public corruption, kidnappings, and extortion relating to SW border issues; and

    ·

    Continuing its successful implementation of the Central American Fingerprint Exchange (CAFÉ) initiative -- which was developed to collect, store, and integrate biometric data from El Salvador, Guatemala, Belize, Honduras, and the Mexican state of Chiapas into a central database accessible to US law enforcement -- as well as the Transnational Anti-Gang initiative -- which coordinates the sharing of gang intelligence between the U.S. and El Salvador.

    OJP – Office of Justice Programs – is investing $30 million in stimulus funding to assist with state and local law enforcement to combat narcotics activity along the Southern border and in High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas, andOCDETF – DOJ’s Organized Drug Enforcement Task Forces Program – is adding personnel to its strike force capacity along the Southwest border.

    We are making concerted efforts to cut off funding for Mexican drug cartels.

    ·

    Operation Firewall – A DHS-led comprehensive law enforcement operation targeting criminal organizations involved in the smuggling of large quantities of US currency.

    ·

    Treasury has made targeting the financial networks of Mexican drug trafficking organizations a top priority and is committed to continuing to work with the Mexican government to disrupt drug money laundering operations. This includes continuing to pursue the use of Treasury authorities including the Kingpin Designation Act.

    ·

    Treasury and other departments and agencies are collaborating closely with Mexico to analyze cross-border cash flows to try to distinguish legitimate activity from drug money laundering and other illicit transactions, as well as to support financial aspects of investigations by U.S. and Mexican law enforcement.

    ·

    Treasury continues to provide the Mexican government with training on how to conduct financial analysis and financial investigations of drug cartels activities, examination of financial institutions and certain Merida-supported IT investments.We are renewing our commitment to reduce the demand for illegal drugs here at home.

    ·

    Approximately $5 billion have been committed in the previous year for initiatives to reduce illicit drug use within our borders.

    ·

    The Obama Administration is focusing on integrating substance abuse services into national healthcare systems with early screening, diagnosis and intervention as regular preventative medicine to reach the millions of patients who need treatment, and as a means to prevent millions more from becoming dependent.

    ·

    Expanding treatment capacity of drug courts in the United States is a priority of the Obama Administration. The FY09 Omnibus includes $63.9 million for drug courts that bring judicial, law enforcement, and treatment communities, as well as other social and public services together with the goal of breaking a non-violent offender’s drug addiction.

    March 23, 2009

    Illegal Alien College Students: Cash cows with bleak futures

    "600 Words by Esther J. Cepeda"

    Set aside the DREAM Act for a moment, I’m not here to tell you whether you should be for or against legislation that would make young illegal aliens with "good character" eligible for a conditional path to citizenship in exchange for a mandatory two year commitment in higher education or the military.

    Let’s talk about how things stand today.

    Currently, an illegal alien student can, in many cases, attend an institute of higher education if he or she is able to afford the tuition – many times at the "out-of-state" rate – and can make the grades to finish.

    Then they get plopped out into the world and have two choices: 1) take a menial job, illegally or 2) take all that U.S.-bred brain power somewhere else.

    Darn.

    At any rate, I came across two pieces of information that just seemed to cry out for six hundred words, or so.

    This from the American Association of Collegiate Registrars, who conducted a survey from February 25 to March 8, 2009 to "better understand the processes related to undocumented students that are used by U.S. postsecondary education institutions."

    Of the 613 institutions of higher ed who responded – 260 full responses and 353 responses not completely filled out – here are a few salient facts for your consideration:

    ·

    96.9% of respondents answered that they do seek information about applicants' citizenship/residence status on their admissions application


    ·

    19.6% of responding institutions indicated they do verify all applicants claiming to have U.S. Citizenship/legal status.

    o

    30.6% responded that they verify applicants for financial aid

    o

    23.3% answered they do not verify at all

    o

    18.7% said that they verify applicants seeking in-state tuition, since they are a public institution

    o

    7.7% indicated other

    ·