Zuraya Tapia-Alfaro's blog

Zuraya Tapia-Alfaro's picture

Fiction And the RNC Convention - Straight Stalk, or Straight Up Lies?

Always fact-check - I appreciate the AP's efforts in correcting the "errors" in several RNC speeches:

Attacks, praise stretch truth at GOP convention

By JIM KUHNHENN, Associated Press WriterWed Sep 3, 11:48 PM ET

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and her Republican supporters held back little Wednesday as they issued dismissive attacks on Barack Obama and flattering praise on her credentials to be vice president. In some cases, the reproach and the praise stretched the truth.

Some examples:

PALIN: "I have protected the taxpayers by vetoing wasteful spending ... and championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress. I told the Congress 'thanks but no thanks' for that Bridge to Nowhere."

THE FACTS: As mayor of Wasilla, Palin hired a lobbyist and traveled to Washington annually to support earmarks for the town totaling $27 million. In her two years as governor, Alaska has requested nearly $750 million in special federal spending, by far the largest per-capita request in the nation. While Palin notes she rejected plans to build a $398 million bridge from Ketchikan to an island with 50 residents and an airport, that opposition came only after the plan was ridiculed nationally as a "bridge to nowhere."

PALIN: "There is much to like and admire about our opponent. But listening to him speak, it's easy to forget that this is a man who has authored two memoirs but not a single major law or reform — not even in the state senate."

THE FACTS: Compared to McCain and his two decades in the Senate, Obama does have a more meager record. But he has worked with Republicans to pass legislation that expanded efforts to intercept illegal shipments of weapons of mass destruction and to help destroy conventional weapons stockpiles. The legislation became law last year. To demean that accomplishment would be to also demean the work of Republican Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana, a respected foreign policy voice in the Senate. In Illinois, he was the leader on two big, contentious measures in Illinois: studying racial profiling by police and requiring recordings of interrogations in potential death penalty cases. He also successfully co-sponsored major ethics reform legislation.

PALIN: "The Democratic nominee for president supports plans to raise income taxes, raise payroll taxes, raise investment income taxes, raise the death tax, raise business taxes, and increase the tax burden on the American people by hundreds of billions of dollars."

THE FACTS: The Tax Policy Center, a think tank run jointly by the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute, concluded that Obama's plan would increase after-tax income for middle-income taxpayers by about 5 percent by 2012, or nearly $2,200 annually. McCain's plan, which cuts taxes across all income levels, would raise after tax-income for middle-income taxpayers by 3 percent, the center concluded.

Obama would provide $80 billion in tax breaks, mainly for poor workers and the elderly, including tripling the Earned Income Tax Credit for minimum-wage workers and higher credits for larger families. He also would raise income taxes, capital gains and dividend taxes on the wealthiest. He would raise payroll taxes on taxpayers with incomes above $250,000, and he would raise corporate taxes. Small businesses that make more than $250,000 a year would see taxes rise.

MCCAIN: "She's been governor of our largest state, in charge of 20 percent of America's energy supply ... She's responsible for 20 percent of the nation's energy supply. I'm entertained by the comparison and I hope we can keep making that comparison that running a political campaign is somehow comparable to being the executive of the largest state in America," he said in an interview with ABC News' Charles Gibson.

THE FACTS: McCain's phrasing exaggerates both claims. Palin is governor of a state that ranks second nationally in crude oil production, but she's no more "responsible" for that resource than President Bush was when he was governor of Texas, another oil-producing state. In fact, her primary power is the ability to tax oil, which she did in concert with the Alaska Legislature. And where Alaska is the largest state in America, McCain could as easily have called it the 47th largest state — by population.

MCCAIN: "She's the commander of the Alaska National Guard. ... She has been in charge, and she has had national security as one of her primary responsibilities," he said on ABC.

THE FACTS: While governors are in charge of their state guard units, that authority ends whenever those units are called to actual military service. When guard units are deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan, for example, they assume those duties under "federal status," which means they report to the Defense Department, not their governors. Alaska's national guard units have a total of about 4,200 personnel, among the smallest of state guard organizations.

FORMER ARKANSAS GOV. MIKE HUCKABEE: Palin "got more votes running for mayor of Wasilla, Alaska than Joe Biden got running for president of the United States."

THE FACTS: A whopper. Palin got 616 votes in the 1996 mayor's election, and got 909 in her 1999 re-election race, for a total of 1,525. Biden dropped out of the race after the Iowa caucuses, but he still got 76,165 votes in 23 states and the District of Columbia where he was on the ballot during the 2008 Presidential primaries.

FORMER MASSACHUSETTS GOV. MITT ROMNEY: "We need change, all right — change from a liberal Washington to a conservative Washington! We have a prescription for every American who wants change in Washington — throw out the big-government liberals, and elect John McCain and Sarah Palin."

THE FACTS: A Back-to-the-Future moment. George W. Bush, a conservative Republican, has been president for nearly eight years. And until last year, Republicans controlled Congress. Only since January 2007 have Democrats have been in charge of the House and Senate.

Following on Simon's post, it's clear that the RNC not only has a flare for drama, but will straight up lie if necessary. Throughout the RNC Convention we have heard eloquent stories, partisan attacks, but no real solutions. The RNC is doing exactly what they criticized Barack Obama for doing: giving nice speeches with no substance.  While during the DNC Convention, not a single speaker focused on the RNC - they might have made differences known on issues, but at no time were speakers condescending or snide about Senator McCain, instead, they focused on presenting their candidate and Barack Obama's specific proposals in the areas of Energy Reform, Immigration, the Economy, and Health Care. Stories can be entertaining for awhile, but in the end, voters will ask for substance. As Gov. Sebelius stated in the Huffington Post, hockey moms may be moved by speeches, but in the end they want to know exactly how the new President will make health care affordable, increase their wages, or improve schools.  As Barack Obama pointed out at Mile-High Stadium, "it's not about me" - this election should be about the American people, but the GOP strategy is precisely to make it about stories and characters.  Rep. Wasserman-Shultz put it best: "Where is the beef? Where is the evidence? Sarah Palin is not a reformer...If her best example of being a reformer was trying to sell a plane on E-Bay, that is not my definition of reform." Reform is not found in the usual stretching of the truth in politics.  To be successful tonight, John McCain will have to shift from this strategy of making it about Barack Obama and instead focus on how he proposes to pay for the pipelines, nuclear power, solar, and expensive alternative energy sources that Gov. Palin spoke about. He will have to explain the incentives to businesses to conserve energy, to have acessible health care for employees, and how he will make the U.S. competitive in a global, 21st century, marketplace.

Zuraya Tapia-Alfaro's picture

What World Does The Republican Party Live In?

I have watched the coverage of the Republican Convention for three days now and I have two main observations: 1) they have not presented a single proposal, just snide remarks (clever ones, but merely snide remarks all the same) and 2) the crowd is older and all white. Such a homogenous crowd is simply not reflective of the reality of the United States of America - watching and listening to the Convention makes one thing abundantly clear: the Republican Party is so very, very out of touch with the country they claim to put first.

The Washington Post's Eli Saslow and Robert Barnes note in a piece published today:

Only 36 of the 2,380 delegates seated on the convention floor are black [which is .01 percent of those present, while blacks make up over 12% of the U.S. population], the lowest number since the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies began tracking diversity at political conventions 40 years ago. Each night, the overwhelmingly white audience watches a series of white politicians step to the lectern -- a visual reminder that no black Republican has served as a governor, U.S. senator or U.S. House member in the past six years.

The lack of diversity is out of sync with the demographic changes in the United States. Twenty-four state delegations at the Xcel Energy Center have no black members at all. A few weeks ago Simon wrote about the Census Bureau reporting that racial and ethnic minorities will make up a majority of the country's population by 2042 -- almost a decade earlier than what the bureau predicted just four years ago. Two-thirds of Americans are non-Hispanic whites, 12.4 percent are black and 14.8 percent are Hispanic,according to 2006 census numbers. Not only is the party out of sync - it appears Republicans are making a concerted effort to ignore the multiplicity of nationalities and races in the United States, as they propose to eliminate all non-citizens from being counted in the next Census.

Only a few years ago, Republicans talked publicly about the party's aspirations to diversify -- So what happened? As in so many other areas, the Republican Party has no record and no proposals to offer any particular demographic. The party made a concerted effort to court Hispanics in 2004, but NDN has tracked how the GOP's electoral gains under George W. Bush have been diminished by the hard-line stance many Republicans have taken on immigration.

A black Republican delegate from Texas, Tony Leatherman agreed, "You see what Obama has done, and it's a reminder of what's possible." But the Republicans have proven that they are too cynical to consider what's possible, they're too busy trying to glorify the past in order to avoid dealing with the reality of today and the very real challenges of tomorrow. They demonstrate this by focusing on putting down their opponent - a product of the bi-racial, multi-cultural society in which most of America lives, instead of developing solutions that can appeal to the wide array of Americans. As Sally Quinn wrote, describing how the two parties are worlds apart: some people might want to live in McCain's or Sarah Palin's world, "but I believe that we live in Obama's world."

Zuraya Tapia-Alfaro's picture

Internship Opportunities at NDN

Please pass on to college-age students or graduates that you feel could contribute to NDN: NDN still has openings for paid internships during the Fall Semester for college-age students interested in a career in politics. Interns will work on a variety of tasks, including, but not limited to the following initiatives:

- Fundraising/Development - The development intern will seek to build skills necessary to advance in 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) fundraising by becoming familiar with the processes used to raise money. He or she will develop donor research, outreach and solicitation skills with regards to NDN’s institutional and individual contributors. The successful applicant will have strong organizational and research skills, an ability to work independently on assigned projects, and an interest in fundraising.

- Green Project - The Green Project intern will assist with research and writing on energy and economic policy. A successful applicant will have an understanding of politics and economics, and have a demonstrated interest in energy or environmental policy. An academic background in political science, economics, or a related field is preferred.

- Hispanic Programs - The intern for NDN’s Hispanic Programs will report to the Deputy Director and Director of this area, will assist in research and writing on Latin American politics and issues, as well as research and writing on issues of importance to the Hispanic community in the U.S. The candidate must be fully bilingual in English and Spanish. A background in politics, International Relations, and/or Latin American studies is preferred.

- Internet/Communications - The Communications intern will assist with website management, as well as help manage NDN’s Facebook and Twitter accounts. This intern will also assist with press relations. Experience in web design is required and experience in political communications is preferred.

- Writer/Researcher - This intern will report to the President and VP for Communications and conduct general research and writing for the organization. This work will cover broad issue areas including politics and foreign affairs. Excellent writing and research skills and a background in politics or related field are required.

In addition to the tasks above, interns will be expected to assist staff in event management, promotion, and marketing as well as database management. Applicants will be chosen based on fit for the position and organization, prior experience and demonstrated interest, and ability to work as close to 30 hours a week as possible.

To apply, e-mail your resume, cover letter, and a brief writing sample to jobs@ndn.org. Please indicate the specific departmental or programmatic area to which you are applying as well as the number of hours per week you are able to work.

Zuraya Tapia-Alfaro's picture

Very Different Party Platforms on Immigration

I am disheartened to read the Republican platform, presented yesterday at their Convention. In the area of immigration, once again, the party has shown their temperment, short-sightedness, and intolerance. I am even sorrier to see that the man who was once a champion of Immigration Reform, John McCain, is either not strong enough to stand up to the radical party base, or doesn't want to. It is telling that the section on immigration in the RNC platform is under "Defending Our Nation, Supporting Our Heroes, Securing the Peace" - again implying that 1) all immigrants are undocumented, and 2) all immigrants inherently pose some sort of danger, grasping at the irrational fear that's intended to move everday Americans to hate immigrants of all colors and creeds and to support the conservative base. But I shouldn't be surprised by the offensive nature of the RNC platform, after all, just today, in trying to "appeal" to Hispanic voters, Sen. McCain's campaign manager Rick Davis said that Republicans had to offer this demographic something "other than a deportation center" - but if he's appealing to Hispanic voters, his comment is pretty offensive - equating all the undocumented with Hispanics, and all Hispanic voters with the undocumented.

By contrast, the DNC platform includes immigration under the section entitled "Renewing the American Community," and is more concerned with modernizing and correcting the underlying flawed immigration system than with demonizing immigrants; more concerned with working with the countries of origin of immigrants and dealing with the causes of immigration than with building porous walls. The RNC platform tries to argue that Americans favor a mass deportation - that is not at all the case. Polling data consistently shows that American's favor a solution to the immigration issue at a federal level in the form of smarter laws, legalization for the undocumented, and smarter enforcement, not in the form of intolerance.

THE REPUBLICAN PLATFORM ON IMMIGRATION

"Defending Our Nation,

Supporting Our Heroes, Securing the Peace


Immigration, National Security, and the Rule of Law

Immigration policy is a national security issue, for which we have one test: Does it serve the national interest? By that standard, Republicans know America can have a strong immigration system without sacrificing the rule of law. Border security is essential to national security. In an age of terrorism, drug cartels, and criminal gangs, allowing millions of unidentified persons to enter and remain in this country poses grave risks to the sovereignty of the United States and the security of its people. We simply must be able to track who is entering and leaving our country. Our determination to uphold the rule of law begins with more effective enforcement, giving our agents the tools and resources they need to protect our sovereignty, completing the border fence quickly and securing the borders, and employing complementary strategies to secure our ports of entry. Experience shows that enforcement of existing laws is effective in reducing and reversing illegal immigration. Our commitment to the rule of law means smarter enforcement at the workplace, against illegal workers and lawbreaking employers alike, along with those who practice identity theft and traffic in fraudulent documents. As long as jobs are available in the United States, economic incentives to enter illegally will persist. But we must empower employers so they can know with confidence that those they hire are permitted to work. That means that the EVerify system-which is an internet-based system that verifies the employment authorization and identity of employees-must be reauthorized. A phased-in requirement that employers use the E-Verify system must be enacted.

The rule of law means guaranteeing to law enforcement the tools and coordination to deport criminal aliens without delay - and correcting court decisions that have made deportation so difficult. It means enforcing the law against those who overstay their visas, rather than letting millions flout the generosity that gave them temporary entry. It means imposing maximum penalties on those who smuggle illegal aliens into the U.S., both for their lawbreaking and for their cruel exploitation. It means requiring cooperation among federal, state and local law enforcement and real consequences, including the denial of federal funds, for self-described sanctuary cities, which stand in open defiance of the federal and state statutes that expressly prohibit such sanctuary policies, and which endanger the lives of U.S. citizens. It does not mean driver's licenses for illegal aliens, nor does it mean that states should be allowed to flout the federal law barring them from giving in-state tuition rates to illegal aliens, nor does it mean that illegal aliens should receive social security benefits, or other public benefits, except as povided by federal aw. We oppose amnesty. The rule of law suffers if government policies encourage or reward illegal activity. The American people's rejection of enmasse legalizations is especially appropriate given the federal government's past failures to enforce the law.

Embracing Immigrant Communities

Today's immigrants are walking in the steps of most other Americans' ancestors, seeking the American dream and contributing culturally and economically to our nation. We celebrate the industry and love of liberty of hese fellow Americans. Both government and the private sector must do more to foster legally present immigrants' integration into American life to advance respect for the rule of law and a common American identity. It is a national disgrace that the first experience most new Americans have is with a dysfunctional immigration bureaucracy defined by delay and confusion; we will no longer tolerate those failures. In our multiethnic nation, everyone - immigrants and native-born alike - must embrace our core values of liberty, equality, meritocracy, and respect for human dignity and the rights of women. One sign of our unity is our English language. For newcomers, it has always been the fastest route to prosperity in America. English empowers. We support English as the official language in our nation, while welcoming the ethnic diversity in the United States and the territories,including language. Immigrants should be encouraged to learn English. English is the accepted language of business, commerce, and legal proceedings, and it is essential as a unifying cultural force. It is also important, as part of cultural integration, that our schools provide better education in U.S. history and civics for all children, thereby fostering a commitment to our national motto, E Pluribus Unum. We are grateful to the thousands of new immigrants, many of them not yet citizens, who are serving in the Armed Forces. Their patriotism is inspiring; it should remind the institutions of civil society of the need to embrace newcomers, assist their journey to full citizenship, and help their communities void patterns of isolation.

Welcoming Refugees
Our country continues to accept refugees from troubled lands all over the world. In some cases, these are people who stood with America in dangerous times, and they have first call on our hospitality. We oppose, however, the ranting of refugee status on the basis of lifestyle or other non-political factors."

THE DEMOCRATIC PLATFORM ON IMMIGRATION

Renewing the American Community

Immigration

America has always been a nation of immigrants. Over the years, millions of people have come here in the hope that in America, you can make it if you try. Each successive wave of immigrants has contributed to our country's rich culture, economy and spirit. Like the immigrants that came before them, today's immigrants will shape their own destinies and enrich our country.

Nonetheless,our current immigration system has been broken for far too long. We need comprehensive immigration reform, not just piecemeal efforts. We just work together to pass immigration reform in a way that unites this country not in a way that divides us by playing on our worst instincts and fears. We are committed to pursuing tough, practical, and humane immigration reform immigration reform in the first year of the next administration. For the millions living here illegally but otherwise playing by the rules, we must require them to come out of the shadows and get right with the law. We support a system that requires undocumented immigrants who are in good standing to pay a fine, pay taxes, learn English, and go to the back of the line for the opportunity to become citizens. They are our neighbors, and we can help them become full tax paying, law-abiding, productive members of society.

Atthe same time, we cannot continue to allow people to enter the United States undetected, undocumented, and unchecked. The American people are welcoming and generous people, but those who enter our country's borders illegally, and those who employ them, disrespect the rule of the law. We need to secure our borders, and support additional personnel, infrastructure and technology on the border and at our ports of entry. We need additional Customs and Border Protection agents equipped with better technology and real-time intelligence. We need to dismantle human smuggling organizations, combating the crime associated with this trade. We also need to do more to promote economic development in migrant-sending nations, to reduce incentives to come to the United States illegally. And we need to crack down on employers who hire undocumented immigrants, especially those who pay their workers less than the minimum wage. It's a problem when we only enforce our laws against the immigrants themselves, with raids that are ineffective, tear apart families and leave people detained without adequate access to counsel. We realize that employers need a method to verify whether their employees are legally eligible to work in the U.S., and will ensure that our system is accurate, fair to legal workers, safeguards people's privacy, and cannot be used to discriminate against workers.

We must also improve the legal immigration system, and make our nation's naturalization process fair and accessible to the thousands of legal permanent residents who are eager to become full Americans. We should fix the dysfunctional immigration bureaucracy that hampers family reunification, the cornerstone of our immigration policy for years. Given the importance of both keeping families together and supporting American businesses, we will increase the number of immigration visas for family members of people living here and for immigrants who meet the demand for jobs that employers cannot fill, as long as appropriate labor market protections and standards are in place. We will fight discrimination against Americans who have always played by our immigration rules but are sometimes treated as if they had not.

Zuraya Tapia-Alfaro's picture

Words Have Consequences

"Under siege," "pro-illegal alien," "open-borders lobby," the U.S. being "overrun" by immigrants, immigrants causing a "crime wave." These are the words we hear every day in news casts, city council meetings, political advertisements, and that we see on websites, intended to cause a great panic in every community. Isolated incidents are blown up to seem like "epidemics." In a time of economic crisis, and with the changing demographics of the United States (not only due to immigration), hate groups have found a scapegoat in Hispanics, and the latest victim of their angry rhetoric is Luis Ramirez, a Hispanic recently beaten to death by a group of teenagers in Shenandoah, PA - just 20 miles from Hazelton, the first locality to attempt to pass a slew of anti-immigrant laws after the failed Comprehensive Reform Legislation bill in the U.S. Congress, and where Lou Barletta has a very directed anti-Hispanic, "anti-immigrant" campaign. The trend of hate crimes against Hispanics has been growing, and it is particularly frightening considering that the changing demographics of the U.S. is a reality - as Conor Dougherty from the Wall Street Journal reports, the Hispanic population continues to spread beyond traditional "gateway cities."

Maria Anglin, from MySanAntonio.com (yes, the news of this crime horrifies people all over the country) summarizes the job of Lou Dobbs, Bill O'Reilly, Glenn Beck, and others like them.

Fear, anger and disappointment are emotions that surge within all of us. The young men charged in the attack, who said they'd been drinking, weren't unruly kids always getting into scrapes with the town cops; they're reportedly good kids who made good grades and participated in high school sports. In other words, young Americans ready to take on the future before fear, anger and disappointment turned a not-particularly-imposing immigrant into the "boogeyman."

There is a fear in America that immigrants, especially Mexicans, will change America. They want to speak Spanish whenever they please; that kind of thing stirs fears that can blossom into a full panic. It's no wonder hate crimes happen; nobody likes the boogeyman. There are those who have made high-profile careers out of fueling fear, anger and disappointment; who dole out large doses of carefully crafted hate speech, gloomy forecasts and xenophobic fear of outsiders to millions of good people itching to blame someone for everything from the price of gasoline to salmonella outbreaks to every crack-cocaine death in America.

And if it's true that immigrants, just by being in the country's classrooms, restaurants and front yards, have the power to shift the nation's values, it is also true that it doesn't take much goading by some wise guy on TV - or a parent, relative, neighbor, family friend, teacher, mentor or politician - to tilt the balance of fear, anger and disappointment in teenagers learning to find their way in the world into the realm of full-blown hate.

Packs of angry boys can be dangerous; the mob mentality that takes over can turn even the harmless kid who eats paste into a hell of a lot of trouble. Add a little underage drinking and things can get ugly really fast. But those who fan the flames of fear, anger and disappointment are much scarier.

These words are tactfully employed to instill fear in the hearts of all Americans, and then one is made to think you're not "American" if you don't feel that fear and hate. Below are a few examples of those who fuel the fire. Just THIS MORNING, CNN reported on marijuana being farmed on the border, and instead of focusing on the drug problem, or asking what the U.S. and Mexico are doing to fight the drug cartels, the CNN reporter volunteers how it "infuriates" a lot of people, "that people can cross ilegally into this country.." - which has nothing to do with the issue at hand and doesn't address the problem.

Video on the Luis Ramirez murder:


Immigrants accused of being the source of illnesses:



Examples of "Fear and Loathing" against Hispanics/immigrants on major networks:


Neighbors upset that Hispanics live in Prince William County, VA:


Cory Stewart, the man who pushed for local law enforcement to develop a way to identify "probable cause" for believing someone was undocumented, essentially racial profiling. 


Hispanic U.S. Citizens are questioned by police for "appearing" to be undocumented.   


And my personal favorite: being called "Mexican trash" by minutemen outside of NCLR's Annual Conference (it wasn't just me, the guy was calling "La Raza," i.e., all Hispanics, "Mexican trash"...in Spanish.


Zuraya Tapia-Alfaro's picture

The Peruvian Quagmire

I want to share an interesting Gallup poll released today that helps shine some light on political tensions in Peru. Throughout the country, the people polled identified themselves as more socialist than capitalist in their personal beliefs (49%), while only 16% identified themselves as more capitalist in their beliefs. However, 45% of Peruvians believe their country is more capitalist than socialist. It's telling that only in the South of Peru did a majority of those polled identify themselves as socialist (57%) - this raises the question of whether there is a disconnect between the more rural South and the rest of the country's market economy. Click here for Gallup's analysis.

Zuraya Tapia-Alfaro's picture

More Than Just "Novelas"

As mentioned in NDN's report, Hispanics Rising 2, the growth of Spanish-speaking media is on the rise. In an article this week, the Associated Press reports: Spanish-speaking news casts are eclipsing their English-language competitors in major media markets all over the country: in New York, within the past few months, WXTV's 6 p.m. newscast has eclipsed its English-speaking competitors on ABC, CBS, and NBC stations in popularity among viewers younger than 49. This reflects a trend mentioned in NDN's report: among 25-54 year-olds, the September 9, 2007 Presidential debate on Univision had the largest viewership of any debate - with 1,166,000 viewers. Case and point of the growing influence of the Hispanic viewership: the Nevada State Democratic Party just named Emilia Pablo , reporter and producer for two years at Univision and one of the most recognized faces in the Las Vegas Valley, as its new spokeswoman.

In Los Angeles, KMEX had more viewers in June for its newscast than any of its English competitors, regardless of age, according to Nielsen Media Research.

"It talks about how the United States is changing," said Ray Rodriguez, president and chief operating officer of Univision Communications, Inc. "It's a bigger story than just television." One startling change has been the TV-watching habits of Hispanic viewers. In 1995, most Hispanic viewers in New York primarily watched English-language television (62 percent) over Spanish-language stations (38 percent), according to Nielsen Media Research. Last year, viewers favored the Spanish stations 71 to 29 percent.

This trend might alarm those who believe that it's because these new residents and citizens are not assimilating into the United States, but Univision executives have analyzed the viewership and explain: the majority of their viewers are bilingual. As Maelia Macin, Station Manager for KMEX in California explains, "The choice is made more for content than language."

Spanish-language news more aggressively cultivates the relationship with the largest growing demographic in the country by trying to be a resource for them in all areas of life: everything from participating in local community events, to running voter mobilization campaigns, health symposiums, etc. General news is not excluded, it's just packaged differently - in addition to covering the National Football or Baseball League, Spanish-language media also covers major soccer games in Latin America - when rivals were preoccupied with Christy Brinkley's divorce and the capture of a Brooklyn murder suspect, New York's WXTV led its local news with a story about graffiti saying "Get out of the USA " painted near a Peruvian restaurant on Long Island. The Spanish-speaking Univision affiliate figured it was a more meaningful story for its audience, and those kinds of choices are paying off.

Zuraya Tapia-Alfaro's picture

McCain Don't Know Much About Geography

As Simon has commented, U.S. Sen. John McCain's ads exceedingly reflect a new Rovian approach to this election, and he's not limiting himself to attacking in one language...this latest ad in Spanish, called "The World According to Barack Obama" intends to promote the notion among Hispanic voters that according to Barack Obama, Latin American countries somehow "don't count" in the world because he didn't discuss Latin America during his trip to EUROPE ("but entire nations were forgotten.."), by asking voters: "and where is Latin America?", "and what about Latinos?", "Did he forget about us?" The ad is flawed in that Barack Obama's trip through Europe, and his speech in Berlin, was intended to discuss issues related to joint U.S. and EU policy.  As Jake and I were discussing, there's this thing called the Monroe Doctrine that would make it unseemingly to say the least for the U.S. to invite European nations to strategize over Latin American policy. But since when have Rovian tactics had any regard for honesty and accuracy?  


Zuraya Tapia-Alfaro's picture

A New Immigration Strategy - Deport Yourself!

This past Sunday, Assistant Secretary for Customs and Immigration Enforcement (ICE), Julie Myers, announced a new pilot program called "Operation Scheduled Departure" on Univision's political show, Al Punto. The idea is to "invite" all the undocumented immigrants who have already undergone immigration proceedings and have been issued a removal order (called non-criminal fugitives by ICE) to approach their local ICE office to begin their deportation. Why didn't we think of that before?! ICE reports that there are 400,000 people who currently fit that description. People who are not eligible for the program are all the undocumented immigrants who have not yet undergone removal proceedings (i.e., have not been caught), and any with a criminal conviction. However, when Ms. Myers "invited" all the viewers of the channel with the largest Hispanic audience in the country to participate, she omitted this detail, making it sound like anyone who is currently undocumented can participate. Not to mention, the policy is contradictory - during this same interview, Ms. Myers herself stated, "When I speak to people in the [ICE] detention centers and I ask if they plan on coming back [to the U.S.], they say ‘of course I'm coming back - that person always gives me a job.'"

During a conference call today with Congressional staffers, ICE officials had a hard time selling the program. Before promoting this program among people in their districts, staffers understandably pressed for answers: "What would be the benefit of participating?" DHS says: Well, they'd avoid risking being caught in a raid (another one, I guess, because they've already been caught, right?) and this way they'd have time to make "all necessary arrangements". Brilliant! It sounds like a concierge service. "Would turning oneself in count towards a legal status?" No. "Would participating in the program grant reprieve from the statutory bars that prohibit re-entry into the U.S.?" No. "Could people just leave of their own accord, without reporting to ICE, and then report their departure to a consulate abroad?" Sure, that's still their choice. Hmmmm...I could almost hear everyone on the phone scratching their head. "What about countries that refuse to issue travel documents, or won't accept their nationals back?" Yeah, then those folks would remain in the U.S. under ICE supervision indefinitely. Sounds like they've really thought this through. ICE could not provide me with the cost of the pilot program, and they couldn't tell us what results they expect to have. So I still don't understand the point of this program - a program that will only be in five cities (Santa Ana, CA, San Diego, CA, Chicago, IL, Pheonix, AZ, and Charlotte, NC), to - ideally - schedule the deportation of 400,000 people during a three-week window (August 5-27). I agree with Doug Rivlin, from National Immigration Forum, "It's pure fantasy." Even Ira Mehlman, spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform, the largest anti-immigrant lobby group, agreed, "The government would have to offer some kind of incentive to entice immigrants to sign up."

Yet another example of the short-sighted, uninformed, and inadequate policies of this Administration. To us at NDN, this is not a solution to the problem. Instead of laughable policies like this, DHS should channel its resources towards dealing with its own backlog, which is keeping many from obtaining legal status, and it should help Congress pass comprehensive immigration reform to address the flaws in immigration law, provide a pathway to citizenship for those who fulfill certain requirements, and deal with the issue of future flow of immigrants.

Zuraya Tapia-Alfaro's picture

The New Case Against Hispanics

On the CIS "report" that I mentioned yesterday - the premise of this paper, does demonstrate that CIS intends to argue that all undocumented immigrants are uneducated Hispanics and that all foreign-born, less-educated Hispanics in the United States are necessarily undocumented immigrants:

CIS ignores that undocumented immigration responds more to economic conditions than to immigration-enforcement measures. Data actually shows the economic downturn in many of the industries where undocumented immigrants tend to be employed (construction, service, and retail sectors) began well before August 2007 (as cited by CIS) - during the 1st quarter of 2007.

Undocumented immigrants themselves report that immigration-enforcement measures are not a deterrent. The Center for Comparative Immigration Studies at UC-San Diego performed an actual field study and found that 91 percent of individuals who intend to cross the border without documents see attempting to cross the border as "very dangerous," and nearly one-quarter know someone who has died while doing so. Additionally, over 90% of the people who intend to cross the border and believe crossing is "very dangerous" cross anyway. Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), Julie Myers, herself admitted during an interview with Univision, that when she asks ICE detainees if they're going to try to cross again, by far most of them say yes.

CIS repeatedly contradicts and undermines its own conclusions. Although no "evidence" is given, CIS posits:"there is good evidence that the illegal population grew last summer while Congress was considering legalizing illegal immigrants. When that legislation failed to pass, the illegal population began to fall almost immediately." Hmm - so these less-educated Spanish-speaking Hispanics (per CIS) were just glued to CPSAN and taking cues from the Senate floor to decide what to do. But CIS then observes (in a footnote), that "illegal immigrant employment is partly seasonal, with more in the country during the summer months [when the immigration debate took place] when employment increases in agriculture, construction, and the hospitality industry."

CIS suggests that the solution to undocumented immigration is more deportation-only measures, a continued economic downturn, and a vow of silence by presidential candidates. CIS also warns that, "Presumably, since even talking about comprehensive immigration reform in the United States could spark a sudden rush of Mexicans across the border, presidential candidates should simply ignore the issue." Great, because ignoring issues always makes them disappear. That is SOUND policy right there.

Border enforcement alone doesn't remedy, it exacerbates the broken immigration system. Since 1993 there has been a 322% increase in the budget of the border patrol. The result has been that during this period of tighter enforcement, the undocumented population has more than doubled in size. It's like a balloon - when enforcement clamps down in Yuma,AZ, crossings through Yuma might decrease, but they increase in San Diego - people find an alternative route. Border enforcement by itself has only helped get "coyotes" (smugglers) more business - the cost of crossing illegally has gone from $975 in 1995 to $2,124 in 2007.

We need a real solution: The answer is not found in blatant anti-Hispanic propaganda, nor in "ignoring" proposals to reform the immigration system, as CIS suggests. A real solution to the problem is to begin by engaging the countries from which immigrants originate (not just Mexico) and share the responsibility of ensuring that economic conditions in the world are such that people can make a living at home. It's necessary to reform the entire visa and legal immigration system, internal and external enforcement, eliminate the backlog that keeps many in uncertain status, and provide a pathway to earned citizenship. Deportation-only strategies do nothing to actually address the problem.