The No Mucho Bueno Coordination between Obama and Pro-Immigrant Organizations

I think that the legislative timing for an immigration reform in Congress is already slipping away for this legislative year. I also think that there is a growing gap between what President Obama is doing (or should be doing) on behalf of a comprehensive immigration reform and what pro-immigrant organizations are doing (or should be doing) in order to be ready for a coordinated action at a national level whenever the timing is right and the need to exert pressure on Congress becomes a must.

If President Obama means to sponsor a comprehensive immigration reform for this legislative period, he should be closing deals right now with members of Congress in order to have a significant number of votes whenever he is ready to support a national campaign on behalf of a comprehensive immigration reform. Pro-immigrant organizations should be ready to exert pressure on Congress through citizens and noncitizens' mobilization as well. When? Well… this task is due basically for yesterday, or for today, the latest. Why? Because it is during these days that members of Congress look back at their constituencies and weight the political costs and benefits of supporting a comprehensive immigration reform.

If Congress people see only a bunch of anti-immigrant letters, for example, but zero pro-immigrant letters on their desk… chances are very high that the wishy-washy members of Congress, those who may or may not support the initiative, may not support it at all. Pro-immigrant organizations probably should be mobilizing their constituency for this end at this point of the political calendar.

It seems that if you are a pro-immigrant leader, activist or organizer and you are not mailing or faxing letters to your Representative, Senator or the White House, well, you are wasting precious, non renewable time. If you are waiting for President Obama to announce the initiative but you have not done anything in order to increase the chances for such announcement to happen, then you may not be part of the solution, but part of the problem. The gap between what Obama may do and what the pro-immigrant organizations can do is growing, not closing. And this is dangerous if we want to be realistic about the chances for a comprehensive immigration reform to take place during 2009 or even 2010.

For example, here you have the transcription of a letter that Houston’s ARCA (Association for Residency and Citizenship of America) is circulating among its members (and public in general) and faxing to the White House. OJO: in order for these letters to be effective, they only need the name of the person, the city, state and Zip Code. No need to write anything else. It is time to reach out people, and people to respond and defend their own interests. Nothing happens to those who sign the letters if they sign them with the very basics, but a lot may happen to immigrants and their families here and there if they are not signed and faxed to Washington D. C. at all. The stakes are very high.


Rahm Emmanuel
White House Chief of Staff
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. Emmanuel:

On behalf of my family and the families of those suffering the consequences of the damaging raids and family separation, we appreciate the opportunity given to the nationally syndicated radio talk show better known as “Piolin” into the Oval Office for a sit-down interview with the President over immigration reform. However, our families and the Hispanic voters who supported President Obama, are getting tired of too much politics and little action.

There’s going to be growing frustration if we don’t see some tangible and real signals that immigration reform is going to be carried out this year. We believe President Obama needs to give a speech or somehow make clear this summer that he wanted Congress to act on immigration reform. Until now, all you are seeing is new enforcement rules, and more restrictions, but very little on a clear path to citizenship for the estimated 12 million undocumented immigrants currently in the United States.

We understand that the country is struggling, but we are part of the struggling group and our hardship is ever extremer than anyone else’s, because we face deportation and family separation every day.

Your support is moving this issue forward is crucial, and our Hispanic community who supported this Administration deserve some of your attention.

Sincerely,

________________________________

La marcha del May Day 2009: Todo trankis y a la baja

Bueno, pues el Primero de Mayo sucedió lo que se preveía que iba a suceder: en términos generales, participación muy baja en las marchas. Las razones que mas se mencionaron en la prensa norteamericana fueron: miedo al contagio de influenza, estaba lloviendo, apatía, miedo a perder la chamba por ir a marchar, etc. En la jornada dominó la tranquilidad y se ondearon principalmente banderas norteamericanas. A continuación un breve recorrido por las principales plazas “marchistas” en los Estados Unidos.

En un repaso nacional, el New York Times reporta un número de participantes muy bajo en L.A., Chicago, Nueva York, Miami, etc. En Boston, Jay Severin, locutor conservador de la WTKK-FM fue suspendido por insultar a los mexicanos: “criminaliens, leeches (sanguijuelas), primitives…” En Chicago 5000 personas salieron a las calles, cifra my pobre al compararse con los 65000 del año pasado: se menciona un cierto grado de decepción hacia Obama por no haber declarado todavía moratoria sobre las redadas de indocumentados… En L.A. la fragmentación se hizo presente: seis grupos organizaron pequeñas marchas… En la ciudad de Nueva York se canceló el Festival 5 de Mayo en Queens a manera de medida precautoria contra la influenza.

California: Miles de personas tomaron la calle en Los Ángeles… Sentido de urgencia más perceptible en relación al asunto de la legalización. La incertidumbre laboral o menos trabajo disponible, parece que eso empuja a la gente a pedir la legalización pero, en función de las cantidades de participantes no parece ser muy importante el rollo… Algunos grupos afirmaron que las marchas no eran únicamente por los derechos de los inmigrantes, sino por los trabajadores en general. En Orange County, para variar, hubo algunas decenas de personas protestando afuera del consulado mexicano… Oakland, San Francisco, San José, Berkeley: Miles salen a la calles… Pancartas: “Workers Without Borders” “Para la Migra” “¡Sí se puede!”

Oregon: Salem 2000 personas, Portland 1500. Políticos que generalmente hablan en inglés aparecieron hablando en español. Un poco de todo: artistas luciendo sus artes, protestas contra el capitalismo, líderes comunitarios sonrientes, trabajadores, estudiantes, presencia sindical. Discursos a favor de una reforma migratoria integral. Protestas contra las redadas del ICE. Tono tranquilo, relajado y hasta festivo.

Washington. Seattle: algunos 5 mil desfilaron, idea prevaleciente: la unión hace la fuerza… Pancartas: “Obama, escucha: estamos en la lucha” Yakima: 600 desfilaron. Unos cinco Minutemen se veían preocupados… algunos contra demostradores usaban mascarillas… Se ve a Obama como aliado y al DHS como listo para enfocarse más en los empleadores que en los empleados a la hora de reforzar las leyes migratorias en los E.U.

Salt Lake City, Utah: algunos cientos de personas salieron a marchar, pero la nota la dieron un puñado de Minutemen con declaraciones de carácter alucinógeno: “"We have 40 million illegal alien invaders in our country. They're stealing our jobs, plundering our treasury." También: "That flu's coming out of Mexico, and there are a lot of illegals over there, we don't want to get sick."

En Houston, un puñado ruidoso de activistas le protestan al alcalde que la policía de la ciudad, sobre todo el personal que trabaja en las cárceles, participan abiertamente en el programa 287(g), convirtiéndose en agentes de inmigración al revisar el estatus migratorio de los encarcelados. Surgen dos temores: que las personas puedan llegar a ser deportadas por faltas menores (como infracciones de tránsito); y que la confianza de la comunidad migrante y latina en las instituciones policiacas de la ciudad se está desmoronando, con lo que se anticipa el subsecuente incremento de índices de criminalidad en los barrios latinos.

Miami: cientos a las calles, fuerte aire de identificación con el May Day de 1886… Presencia de sindicatos y coaliciones pro-inmigrantes. Se leía en las pancartas: “Reforma Migratoria SI, deportaciones NO” “Bailout the People, not the Banks”

Newark, Nueva Jersey: 200 personas. Pancartas: “No human being is illegal.”

Providence (R.I.): 300 personas se pusieron a gritar bien fuerte afuera del U.S. ICE… Pancartas: “Human Rights for All” “Stop the Deportations” “ICE out of R.I. Now” También se lanzaron contra el gobernador Carcieri, uno de los gobernadores mas anti inmigrantes de los E.U.

Milwakee: miles de personas a las calles… Parece que están mas unidos, hay mejor coordinación, están mejor organizados… Interesante.

¿Por qué tan poca participación? ¿Qué ya no hay trabajadores, ni personas indocumentadas en los Estados Unidos? Además de las razones coyunturales arriba mencionadas, también existen razones de fondo que explican tan magra participación: los sindicatos todavía no levantan a la gente, lo grupos pro-inmigrantes como que nomás no saben qué hacer o cómo hacerle y quizá la más importante de todas: la iglesia católica no tuvo nada que ver en esto.

Es posible que aquí los sindicatos fueran los más ganones al estar calibrando su capacidad de movilización para cuando llegue la hora de la verdad. Ojalá. Aunque yo me pregunto: ¿Y a todo esto, dónde están los principales interesados, los millones de indocumentados que viven y trabajan en este país? Igual y millones de gentes consideran que no es necesario salir a las calles, aunque tampoco me queda claro qué es lo que todos estos millones consideran que vale la pena hacer. No sé, no tengo idea.

Greetings from Mars: Mexican Immigrants and Major Works on Latino Politics

I would like to comment on the reference guide titled “Latino Politics: A Growing and Evolving Political Community” (2009). This magnificent work, published by The University of Arizona Libraries and authored by John Garcia (University of Arizona), Gabriel R. Sanchez (University of New Mexico) and J. Salvador Peralta (University of West Georgia), is a first-rate bibliography on practically every relevant aspect of Latino Politics: History, demographics, mass media, Latino identity, ethnic studies, political behavior, elites, inter-group relations, public policy issues, and methodology and measurement issues (this last, my favorite section). It covers works published mainly during the 1990s and 2000s.

I also enjoyed very much the ‘Retrospective Essay’ of their work: “Latino Politics: Both a Growing and Evolving Political Community,” in which the authors address implicitly and in a very straight forward manner the research and teaching agenda of those who address the Latino community from a scholar, political standpoint: The pan-ethnic perspective, group identity issues, assimilation and acculturation, opinion and policies, organization and mobilization, the foreign-born, and how the context does matter. It is highly recommended for those who are preparing a syllabus on Latino Politics, or for those who wish to update their current syllabus, to take a careful look to the whole compilation of references. The work is also an essential starting point for those students or scholars who are currently looking for new veins of research on Latino political issues.

Now, let’s take a look to a very specific aspect of this major reference work. As a scholar on Latino immigration in the United States, with specialization on Mexican immigrants, I looked immediately for the section on Mexican immigrants and... I guess there is something that I do not understand very well here. In Chapter Five, “Books Focused on Ethnic Studies,” the authors present a section on Central American studies, Cuban studies, Dominican American studies, Mexican American studies, Chican@ studies and Puerto Rican studies… but no Mexicans in the U.S., a category that covers those Mexicans who were born in Mexico, who work and live in the U.S. and who are not American citizens. In Chapter Nine, “Public Policy Issues,” I found a section on “Immigration and Naturalization,” in which there are several references to Mexican immigrants.

If an inhabitant from Mars would arrive today to our planet and would take the reference guide to see what is the state of the affair with Mexican immigrants in the United States, it would take some time for the Martian to realize that Mexican immigrants are important within the analytical framework of Latino Politics, although the Martians would have to look out specifically hard for the topic. At a first glance, Mexican immigrants appear nowhere in this work.

Good news is that research on Mexican immigrants appears and appears in good, healthy numbers. I counted the references that included only Mexican immigrants as a main target of research in the sections of National Origin Based Identity, Political Attitudes, Political Participation, and Immigration and Naturalization and found 43 references. This is, a higher number of references than the total combined references that appear under the categories of Central Americans, Cuban Americans, Dominican Americans, Mexican Americans and Chican@s presented in the Ethnic Studies section of the bibliography.

I think it is time to point out the elephant in the room. Researchers cannot skip anymore the importance that embodies Mexican immigrants for Latino Politics, and certainly for American Politics as a whole. Good that this work makes a distinction between Mexican Americans and Chican@ studies from a political perspective, but it is not enough. Mexican immigrants are now about 30% of the foreign-born population of the most powerful country on this planet, and issues like immigration reform are a big deal in Washington D.C. right now. The study of Mexican immigrants goes well beyond the study of “Immigration and Naturalization.”

Mexican immigrants deserve a category of their own in this type of macro research. Indeed, the current classification of research on Mexican Immigration in this work gives the impression that the topic is only a subject of incorporation/integration… which is not the case. I also think that changing the scope of this classification by creating a category for Mexican immigrants would contribute in leading researchers to deal in a simultaneous way with issues of assimilation, acculturation and transnationalism, for example.

Finally, I have reorganized the section of Papers, Reports and Field Research in my website. Now the information (on immigration-related research) that is offered in this section has been classified in the following categories: Alphabetical Order; American Cities and States of the Union; Economy; Education and Health; Immigration Reform; (The) Mexican Perspective; Mobilization and Participation; Political Integration/Incorporation; Population; Public Policy; Studies and Field Research; and Undocumented-Unauthorized Immigrants / Illegal Immigration. Enjoy.