About

My Photo

Cool stuff

Press Credentials

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter

    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

    Posted at 07:00 AM in Chicago, crime/violence/gangs/poverty, culture, Current Affairs, education, Health/Medicine/nutrition, Hispanic/Latino, immigration, international relations, kids/teens, politics, responsibility, Sports, Weblogs | | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

    Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

    Chicago Latino List 2009 - Jose Oliva, Restaurant Worker Sentinel

    “600 Words by Esther J. Cepeda”

    JoseOliva What Jose Oliva wants you to know is simple. It has to do with the people who cook your food, serve your food, and bus your tables at your favorite restaurant.

     

    These fine people who nourish and cater to your dining needs – whether they be teenage girls from Wilmette, middle-aged immigrants from El Salvador, or your next door neighbor whose husband left her to fend for herself and her kids – these fine people have it rough.

     

    Like a $2.13 Federal minimum wage for servers who make tips, rough.

     

    Like no basic job benefits such as “paid time off,” rough.

    And folks – even for the people who are just thankful to even have a job in this economy, that’s pretty damned rough.

     

    Oliva, a 36-year-old Policy Coordinator with Restaurant Opportunities Centers United, is working to change that.

     

    “Most people think that all restaurant workers make the well-known federal minimum wage and have sick and personal days, but they definitely don’t,” Oliva told me. “They have the Federal Family Medical Leave Act, which is extended un-paid time off, but if the President says ‘stay home if you don’t feel well’ in response to a Swine Flu epidemic, well, that’s just not an option.”

     

    A Guatemala native who immigrated to the U.S. at the age of 13, Oliva is working on two major pieces of legislation, the Healthy Families Act, which would require businesses with 15 or more employees to provide up to seven days of paid sick leave each year. And an increase in the Federal tipped minimum wage of $2.13 (Illinois’ is a more robust $4.65, but still).

     

    “It’s been 18 years since this dollar amount was set and the real egregious part of it is that this group has been literally singled out,” Oliva said. “It just doesn’t make any sense, there’s no reason for it to stay the same for almost 20 years.”

     

    And it’s a pretty big group. Oliva says Chicago has the second largest number of restaurant workers in the country, over 250,000 (only Los Angeles has more) and, of course, one of the largest Latino immigrant communities in the country. “However, neither have direct, full and democratic representation in the economic and political life of our country,” Oliva says.

     

    “The influence of the National Restaurant Association as a lobby, for instance, is about the 17th most influential in Congress (according to Forbes Magazine). Meanwhile restaurant workers have no one to speak to their issues and advocate on their behalf. This holds special weight when you factor in that most restaurant workers are immigrants in Chicago and that immigrants have a similar handicap in as far as voice in DC is concerned.”

     

    Well, those particular restaurant workers have Jose Oliva. And he’s doing two things:

     

    1) He’s working on re-establishing a memorandum of understanding on immigration enforcement so no immigration raids would occur at a worksite where the employees were already engaged in any other activity – like a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission against their employer – “so an employer can’t just call for a raid to get rid of the problem workers and then suffer no ramifications even though he was the one breaking the law in the workplace.”

     

    2) He’s educating workers on their rights, and on how to band together to help each other fight for better working conditions and more opportunities.

     

    “In essence what we need to do is to demystify the legislative process, we need to make sure ordinary people  who go to work feel they have a voice in government or in the companies where they work,” Oliva says. “The only way they can have that voice is to band together on common issues and that voice is magnified only if you take it to the power and speak in unison.”

     

    His legislative action sensibility is what sets him apart from others who focus just on the workplace organizing – not that Oliva is a slouch in that department, he trained at the Organizing Institute at Midwest Academy with Jackie Kendall a nationally-known trainer now known for her work with President Obama.

     

    “I methodically and scientifically gather workers’ stories for national reports and take it to DC,” Oliva said. “We’re not a union, not just a community organization, we’re a hybrid. We don’t just do rallies in DC, we do both and we’re trying to become a pioneer for organizations treading a new path.”

     

    “All workers are interconnected,” Oliva said. “So to the extent you raise the conditions in one place, others follow and raise their wages and conditions. That’s how capitalism works. You have to raise wages; that teenager in Des Moines, Iowa will be positively affected by our work across the country, not just Chicago.”

    “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

    Posted at 12:11 AM in Chicago, crime/violence/gangs/poverty, Food and Drink, Health/Medicine/nutrition, Hispanic/Latino, immigration, politics, responsibility | | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

    Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

    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

    Posted at 12:10 AM in Chicago, crime/violence/gangs/poverty, culture, Current Affairs, education, Health/Medicine/nutrition, Hispanic/Latino, immigration, kids/teens, responsibility | | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

    Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

    Chicago Latino List 2009 – John Viramontes, Voice to the Voiceless

    “600 Words by Esther J. Cepeda”

     

    J._Viramontes_Chicago_Latino_List_2009_photo_by_Daisy_Urbieta

    John Viramontes would make Benjamin Franklin proud. Like our founding father, Viramontes has found the pen to be mightier than the sword.

     

    A microscopic sampling of his Letters to the Editor to several major newspapers:

    ·   

               7/11/05 - "Let Promotion Bloom" in Chicago Tribune, Voice of the People he defends artists’ rights

     

        ·    1/4/06 "Honor a Living Legend" in the Chicago Sun Times, Letters to the editor he writes about activist Florence Scala

     

        ·    8/21/06 "Government needs a better way" in  Chicago Sun Times, Letters to the editor he takes on immigration

     

    And this is just the tiniest, tiniest sample – Viramontes, 57, has been sourced, photographed, and published as an authentic local voice all over Chicago and the Midwest in all sorts of publications in multiple languages.

     

    Why? Because the man is there. On the ground, in the neighborhoods, listening to people talk about losing their homes, or getting their green card, or being bilked out of their rent money, or any number of things.

     

    “When I started helping out at the Northwest Neighborhood Federation in the late nineties, I was working on the injustices of neighborhood – housing availability, predatory lending, blight – I wasn’t looking at ethnicities, I was just trying to help people,” Viramontes told me recently. “In that work I learned I have a tremendous capacity to put myself in other people’s shoes, the ability to listen to others’ stories.”

     

    “These are the stories of injustice, unfairness, callousness, bureaucracy,” Viramontes said, “and I’m living proof that getting justice for people doesn’t limit itself to any particular ethnicity, neighborhood or state.”

     

    But the cool part about John? He actually gets stuff done.

     

    In 1998 the Chicago Police Department’s 25th District issued a Certificate of Appreciation for Outstanding Community Service and Initiative for contributing to solving an armed robbery where a large sum of money was taken from a North Ave. near Harlem Ave. currency exchange.

     

    In 2002 Viramontes was instrumental in getting the Ecuadorian consulate to establish the first ever office in Minnesota, organized by the non-profit National Peoples Action.

     

    He has (and continues to) engage the American Association of Museums (AAM) through its president, to consider Heather Hope Stephens’ challenging Master’s thesis “Visualizing The Path Forward: The Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990 and Recommendations For a Response by American Museums.”


    According to multiple people who plied me with testimonies to Viramontes’ work, he has shouldered the responsibility of allowing both the public and arts profession to know the significance of the historic case of Kelley vs. Chicago Park District which was filed using the Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990 statute and currently on appeal in a Chicago federal court.

     

    The Chicago 2016 Olympic Bid? Don’t. Even. Get. Him. Started – that’s a whole ‘nother 600 words.

     

    The bottom line here is that Viramontes – a Chicago-born, second generation Mexican-American accountant by trade, trained community organizer, and lifelong activist by heart – cares. And he translates that caring into action and results for people who are too deep in their problems to see the promise beyond them. Everyday.

     

    “Perhaps the Irish progressive George Bernard Shaw put it best when he said: ‘I am of the opinion that my life belongs to the whole community, and as long as I live it is my privilege to do for it whatever I can. I want to be thoroughly used up when I die, for the harder I work, the more I live. I rejoice in life for its own sake.

     

    Life is not a brief candle to me; it is a sort of splendid torch which I have got hold of for the moment, and I want to make it burn as brightly as possible before handing it on to future generations.’”

     

    “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

    Posted at 12:06 AM in African American, Chicago, crime/violence/gangs/poverty, culture, Hispanic/Latino, immigration, responsibility | | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

    Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

    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

    Posted at 12:16 PM in Chicago, culture, Current Affairs, Food and Drink, Hispanic/Latino, immigration, international relations, Travel | | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

    Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

    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

    Posted at 09:23 PM in Current Affairs, Hispanic/Latino, immigration, politics | | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0)

    Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

    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

    Posted at 09:34 PM in crime/violence/gangs/poverty, culture, Current Affairs, education, Hispanic/Latino, immigration, international relations, kids/teens, politics, responsibility | | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0)

    Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

    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

    Posted at 08:00 AM in advertising/marketing/media/merchandising, culture, Current Affairs, Film, Hispanic/Latino, immigration, international relations, Science, Web/Tech | | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0)

    Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

    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

    Posted at 09:36 PM in Chicago, Current Affairs, Health/Medicine/nutrition, Hispanic/Latino, immigration, international relations, politics, responsibility, Travel | | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0)

    Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

    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

    Posted at 09:25 PM in Chicago, culture, Current Affairs, Hispanic/Latino, immigration, international relations, politics | | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

    Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

    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


    ###

    Posted at 08:07 AM in crime/violence/gangs/poverty, culture, Current Affairs, Hispanic/Latino, immigration, international relations, politics, responsibility | | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

    Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

    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

    Posted at 05:30 PM in African American, crime/violence/gangs/poverty, Current Affairs, education, Hispanic/Latino, immigration, kids/teens, responsibility | | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

    Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

    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

    Posted at 09:58 PM in Current Affairs, Hispanic/Latino, immigration, international relations, politics | | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0)

    Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

    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.

    Posted at 08:49 PM in crime/violence/gangs/poverty, Current Affairs, Hispanic/Latino, immigration, international relations, Travel | | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

    Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

    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

    ·

    Asked if required to report information on undocumented students 22.6% said that they are required to report information on undocumented students. 77.4% said they are not required to do so.

    ·

    55.4% of institutions who said they’re required to report information about undocumented students said they report this information to a state entity.

    o

    30.1% said they are required to report information about undocumented students to an office or offices within their institution. 14.5% indicated "other"

     

    ·

    If applicants specifically seeking admission as undocumented students don’t provide the required information?

    o

    38.4% said they are charged higher tuition

    o

    22.7% said that they are not permitted to enroll.

     

    o

    16.3% said they are permitted to enroll without conditions

    o

    10.8% indicated "other"

    o

    10.3% said they are permitted to enroll under certain conditions.

    o

    1.5% said that if already enrolled, they are asked to withdraw





     

    ·

    If they find out, or have reason to believe students who claimed otherwise, are undocumented?

    o

    23% responded that they are not permitted to enroll

    o

    23% said they are charged higher tuition

    o

    20.5% indicated "other"

    o

    12% said they are permitted to enroll without conditions

    o

    11.2% said that if already enrolled, they are asked to withdraw

    o

    7.8% said they are permitted to enroll under certain conditions





    And along those same lines, last week an interesting story out of North Carolina, Illegal immigrants' tuition pays way" revealed that the state, which has been caught in the cross-fire of differing and ambiguous state and U.S. immigration laws on the matter, is making money off illegal alien students attending the state’s community colleges.

    According to Gina Shkodriani, a researcher with JBL Associates of Maryland, on average it cost $5,375 per year to educate a student at one of the state’s 58 community colleges. But for the undocumented students who were allowed into colleges between 2007 and 2008 who paid out-of-state rates, their average tuition cost was $7,024.

    "In a sense ... it’s a revenue," Shkodriani was quoted in Mark Binker’s News-Record story.

    Sen. Phil Berger, a Rockingham County Republican, has filed legislation to stop those illegal aliens from being admitted to the community college system.

    Apparently undocumented students are not worthy of being educated even if they are cash cows.


    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

    Posted at 08:25 PM in Current Affairs, education, Hispanic/Latino, immigration, kids/teens, politics, responsibility | | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

    Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

    March 19, 2009

    Chicago’s Latino Landscape 2008: a statistical portrait of Chi-Town Hispanics

    "600 Words by Esther J. Cepeda"

    Latinolandscapecover On Monday the Chicago Community Trust published The Latino Landscape: A Metro-Chicago Guide and Non-profit Directory and put a copy into my greedy little hands.

    You’ve noticed my very specific Hispanic data-tweets on Twitter? Totally ripped off from my Chicago-centric guide to all things Latin-American-ish in our region.

    The Chicago Community Trust (and I) thank the Center for Metropolitan Chicago Initiatives of the Institute for Latino Studies, University of Notre Dame and the CCT’s members of the community advisory board who brought this incredible collection of factoids, history, and community resources to life.

    I’m pulling out only the juiciest bits and numbers because I’m a sucker for statistics. The cheeky headings are mine but all the information was taken from official government sources and tabulated by people waaaay smarter than me. You can check it all out – complete with cool charts – in your very own PDF copy, just make it to the bottom of this omni-Hispanic-bus column for the link.

    GENERATION "1.5+"

    Some definitions from The Pew Hispanic Center:

    First Generation: Latinos born outside the United States or on the island of Puerto Rico.

    Generation One and a Half: First-generation Latinos who arrived in the United States at or before the age of 10.6

    Second Generation: Latinos born in the United States to immigrant parents.

    Third Generation or higher: Latinos born in the United States to US-born parents.

     

    "HISPANIC" OR "LATINO"?

    In theory, the terms ‘Hispanic’ and ‘Latino’ are used interchangeably. They refer to a collective ethnic and political identity that is unique to living in the United States. In reality, though, it is a complex matter of preference.

    The term ‘Hispanic’ was coined in the 1970s by the US government. Although mainly applied to Spanish-speaking Latin American countries, the government continues to use it to refer to Spaniards and Portuguese-speaking Brazilians.

    The term ‘Latino’ is considered to have a community-based origin and has a weaker connotation to Spanish colonial history and a greater emphasison Latin America. For this reason, many people prefer ‘Latino’.

    According to an unpublished 2003 study in the Chicago area by the Institute for Latino Studies at the University of Notre Dame, those who prefer the term ‘Hispanic’ are 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 (26–35 years old).



    ID, PLEASE:

    In terms of identity, a 2002 Pew Hispanic Center survey found that first-generation Latinos are more likely to select their country of origin when asked to describe themselves (68 percent) than second generation Latinos.

    The latter also use their parents’countries of origin to describe themselves, but 35 percent prefer the term ‘American’. An equal number of both generations (25 percent), however, use the term ‘Latino/Hispanic’ to express identity.



    NATIONS REPRESENTED IN CHICAGO:

    In 2006 Latinos accounted for 20 percent of the region’s population, making them the largest ethnic group in metropolitan Chicago. Whites accounted for 55 percent of the population, while African Americans made up 18 percent and Asians represented 6 percent.


    Hispanic or Latino     1,722,843 100.00%

    Mexican                    1,357,353 78.79%

    Puerto Rican             153,206 8.89%

    Guatemalan              30,332 1.76%

    Cuban                       18,875 1.10%

    Ecuadoran                 18,796 1.09%

    Colombian                 16,482 0.96%

    Peruvian                    10,796 0.63%

    Salvadoran                 8,431 0.49%

    Honduran                   7,927 0.46%

    Dominican                  4,186 0.24%

    Venezuelan                 4,090 0.24%

    Argentine                   3,702 0.21%

    Costa Rican                 2,064 0.12%

    Bolivian                      1,901 0.11%

    Nicaraguan                 1,519 0.09%

    Panamanian                1,502 0.09%

    Chilean                          906 0.05%

    Uruguayan                     588 0.03%

    Paraguayan                     392 0.02%

    Other Central American     3,139 0.18%

    Other South American         1,417 0.08%

    Other Hispanic/ Latino     975,239 4.37%

    Source: US Census Bureau, 2006, American Community Survey, analyzed by the Institute for Latino Studies, University of Notre Dame.



    THEY WERE "BOOOOOORN IN THE U-S-A!"

    Eighty-nine percent of Latinos under the age of 18 were born in the United States compared to 37 percent of Latinos over the age of 18.



    SHOW ME YOUR "PAPERS"

    Nearly 69 percent of Latinos in the Region are US Citizens: 55.5 percent are US-born and 12.8 percent are naturalized.

    Any estimate of the undocumented population is inconclusive given the unofficial nature of their arrival. However, a 2005 report estimated that at least 200,000 foreign-born Latino residents in the six-county area of metro Chicago were undocumented.

    (The 31.2 percent of Latinos in metro Chicago who are not citizens of the United States includes legal permanent residents and those who are legally authorized to live and work in the country, as well as those without authorization.)



    ‘HOODS:

    Eighty-one percent of metro Chicago Latinos lived in the following 25 places in 2000. Information has been updated for 2006 with US Census data, where available. I ordered them by percentage of population:

    Cicero                       66,299          77.4%         66,389 82.0%

    Melrose Park             12,485          53.9%         N/A N/A

    West Chicago            11,405         48.6%          N/A N/A

    Waukegan                 39,396         44.8%          49,689 56.2%

    Carpentersville          12,410         40.6%          N/A N/A

    Franklin Park              7,399         38.1%           N/A N/A

    Berwyn                      20,543        38.0%           N/A N/A

    Blue Island                  8,899        37.9%           N/A N/A

    Bensenville                 7,690        37.1%           N/A N/A

    Elgin                         32,430        34.3%          40,243 40.5%

    Aurora                      46,557        32.6%          73,252 40.1%

    Round Lake Beach       8,084        31.3%             N/A N/A

    Addison                     10,198       28.4%             N/A N/A

    Hanover Park             10,233       26.7%             N/A N/A

    Chicago                  753,644        26.0%          774,042 28.2%

    Mundelein                  7,487         24.2%              N/A N/A

    Chicago Heights         7,790         23.8%              N/A N/A

    Wheeling                   7,135         20.7%              N/A N/A

    Joliet                        19,552        18.4%           39,226 27.2%

    North Chicago             6,552        18.2%              N/A N/A

    Streamwood               6,108         16.8%             N/A N/A

    Palatine                     9,247         14.1%           9,698 14.8%

    Des Plaines                8,299          14.0%            N/A N/A

    Bolingbrook                7,371         13.1%            N/A N/A

    Mount Prospect          6,620          11.8%            N/A N/A



    LADIES AND GENTS:

    There are more men among Latinos in the region (53 percent) than among whites (49 percent) or blacks (46 percent).

    Forty-seven percent of Latinos are women, compared to 51 percent of whites and 54 percent of blacks.

    Female-Headed Households:

    In the metropolitan Chicago area women are at the head of 16.1 percent of Latino households compared to 42.9 percent of black households and 8.6 percent of white households.

    Same-Sex Households:

    Among same sex households in 2006, 3,162 were Latino in Metropolitan Chicago compared to 2,359 black and 14,368 white.

    Same-Sex Households in Metropolitan Chicago by Race/Ethnicity, 2006:

    White     Black   Latino   Total

    Male householders              7,557    1,279   2,264     11,100

    Female householders          6,811    1,080      898      8,789

    Total                               14,368    2,359    3,162     19,889

    Source: Data are from the Chicago Metropolitan Statistical Area, which includes 9 Counties: Cook, DeKalb, DuPage, Grundy, Kane, Kendall, Lake, McHenry, and Will.

    According to the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, 59 percent of Latino female same-sex couples and 45 percent of Latino male same-sex couples were raising at least one child under the age of 18 in metro Chicago in the year 2000.



    "YOU DON’T LOOK A DAY OVER 20!"

    US-born Latinos are the youngest in the region with nearly 57 percent of them under the age of 18 compared to nearly 22 percent of whites and 30 percent of blacks in the same age group.

    At 53 percent, foreign-born Latinos are disproportionately represented in the 24–44 age

    group, when compared to whites (27 percent) and blacks (27 percent).



    READIN’ ‘RITIN’ n ‘RITHMETIC

    Only 24 percent of US-born Latinos have graduated from college or higher as compared to nearly 55 percent of whites and nearly 28 percent of blacks in the region.

    Fifty-five percent of foreign-born Latinos have less than a high school diploma compared to nearly 29 percent of US-born Latinos, 22 percent of blacks, and only about 9 percent of whites.



    "WAIT, WHATCHOO SAY?"

    The Census Bureau defines English fluency as people in a household over the age of 5 who speak English well or very well.

    Nearly 59 percent of all Latinos in the region speak English well or very well and almost 15 percent speak only English.

    Nearly 12 percent of Mexicans speak only English compared to nearly 28 percent of Puerto Ricans and nearly 25 percent of Other Latinos.

    Nearly 30 percent of Latino households in the region are "Linguistically Isolated" according to the US Census. That is to say, no one in the household over the age of 14 speaks English very well.

    English usage increases over generations, and although Spanish use decreases, it does not

    disappear. Nationally, first-generation Latinos (foreign born) are Spanish-language Dominant.

    Second-generation Latinos (US born) are comfortable in both languages but are more likely to speak English at home and at work.

    By the third generation and beyond, more than half (52 percent) say they speak Spanish at least pretty well.



    "SHOW ME THE MONEY"

    Seventy-one percent of Latinos in the region are currently working or looking for work, compared to 69 percent of whites and 61 percent of blacks.

    Retirees, homemakers, and those who are incarcerated are examples of individuals not in the labor force.

    Fifty-two percent of Latinos in the labor force worked in the following four occupations in the region in 2006:

    • Production

    • Office & Administrative Support

    • Transportation

    • Sales

    Median Household Income among Latinos in Metro Chicago, 2006:

    Total Latino   $49,303

    Panamanian   $132,817

    Costa Rican   $90,557

    Honduran      $87,237

    Paraguayan    $84,168

    Argentine      $76,018

    Colombian     $72,848

    Cuban           $67,817

    Ecuadoran     $67,817

    Dominican     $66,207

    Venezuelan    $59,365

    Puerto Rican $48,297

    Peruvian       $47,694

    Mexican        $47,291

    Salvadoran    $46,889

    Guatemalan   $45,580

    Nicaraguan    $42,260

    Chilean         $36,545

    Bolivian        $30,186

    Uruguayan    $25,960

    Source: US Census Bureau, American Community Survey 2006.



    "THERE’S NO PLACE LIKE…"

    Homeownership:

    In the region 60 percent of Latinos own and occupy their homes compared to 84 percent of whites and close to 47 percent of blacks.

    It is still unknown what impact the national foreclosure crisis will have on Latino homeownership. However, according to a recent report by the Latino Policy Forum in the

    Chicago region, Latinos were 1.5 times more likely to receive high cost loans than whites.

    Poverty:

    Seventeen percent of all Latinos were at or below the poverty level in 2006, compared to nearly 27 percent of blacks and 5 percent of whites.

    As defined by the Federal Office of Management and Budget and updated for inflation, the poverty threshold for a family of four in 2006 was $20,614; for a family of three, $16,079; for a family of two,$13,167; and for unrelated individuals, $10,294.15

    Homelessness:

    According to a point-in-time count and survey by the City of Chicago, in January 2007 there were 5,922 homeless individuals.

    Six percent were Latino, 75 percent black, and 16 percent white.

    Latinos tend to be under-represented in counts of homeless people on the street or in shelters, according to the Chicago Coalition for the Homeless, because Latino families often live in overcrowded conditions before resorting to the shelter system.



    "IN THE JAILHOUSE NOW…"

    According to the US Department of Justice, there were 415 Latino inmates in Illinois State prisons and local jails per 100,000 residents in 2005, compared to 223 whites and 2,020 blacks.

    In Illinois, while blacks represent almost five times the inmate population of Latinos, that proportion climbs to nine times the number when compared to whites. While the incarceration rate for whites in Illinois is almost half the incarceration rate for Latinos, Latinos in Illinois are as likely to be incarcerated as whites are in the whole country.

    Number of Inmates in State Prisons and Local Jails per 100,000 Residents by Race/Ethnicity, June 30, 2005:

    White Black Latino

    Illinois             223  2,020   415

    Midwest          351  2,278    450

    Source: US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, "Prison and Jail Inmates at Midyear 2005."



    THEY DID IT EARLY AND OFTEN:

    Voter Turnout in November 2004 and 2006: Fifty-nine percent of Latinos were eligible to vote in November 2006, compared to 97 percent of whites and 99 percent of blacks.

    More than 40 percent of Latinos over the age of 18 are not eligible to vote because they are not US citizens.

    Of those eligible to vote, 58 percent of Latinos were registered compared to 76 percent of whites and 74 percent of blacks.

    Of those eligible to vote, 86 percent of those registered exercised their right and cast a ballot in 2006 compared to 93 percent of blacks and 89 percent of whites.

    Similar to other groups, about one-fourth of the total Latino population over the age of 18 are not registered to vote.

    Given the large number of the population not eligible to vote, only about 30 percent of all Latinos over the age of 18 voted in 2006.



    THE BODY AS A TEMPLE:

    Physical Disabilities:

    The table below shows the percentage of individuals who reported difficulty of vision or hearing, limited mobility, or a limitation with regard to personal care among Latinos, whites, and blacks in the region in 2006.

    Physical Disability by Race/Ethnicity in the Region, 2006

                                        White Black Latino

    Limited mobility              5.5%   8.1%   3.0%

    Personal care limitation   3.0%    4.9%  1.4%

    Vision or hearing difficulty 3.5%  4.1%  2.3%

    Source: US Census Bureau, American Community Survey 2006.


    Health Insurance:

    According to a 2008 report issued by the Gilead Outreach & Referral Center, 26 percent of Latinos in the Chicago metro area17 were uninsured, compared to 21 percent of blacks and 7 percent of whites.

    The report also states that 15 percent of Latinos who are US citizens are uninsured compared to 50 percent of Latinos who are not US citizens.


    Underinsurance:

    Analysis of 2006 American Community Survey data by the Institute for Latino Studies revealed that in the Chicago region between 7 and 37 percent of whites are at risk of being underinsured. For blacks the range was between 4 and 49 percent and for Latinos the range was between 4 and 29 percent.

    Although Latinos are more likely to be uninsured, they are less likely to be underinsured.

    Nationally, 16 percent of whites are underinsured compared to 17 percent of blacks and 6 percent of Latinos.


    Health Status:

    Responding to a survey by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in 2007, 86 percent of whites in the State of Illinois said their health was "Good" or "Excellent" compared to 76 percent of blacks and 70 percent of Latinos.

    Infant Mortality: According to the Illinois Department of Health, in the six-county region, blacks had the highest infant mortality rate in 2005 at 15.5 per thousand live births.

    Latinos and whites were similar at 5.7 and 5.2, respectively.

    Immunization:

    Among children 19–35 months of age in the State of Illinois, it is estimated that 74 percent of whites had been vaccinated23 compared to 78 percent of Latinos. Data for black children were unavailable.

    Substance Abuse: Of the 45,327 individuals admitted to substance abuse treatment programs in the State of Illinois in 2007, 49 percent were white, 45 percent were black and 4 percent were Latino.

    Smoking: According to the same CDC report, 21 percent of white adults in the state identified themselves as current smokers compared to 23 percent of black adults and 15 percent of Latino adults.

    Whew - you made it!

    And if you want four-color charts and graphs, short profiles of each Latin American country's history in Chicago, in-depth profiles of the top Latino populated suburbs, and a full directory of community organizations serving Hispanics, get your very own PDF copy of the Chicago Community Trust’s The Latino Landscape: A Metro-Chicago Guide and Non-profit Directory here. Be sure to look under "News," it’s the second link down.

    Enjoy!


    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

    Posted at 06:29 AM in African American, Chicago, crime/violence/gangs/poverty, education, Health/Medicine/nutrition, Hispanic/Latino, immigration, international relations, smokers/smoking | | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

    Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

    March 15, 2009

    The Future of Illinois: Our English Language Learners

    "600 Words by Esther J. Cepeda"

    I just couldn’t be more thrilled with today’s New York Times front page story "Where education and assimilation collide" by Ginger Thompson.

    In it, she delves into the sociological ramifications of the waves of new immigrants – and their children – on U.S. school systems. Most of these school districts are completely unprepared for the host of issues and needs that come with large numbers of students with many varied native languages other than English, wildly different cultural norms, and challenging home experiences.

    There’s no need to re-create her well-written, balanced article here, I suggest you take a look at it when you’re done visiting me, I’m providing the link at the end of this column.

    Instead I will key in on one major point she makes – the one she leads with – is it right to segregate students who don’t speak English to a self-contained, sheltered learning environment where new skills are built on past experiences and shared background knowledge?

    I say no – absolutely not!

    Ginger, in the fifth paragraph of her story – after having remarked the beauty of the integrated main campus of Cecil D. Hylton High School in Woodbridge, Virginia – quotes a young woman from Guatemala who is segregated from the main population to one where all the students are English Language Learners. I’ll give you the flavor:

    Walk with immigrant students, and the rest of Hylton feels a world apart. By design, they attend classes almost exclusively with one another. They take separate field trips. And they organize separate clubs.

    "I am thankful to my teachers because the little bit of English I am able to speak, I speak because of them," Amalia Raymundo, from Guatemala, said during a break between classes. But, she added, "I feel they hold me back by isolating me."

    Her best friend, Jhosselin Guevara, also from Guatemala, joined in. "Maybe the teachers are trying to protect us," she said. "There are people who do not want us here at all."

    I was a "bilingual teacher" in two different Illinois school districts where the non-English-speaking students – 90% of whom happened to be native Spanish-language speakers – were shunted off to be with their own kind like Amalia and Jhosselin. It was horrible!

    These students relied on each other so much they had no need to speak English, therefore they didn’t learn it. They were perpetually angry at me for insisting on speaking to them and teaching them with as much English as possible.

    It wasn’t their fault – this is what the schools taught them that the normal "Bilingual classes" were supposed to be like.

    That, of course didn’t hold true for the Polish-only speakers, the Chinese-only speakers, and the Russian-only speakers who numbered so few, they were simply thrust into "mainstream" classes with accommodations. Those kids subsequently thrived and picked up English at a rate I observed to be roughly three to six times faster than my students – some of whom were born in the U.S. and still didn’t have a decent command of the language.

    The school district and the state thought I was insane for demanding that the Spanish language students be integrated with the rest of the school and taught in English – and guess what? I’m not a teacher anymore.

    Schooling for English Language Learners must change – like 10 minutes ago! – across the country to better serve these students, and all the people who will have to live with them for generations to come.

    Here are some statistics mined from the New York Times article’s on-line interactive maps, and from the National Center for Education Statistics, to give you a sense of what all this means to Illinois.

    Keep in mind the U.S. Achievement gap: English Language Learners graduate from High School at a rate of 64% versus 80.1% for the "average" native English speaking student.

    Illinois ranks #9 in the 51 states/Districts in terms of diversity according to latest figures, in 2006. (Top five are Nevada, Florida, California, New York, and Texas)

    Following are statistics on the number of English Language Learners (ELL) in Illinois in 2006:


    Cass County

    % ELL 16.5%

    total ELL students 391

    total students 2,371

    % Latino/Hispanic 23%



    Kane County

    % ELL 13.9%

    total ELL students 16,483

    total students 118,515

    % Latino/Hispanic 35%



    Cook County

    ELL% 13.3%

    total ELL students 106,756

    total students 800,262

    % Latino/Hispanic 31%



    Lake County

    % ELL 11.8%

    total ELL students 16,469

    total students 140,164

    % Latino/Hispanic 24%



    Jo Daviess County

    % ELL 11.8%

    total ELL students 410

    total students 3,483

    % Latino/Hispanic 2%



    Boone County

    % ELL 9.6%

    total ELL students 1,005

    total students 10,457

    % Latino/Hispanic 28%



    DuPage County

    % ELL 7.5%

    total ELL students 12,192

    total students 162,017

    % Latino/Hispanic 16%



    Grundy County

    % ELL 6.3%

    total ELL students 740

    total students 11,751

    % Latino/Hispanic 10%



    McHenry County

    % ELL 5.3%

    total ELL students 2,807

    total students 53,515

    % Latino/Hispanic 12%


    I include the following counties because of their proximity to Chicago, but they, like the rest of Illinois’ counties, have less than 5% English Language Learners in their community schools:

    Will County

    % ELL 4.8%

    total ELL students 5,537

    total students 114,560

    % Latino/Hispanic 18%



    DeKalb County

    % ELL 4.5%

    total ELL students 743

    total students 16,421

    % Latino/Hispanic 11%



    Kendall County

    % ELL 4%

    total ELL students 830

    total students 20,579

    % Latino/Hispanic 19%



    Kankakee County

    % ELL 1.1%

    total ELL students 225

    total students 19,656

    % Latino/Hispanic 11%


    Read the full text of the New York Times story "Where education and assimilation collide" by Ginger Thompson here.



    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

    Posted at 02:52 PM in Chicago, culture, education, Hispanic/Latino, immigration, kids/teens | | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

    Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

    March 11, 2009

    A South American Penguin Story

    600 Words by Esther J. Cepeda"

    It’s been a while since I gave an update on my pal Isai Madriz.

    He’s the guy who, on September 12, 2007 hopped on his rickety bicycle to pedal from the ‘burbs of Chicago to Argentina for twenty months to raise money for low-income students to go to college.

    I’ve written about him several times (read the last post on him here), chronicling his amazing adventures as he rides 22,500 miles from Montgomery, IL, a tiny ‘burb outside Aurora, to Tierra del Fuego (''Land of Fire'') at the southernmost tip of Argentina.

    All because after struggling to pay tuition and board at Humboldt State University in California, he wanted to make it easier on other young Latino students pursuing their college degree.

    He’s been chased by dogs, broken a few bones (dislocated others), been bitten by truly horrifying bugs, and gotten several debilitating viruses because he’s been in starvation mode – he’s been relying on the kindness of strangers for food and shelter because a corporate sponsorship fell through before he started his odyssey 17 months ago.

    Isaibike He crossed into South America August 11 and was in Colombia in early September. In February he crossed into Argentina and here is a note he sent me a few days ago.

    "Penguin Story

    Penguins are the bestest, most adorable, clumsy little creatures on earth. In the refuge (Punta Tombo) there are almost 800,000 individuals and they walk all around you and make congested horn-like calls.

    I have to tell you all, the story I told my Danielle over the phone.

    Walking around hundreds of penguins, I became so excited to be in such a great place that I decided to enjoy it as much as I could.  

    In the absence of people at that time, I decided to lay down and I closed my eyes to hear the penguin calls and nothing else.

    Punta_tombo,_Argentina I laid down on the ground underneath a bush shadow, with my face facing towards the sky. I covered my face with my hat and closed my eyes. After a couple of minutes of tranquility I felt a heavy object fall on top of my stomach, squishing it down. I gently lifted my head and looking through my mesh hat I saw a 44cm, and about 4km male penguin on top of my stomach.

    Apparently I was blocking the path that he takes to reach his nest and since the way around was too long, he decided to take the short cut. The little animal started to look around at the weird object underneath him and began to sit down on my squishy tummy.  It started to move its little feet in the same place, making himself comfortable.

    Lifting his short legs one at the time, rising and falling on my stomach as it moved, made him look like he was jumping. I, all exited of coarse, did not want that to end so stayed still looking through the hat at the magical moment.

    The penguin made himself home and started to fall asleep on my stomach. Another individual, looking at the weirdness of the situation decided to take a closer look and moved near where all the fun was. Standing besides my arm, the new penguin began to look at the lazy pinguino on my tummy and with no apparent reason, started to peck the side of the lazy individual on top.

    The penguin on top, after feeling the pecking, moved its feet in the same manner as previously but did nothing against the obvious discomfort of its buddy. Before it could sat down again, the pecking continued until he could not take it any more and jumped off and started to walk away in the cutest way that only a penguin can do.

    I uncovered my face and looked at the other evil penguin. After ending the greatest moment since "Daniel the manatee" back in Mexico, the penguin just stared at me and started to move its neck to the sides while keeping its eyes on me. That is the characteristic sign that a penguin wants to fight. 

    Isai3 With the little trouble maker a few inches from my face I decided to not get into a mess where definitely the penguin would have won. He was so cute and fluffy that I could not stare at him madly. All I wanted was to hug him and squeeze its tummy but I don’t think that would have been a good idea so I got up and moved away.

    The little animal did not have enough and began to chase me for a few meters. Moving its cute little body side to side he ran behind me for a few meters until he could not keep up with the chase and turned around.

    I hope you enjoyed the story."

    I certainly did, and I hope you did too. I hope you enjoyed it so much that you’ll go on his website http://www.isaimadriz.com and donate – either to his odyssey fund or directly to the college-bound students he’s raising money for.

    Isai’s fundraising efforts, need help. Aside from a few local donations – and the hospitality shown to him by the people he’s touched on his quest – the fund for other low-income Hispanic students to get a helping hand through college still needs help.

    But that never enters into Isai’s equation when he’s on the hot road or under the stars in the mountains. "Education is like planting little seeds, and when those seeds grow everybody benefits."

    As Isai continues on his way I’ll share his stories with you in this space. If you’d like to help you can send donations – which will go to the education fund, not Isai’s travel expenses – to: Jesus Guadalupe Foundation, 902 S. Randall Road, Suite C-322, St. Charles, IL 60174. Write "For Isai" on the check.

    Posted at 08:59 PM in Chicago, education, Hispanic/Latino, immigration, international relations, kids/teens, responsibility, Travel | | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

    Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

    March 05, 2009

    Mayor Daley's office still mum on "City of Immigrants" translated city service pamphlets

    "600 Words by Esther J. Cepeda"

    ChicagoCityHall It's Thursday, two days since Chicago's City Hall decided to control the bad press from revelations that there were 11 new contracts for public relations work signed during these difficult budgetary times by killing them – and disposing of "non-essential" translation services for City of Chicago publications.

    Read all the details in my Tuesday post "Daley cancels "non-essentials" - what will be lost in translation?"

    The good folks in Mayor Daley's press office have yet to answer my few simple questions though I've continued to call and leave messages. Those are:


    What pamphlets and brochures will now not be translated? How many are there?

    Are they for a particular department, program or event?

    To what languages were these materials going to be translated and to what communities were they headed?

    If the lack of these materials in languages other than English carry the risk of creating a public safety or health issue will they be translated anyway?

    In the meanwhile, I've gotten slammed with the sorts of emails you'd expect: hatin' on the 2016 Olympics, hatin' on the sorts of people who'd benefit from translated materials (I'm only concerned about public safety and health/well-being issues, I don't care if the City will no longer translate their puff pieces), and hatin' on City Hall.

    Also I've heard from one of the firms involved in the contract-cutting and one interested party with a point of view most life-long Chicagoans who grew up with English-speaking parents wouldn't understand.

    I replied to one person who railed on my Huffington Post page that "no one" reads those things: newcomers read those things, and the very people who don't speak English well have a tendency to be the same types of people who also don't have access to high-speed broadband Internet connections.

    You can imagine that there's a huge swath of people unwilling to speak out against the Daley administration; they run the gamut from cautiously indirect to flat-out-terrified of screwing up a tender relationship. And so even though I couldn't get the representative from one of the eleven firms affected by the contract freeze to talk on the record, I did have one interested party agree to be quoted anonymously about just how some "non-essential" City of Chicago program publications impact a community.

    "So the self-appointed guardians of the public good have decided that the City spends too much on communicating with residents? Really – before the good citizens of this city and their sage elected representatives get the rope and find the tree, think about it:

    For most of the 2.8 million who inhabit our wonderful city, City Hall is a mystery – their website even more (should we have access to a computer).

    Not only do we not know the right person to call to find information on affordable housing or foreclosure assistance or where to get grants or loans for home repair or where and how to get heating assistance – most of us don’t even know that such services are even available.

    Although it would be nice, we certainly can’t rely on the daily newspapers. While their pages are filled with misdeeds and juicy gossip about this insider contract or that bribe – I can’t remember a front page or even noticeable article about the availability of weatherization funding or assistance to home owners.

    As to the nightly news – if anyone is watching – a 30 second piece is the most we can usually expect (if there doesn’t happen to be a fire, murder, political scandal or other "news" filling those precious seconds.

    And if we read and write in a language other than English (there are I believe 81 languages spoken in Chicago, with Chinese, Spanish, Polish and Russian topping the charts), we are virtually out of luck.

    I, for one, attend City Events - when I hear about them. I bring my Xmas tree to a park so it can be recycled. I go to neighborhood housing resource fairs, and I have friends who in these troubled times have turned to City-recommended counselors.

    Occasionally I’ve heard about these events on a TV station – usually Fox. Usually, however, it’s been a flier or tv commercial or a billboard or an ad or a poster in a window. I don’t really know how they get there, but I’m glad they are.

    Without communications only the insiders can ever know what there is to be known. Who will tell the rest of us?"

    Good points, and I'd like to clarify for those who will write to me complaining about people who don't read or speak English. The reality is that most immigrants to this country show up and very quickly learn to get by in the English-speaking world. The smart ones read the papers and watch the TV news in English and can at least follow what's going on. For them, a tip about services available through the city is a good start but to really understand what the benefits of certain vital programs are, they need materials in their native languages.

    For those who consume their news in Spanish, Polish, Chinese, etc., it's fine and good for them to learn about City services through those venues but of little help if when they finally make their way to a community center – or even City Hall – there's nothing there explaining to them, in words they can understand, how they can access those city programs.

    Either way, we're talking in hypotheticals here because you and I don't know what sorts of information, in what sorts of pamphlets, won't be translated.

    This is what I'll say when I finally pin a press secretary down to answer my questions:

    While the 2016 Olympic Bid Committee is gleefully promoting Chicago’s diverse, multicultural neighborhoods to the International Olympic Committee, is this really the message that the mayor of the "City of Immigrants" wants to send?



    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

    Posted at 07:43 AM in Chicago, culture, Current Affairs, education, Hispanic/Latino, immigration, international relations, politics, responsibility | | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

    Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

    March 03, 2009

    Daley cancels “non-essentials” - what will be lost in translation?

    "600 Words by Esther J. Cepeda"

    When times are tough, decisions need to be made, and frills understandably go out the window.

    But what do you consider "frills?"

    How about printed materials – detailing city services – in various languages for those Chicago residents who can’t read English? Let’s re-cap:

    A few months ago, the Daley camp took heat for having a wide array of hefty contracts for public relations services even as 50.5 million dollars worth of budget gaps were causing doomsday predictions to fly out of Chicago’s City Hall.

    According to the Chicago Sun-Times’ Fran Spielman, in this morning’s story "City still has money for PR," Da Mayerssss people signed yet another $5 million public relations contract bringing the citywide total to 11 firms and $55 million even though "press secretary Jacquelyn Heard insisted last fall that not a penny would be paid to outside spin doctors until Chicago's budget crisis is over."

    That eleventh contract, valued at $5 million was signed on Feb. 17 with Cultural Communications LLC, for translation services - to Jackie’s surprise, according to Spielman’s story which quoted Heard thusly:

    "A lot of pamphlets and brochures we do are in English. Often, the information needs to be communicated [to neighborhoods] where English isn't the first language," she said.

    Spielman then reported that Heard said: "No funds have been expended, and it's highly unlikely any will in this economic climate. Every department is aware of our financial constraints, and these types of services are not considered essential."

    Then later in the day, Fran reported in her story "Daley administration cancels 11 PR contracts," that City Hall abruptly canceled them in order to save money – and face – about spending so much money on "spin control."

    "We get it. We absolutely get it. We understand that it would seem absurd at a time like this to be using taxpayer funds for this kind of non-essential service," Spielman quoted mayoral press secretary Jacquelyn Heard as saying.

    But are they really "non-essential?" Are we talking puff-piece brochures about the Bean and Millenium Park or are we talking about pamphlets telling people how to vote, or giving instructions on how to get electricity assistance from the city?

    I don’t know because as of Tuesday evening, the City Hall spokespersons I talked to – and emailed – did not answer my questions. Questions like:

    What pamphlets and brochures will now not be translated? How many are there?

    Are they for a particular department, program or event?

    To what languages were these materials going to be translated and to what communities were they headed?

    If the lack of these materials in languages other than English carry the risk of creating a public safety or health issue will they be translated anyway?

    I completely understand budget shortfalls and the need to trim PR costs when budgets are bleeding red ink, but if guides to immunizations clinics and materials on elder abuse help in Chinese and Polish are dumped, is that the best way to save money?

    Is the City of Chicago really saying that guides for finding affordable housing, emergency services hotline information, and getting legal help in Spanish and other languages are not necessary to service our internationally-populated town?

    While the 2016 Olympic Bid Committee is gleefully promoting Chicago’s diverse, multicultural neighborhoods to the International Olympic Committee, is this really the message that the mayor of the "City of Immigrants" wants to send ?

    I dunno, but I’ll be sure to let you know if I ever get a call back – and some answers – from Chicago’s City Hall.


    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

    Posted at 09:12 PM in Chicago, crime/violence/gangs/poverty, Current Affairs, Health/Medicine/nutrition, Hispanic/Latino, immigration, international relations, politics, responsibility | | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

    Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

    February 25, 2009

    Help fellow Latinos understand: you don’t leave kids unattended in cars!

    "600 Words by Esther J. Cepeda"

    Gaeldominguez Tribune Photo Well, thank goodness little Gael Dominguez is home safe and sound.

    If you hadn’t heard, last Sunday morning four-year-old Gael was sitting in the back seat of his family’s SUV that his daddy had left running in front of their house for "just a minute" on Chicago’s northwest side when a thief stole the van – with Gael in it.

    I can just imagine the alarm the thief must have felt when he realized there was a small person in the car he’d helped himself to. Certainly not as bad as the feeling dad, 24-year-old Javier Dominguez, had when he walked out and realized what had happened – and then when he had to tell Gael’s mom Elizabeth Cruz. It makes my stomach hurt just thinking about it.

    The thief abandoned the van about a mile away from the family home with Gael inside who, according to his mom Elizabeth, had hidden between two child seats in the back and exchanged no words with the driver, according to Monday’s story in the Chicago Sun-Times.

    Really? Does that mean he had not been securely fastened into his own child seat – or merely that he was a master at unbuckling himself from it? Shake your head wearily.

    Latinos don’t get it when it comes to child vehicle safety – they just don’t. O.K., yes, not all Hispanics, obviously, but too many. Gael Dominguez’ excellent adventure was just the latest in a string of incidents.

    We can go back to July when Ricardo Gonzales, a 35-year-old Midlothian, Illinois man was charged with misdemeanor child endangerment for locking his two-year-old and five-year-old daughters in a makeshift cage in his pickup truck (read my column here).

    Back on November 28, 2008 seven-month-old Osiel Hernandez was whisked to a hospital to be checked out after spending about 12 hours inside a Dodge Caravan which was stolen when his mom had left it running – with him inside it – at a factory in Skokie as she ran into pick up materials for her job.

    There are a million reasons: from ignorance of this country’s laws, to poverty, to desperation…I’d insert a really good quote from a Latino public health specialist here if any of them had wanted to talk about this disturbing issue. But as one Latino community leader told me off-the-record, "that’s one of those things you’re not going to be able to get too many people to talk about." No kidding!

    My take: all of these people were poor, relatively recent arrivals to the U.S. (and therefore ignorant of the laws against leaving children unattended in cars), monolingual (all used translators to communicate to police and media), and probably scared of police because of immigration-related anxiety.

    And all those like them – in those same life situations - need our help.

    It’s not a matter of taking sides over the immigration issue and it’s not about whether parents "should" know better – do a Google search, plenty of U.S.-born citizens make the bone-headed move of leaving their kids in cars, they’rejust usually not scared to call police – it’s about raising awareness in communities.

    Simple to say and hard to do because it seems overwhelming, but don’t let it be – talk about these incidents with people, then suspend your desire to judge and reach out to someone who might need a friendly piece of advice about securing their kids in car seats and not leaving them alone in the car.

    I talked to JuanValenzuela, an Illinois State Police Sergeant and Public Information Officer and a designated officer for Hispanic Community Affairs:

    "We don’t keep statistics on race about who leaves kids in the car unattended," Sgt. Valenzuela told me, "but we do do presentations in local communities where there is a need."

    "We can present to specific groups, like at the Mexican Consulate and at immigrant welcoming centers where we teach about our laws. We can be topic-specific when providing presentations," Valenzuela said. "If it’s Latino-related I would provide them but we also have 21 other education police officers in the state."

    "If anyone wants to set up a presentation they can reach me directly at valenzj@isp.state.il.us or by calling me at 312/ 814-8368."

    His final words on the subject: "We recommend nobody leaves a vehicle with a child in it or with a key in the ignition even if there is no child present and that goes across all lines – NEVER leave a child in a car for any amount of time. Regardless."



    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

    Posted at 09:41 PM in Chicago, crime/violence/gangs/poverty, culture, Current Affairs, education, Health/Medicine/nutrition, Hispanic/Latino, immigration, kids/teens, responsibility | | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

    Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

    February 17, 2009

    Asian immigration: A family affair

    by Esther J. Cepeda

    Gross generalization alert: If there’s one thing Hispanics hate is for people to assume they’re all Mexican.

    And if there’s one thing Mexican-descended Hispanics hate it’s for people to assume they’re all immigrants – and illegal ones at that.

    And if there’s one thing immigrants hate, it’s for people to assume that the issue of illegal immigration is just a "Mexican problem."

    And who could blame them? To look at the news coverage, the "broken immigration system" is primarily reported in the context of what it means to Latinos and their extended families, as if every single one of the "12 million" illegal immigrants in the U.S. came from Tijuana.

    With the rhetoric heating up yet again I thought I’d talk to someone with an alternative view point on this whole immigration business, which is how I came to meet Karen Narasaki, the Asian American Justice Center’s president and executive director.

    KarenAAJC AAJC bills itself as the nation's premiere authority on immigration policy as it affects the Asian American and Pacific Islander communities, so who better to talk with about what’s going on in immigration land?


    Q. Karen, how does the immigration issue hit Asian American homes?

    As you know, Asian Americans have a higher percentage of foreign-born residents living in the U.S. so immigration is very much a relevant issue to many families in our community. We did some exit polling [during the November 2007 Presidential election] to find out just how important the issue of immigration was to Asian-Americans and I thought one of the interesting takeaways was that it was very important, and that there were very strong views of how the different [political] parties looked at immigration.

    We were looking to see what effect Asian-American votes had on the race and found that 94 percent of Asian-American voters supported increasing programs to help new immigrants learn English and 56 percent of Asian Americans who voted on election day oppose continuing workplace raids. We felt the emerging story on the Asian-American community is that on the economy, healthcare, and immigration, they’re voting for someone with a progressive agenda.


    Q. A nice chunk of your polling happened here in Chicago, can you talk a little bit about what you found here?

    Tuyet Le, the executive director of the Chicago-based Asian American Institute participated in a tele-briefing posted on our website in which she discussed her findings.

    She said that the Chicago Asian American Institute, in conjunction with other groups such as the Illinois Center for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, polled 15 areas in the city and suburbs, though most came from the Chinatown area.

    What they found was that [across polling sites] 81 percent of Asian-Americans voted for Obama 16 percent for Sen. John McCain.

    Tuyet reported that the top issues were the economy and jobs at 45 percent, then healthcare, and education. Specific to immigration, the top issue in importance was faster processing of family re- unification applications, with 25 percent of respondents favoring a path to legalization.

    In terms of party politics, 50 percent of respondents felt the Democrats were very favorable toward immigration reform in contrast to the 46 percent who felt Republicans were unfavorable toward immigration reform. Obviously this debate had a significant influence on how Asian Americans voted and how they perceive each of the parties being responsive to Asian Americans in regard to immigration issues.

    In fact, 18-30 year olds overwhelmingly voted for Obama and foreign born voters overwhelmingly voted for Barack Obama at even slightly a higher rate than U.S. born Asian Americans. Tuyet said that in Chicago a majority of the survey participants were foreign born which shows that the message is reaching across generations.


    Q. What’s the situation with undocumented Asians? We never hear about them. The most recent statistics I found from a March 2006 a report estimated the number of undocumented Asians living in the United States in 2005 was about 1.5 million – 14 percent of the 10.5 million undocumented immigrants in the United States, and 12 percent of the Asian population. At the time it was estimated that of the 1.5 million 23 percent were Chinese, followed by Filipinos (17%), Indians (14%), and Koreans (11%).

    What's been reported largely has been just the issue of the undocumented and therefore people are under the false impression that most illegal immigrants choose to come in undocumented.

    People misunderstand how hard it gets to get in the U.S., people believe [illegal immigrants] have a choice to come in legally but don't.

    For Asians, a majority came on a student or tourist visa, or temporary employment visa and overstayed so they don't think of themselves as illegal immigrants because they came with documents and a lot of them are caught in the burueacracy to adjust their status.

    Because it is a very different kind of immigration on some levels it does make it difficult. For example, the fact that someone's undocumented status tends to be a secret moreso than in the Latino community where, for instance, many undocumented immigrants come from the same family or village. And that’s one of the reasons why it’s harder to organize the Asian community – I think there is more of a stigma in the Asian community about being undocumented.

    Asian kids sometimes don't even know because their parents never even told them! We saw that a lot when advocacy began on the Dream Act.

    Again that was seen largely as a "Latino issue" but we found out it was an issue in the Asian community but it wasn’t well known – kids didn't discover it until they were going to college.

    For instance, there’s a wide preconception that there aren’t many undocumented in the Chinese community but that's probably higher than any other. If I go to talk to a Chinese group about immigration and ask who knows someone who is undocumented almost no one will raise their hand but then after I talk, people will come up to me individually and say, "I have an auntie" or "an uncle," but they would never publicly admit that.

    And the reasons for that vary – for instance, some refugees are undocumented but the numbers are lower so when you talk to Vietnamese and Cambodian immigrants about the issues, there can be less sympathy because they largely came here legally and don’t understand [the challenges].


    Q. Talk a bit about the "signature" Asian American immigration issue.

    It’s the issue of family backlogs. Huge backlogs exist in families where immigrants are citizens and they can bring in spouses, and parents, and minor children from overseas. The backlog grew enormously in part because those who became citizens during the last legalization programs are now finally now trying to get family members over.

    In July 2007, 4 million immigrants were in the backlogs and we estimate about half are spouses of legal permanent residents.

    So the family concerns flow through all of these issues; the high tech workers, unless they’re already married, they face enormous wait times. And historically extended family immigration [of brothers and sisters] is perceived as being more important to Asians than Latinos.

    What’s very important to Asians is that a big part of the backlog is family members where for Latinos there are larger numbers of undocumented living here versus those with a backlog of families waiting – for Latinos that number is only about 10 percent.


    Q. So what’s your best prediction about the immigration issue under the Obama administration? Are we going to see any movement this year?

    It’s a little early in the game… we know this is an issue Obama had spoken a lot about in the campaign. Most people didn’t notice because it wasn’t an issue they were following but every time he spoke of comprehensive immigration reform he would talk about family backlogs.

    The administration knows this is an issue that needs paying attention to but with the economy it’s very difficult to talk about any kind of immigration – people are very skittish about additional immigration.

    But I think an argument can be made that solving this issue and helping families come together – especially in times when families need to work together – people will be able to see that if you take care of this issue now it would be helpful to the economy in the long term.

    One of the things people tend to look at regarding family immigration is the degree to which it helps that family, but they don’t understand that it’s important in helping all people thrive because immigrants buy houses, buy businesses, send kids to college, and pool their money.

    This is why the Asian community has been relatively successful in integrating in the U.S. – they live with other family members who help them get jobs, learn English, and learn the culture.

    Family immigration has been at the core of U.S. immigration for about 100 years now. People talk about changing the immigration system [to limit family immigration] but they lose perspective of the role the family plays in helping new immigrants become part of America.


    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

    Posted at 09:22 PM in Chicago, Current Affairs, Hispanic/Latino, immigration, international relations, kids/teens, politics | | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

    Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

    January 21, 2009

    Fan of ICE training Waukegan Illinois Police Chief Biang to retire

    "600 Words by Esther J. Cepeda"

    Chief Biang is going bye-bye and though the great majority of the Waukegan, Illinois Latino community wished him something else, I wish him well.

    William Biang, top cop of Waukegan the mostly-Hispanic Lake County, Illinois town well north of Chicago's rich and fabled North Shore, announced at Tuesday's City Council meeting that he will resign this May, according to a Lake County News Sun staff report printed in Wednesday's paper.

    Most people had never heard of the Chief until July 2007, when the immigration debate finally boiled over in Waukegan, and the highly-organized Waukegan Latino community went head to head with the highly-organized and supremely-ticked-off Caucasian community over opposition to proposed 287(g) Immigrations and Customs Enforcement training for Waukegan policemen and women.

    Back in those days, Hazelton, PA and Carpentersville, IL were only two of many U.S. small towns – economically depressed and frustrated with the cultural change in their communities – that started forcing immigrants (some legal, some illegal) out through organized crackdowns.

    Here's my article – thanks to the generosity of my former employer the Chicago Sun-Times – from July 10, 2007 to give you some context:

    Deportation training divides community
    July 10, 2007

    BY ESTHER J. CEPEDA Staff Reporter/ecepeda@suntimes.com

    Far north suburban Waukegan has become the latest local lightning rod in the battle to control illegal immigration.

    At issue is an Immigration and Customs Enforcement training program, which would give police in the Lake County city of 83,000 the ability to trigger deportation proceedings for violent offenders.

    The measure is pitting angry immigrant-activist organizations --who are asking residents to boycott businesses that fail to post orange posters opposing it -- against Waukegan officials. It's also stoking grass-roots anti-illegal immigrant groups and catching local businesses in the cross fire.

    In late June, the Waukegan City Council authorized Police Chief William Biang to submit an application for two police officers to be trained for 287(g) authorization -- a federal program which would allow those officers to start deportation proceedings for legal and illegal aliens of all ethnicities who are convicted of violent offenses such as rape, murder, sexual assault, or drug violations.

    Though the 287(g) program has been in effect since 2001 -- and to date there have been no complaints against law-enforcement officers across the country who have employed the training -- immigrant activists still are arguing that Waukegan's effort to have officers trained amounts to a push to get Latinos out of what was once a predominantly white, blue-collar community.

    Biang, however, said he has been frustrated by misinformation about the program that has spread across Waukegan, which is now 54 percent Hispanic. Out of Waukegan's 166-officer department, about 25 officers are bilingual.

    "It's not aimed at any one particular minority and doesn't apply to traffic violations or other misdemeanors," Biang said. "In many cases, these violent offenders currently slip through the cracks once they've been through the system."

    "We're targeting criminals, not a minority group," Biang continued. "In fact, crime has gone down over the last 10 years as the Latino population has gone up."

    Despite Biang's assurances about the program, it still has angered immigrant activist groups concerned that immigration enforcement powers will translate into racial profiling. They have called in volunteers from all over Chicago and the suburbs to canvass Waukegan and ask residents to boycott businesses that do not oppose the measure.

    "The businesses that support us have orange posters saying 'No 287(g)' in their windows," said Lilia Paredes, vice president of the Chicago Chapter for Latin American Council for Labor Advancement, who said there are hundreds of businesses cooperating. "We are demanding they withdraw the application . . . and establish an independent review board for the police."

    Besides Waukegan, there are about 75 similar applications for 287(g) training pending for certified law enforcement agencies across the country, according to Mike Gilhooly, an Immigration and Customs spokesman. He said, "The training includes Department of Justice Training designed to prevent racial profiling, as well as training in how to do the job while observing civil rights."

    While Hispanic-owned businesses are proudly displaying their orange posters -- "We have to support the people, because from them we live" said Maria Ortiz, owner of Mary's Unisex Beauty Salon -- others in town are feeling the heat of a contentious issue.

    "This is a no-win situation," said a local restaurant owner, himself a son of Greek immigrants. "I lose either way by supporting or not supporting them. And I think these people who are translating are not telling people the right thing. They're getting them all worked up. . . . People are going to get hurt."

    As a result of the community's outcry, the 287(g) application will be reconsidered at a Monday, July 16, board meeting, though Mayor Richard Hyde has repeatedly said Waukegan will not back down.

    Meanwhile, Waukegan Police are doing their best to clarify that they will not be going into homes or businesses or conducting roadblocks in search of illegal immigrants.

    "If someone would just ask me I'd explain," said bilingual officer Jose Nieves. "It's just designed to go after dangerous felons, not the common hardworking person."

    The problem the Chief and his staff were facing was that no one in town – no one with brown skin, that is – was buying the old "dangerous criminals, but not you" argument.

    Part of the reason for that was the police department had a darn sketchy past reputation for mistreating only certain residents of town, but to be fair, part of it had to do with a cabal of Chicago activists who moved in and literally organized people via the terror method.

    Yes, there were people telling scared, Spanish-speaking-only Waukeganites that the police were going to deport them for returning library books late. No, sadly, I'm not kidding or exaggerating.

    I always liked the Chief, seemed like a good guy and all. He answered all my questions honestly and seemed to have the best interests of Waukegan at heart, but then again, I never dared speed down Delany Road, either, just in case some of his officers were of the sort others had complained about. The sort who would allegedly ask you for your "papers" if you went two miles over the speed limit.

    Congrats Waukegan Latinos, you can sing "ding-dong the witch is dead," if it makes you feel better about life. Biang relinquishes command on May 5, but already handed the reins over to Deputy Chief Artis Yancey.

    And Yancey's take on the immigration issue in Waukegan is anyone's guess.


    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

    Posted at 08:00 PM in crime/violence/gangs/poverty, Current Affairs, Hispanic/Latino, immigration, politics | | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

    Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

    Twenty-four hours after inauguration, Obama on the spot for immediate immigration reform

    "600 Words by Esther J. Cepeda"

    In the 48-hour time period between Monday and Wednesday three events will collide to put newly-inaugurated President Barack Obama in the crosshairs of those pushing the anti-"anti-illegal" immigration agenda in this country.

    First, on Monday – in a stunning last-minute move – then-President George W. Bush granted clemency to the two border patrol agents who were serving eleven and twelve year sentences for shooting a Mexican drug smuggler in the buttocks back in 2005, then conspiring to cover it up.

    The campaign to "Free Ramos and Compean" was taken up both by rabid anti-immigrant types as well as by the more moderate sorts who – though certainly don’t advocate shooting people in the back – didn’t believe that officers Jose A. Compean and Ignacio Ramos deserved to be put in solitary confinement for over a decade for their crime.

    Either way, the border patrolmen’s plight was just one of the many points of contention that boiled over in the thick of the pro-vs.-anti-illegal-immigrant rhetoric that successfully drowned out July 2007’s attempt at comprehensive immigration reform.

    Next, of course, came Barack Obama’s Tuesday inauguration when the world stopped to sigh happily that "a new day has dawned" not only in the United States, but also across the globe.

    Fast forward 24-hours and the honeymoon is over: Wednesday at 11am in Washington, DC, the "National Capital Immigrant and Fair Immigration Reform Movement" will be holding, an immigration rights march to demand (all together now!) quote:

    "[A] Moratorium on the Raids and Deportations -Just and Humane Immigration Reform -Health Care for All –

    Worker Justice Obama’s decisive victory signals a sea change in U.S. politics.

    This is a historic moment not only because the U.S. will have its first African American president, but also because a decisive majority of Latino voters, and many white voters were central to Obama’s victory. We are entering a new era, one where real social change can happen. Mass movements for social justice must play a crucial role."

    Not to be left behind, Chicago’s very own March Mastermind Jorge Mujica – now best known for successfully engineering the takeover of the Republic Window factory and getting those employees the severance they were owed – has his own gig here in Chicago.

    JorgemujicaThe "Solidarity Rally" – to (altogether now!) "Demand an End to Raids and Deportations" – starts at 5:00pm Wednesday at Federal Plaza (corner of Dearborn and Adams, Downtown, Chicago, if you’re interested in showing up).


    Naturally, because I like to talk to the Devil’s advocates – just a manner of speech, of course – the first person I called with this news was Rick Biesada, the Director of the Chicago Minuteman Project.

    Despite leading three years of protests in front of Illinois legislators’ offices demanding Ramos and Compean be freed, he was none too impressed with Monday’