Click to read Subcomandante Marcos' Speech

September 11, 2003

Do as the U.S. says, not as it does.

The Price of Mexican Dignity-It's up to consumers.

Que es Globalization?

Call Me a Bush-Hater!

What exactly is imperialism?

States Where Latinos are the largest Minority

"Is our children learning"

By Erika Robles/HispanicVista.com

In order to answer Bushs widely quoted question: Is our children learning? we need to take a closer look at how public schools are performing and how they have been affected by the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act. The Act makes the most sweeping change in decades in the role federal and state governments play in the nations schools.

While the ideals advocated in NCLB are commendable, the realities of the Bush plan are not. It imposes strict and expensive mandates on public schools. A recent study by the New Hampshire School Administrators Association estimated that even with the funding increases that the Bush Administration is providing to fund the Act, the federal government will give New Hampshire schools only about $80 per student, while costing the state $575 a student to implement NCLB. According to the House Appropriations Committee, Bush's 2004 budget under funds the act by $9.7 billion, leaving local communities many already facing severe budget gaps to make up the difference. (The budget also eliminated funding for rural education, gifted-and talented programs, small schools, and technical education.)

On the other hand, the NCLB Act requires that at least 95 percent of all students enrolled in a school district take a math and reading test. For the 2003-2004 school year, each grade level must have at least 45 percent of the students at the proficient or advanced level in reading and 35 percent at the same level in math. (Every state must set a standard for the reading and math performance of its students. Students who meet or exceed that standard are considered proficient) In addition to the above items, the Junior-Senior High school must maintain a graduation rate of at least 95 percent or higher to make Average Yearly Progress (AYP). Schools that fail to make AYP in any of the above areas are put on a list for a warning, school improvement or corrective action.

Nobody argues that performance standards arent good. But when those standards fail to take into account the realities of teaching children with disadvantages economically disadvantaged, language barriers, minorities, children with special needs - fails to fully fund the federal mandate and judges adequate progress using a one-size-fits all formula, the neediest children will certainly be the ones left behind. Special education kids, for instance, have to take these standardized tests prepared for their age level, rather than their mental age or IQ. Also, the performance of economically disadvantaged groups must be compared to students who are not economically disadvantaged. And the Bush Administration pushing the testing has reneged on the funds needed to help these kids through testing and assist schools full of kids facing the academic hardships created by extreme poverty.

Educators know and research confirms the types of programs which can close the education gap: highly qualified teachers and para-educators; sound professional development; early childhood programs; all-day kindergarten; small class sizes in the primary grades; highly involved parents, guardians and community; mentoring and tutoring; and quality summer programs. These services and programs will make a difference in a child's ability to meet and exceed NCLB and established state achievement standards; but theres no funding for such programs. Instead, schools identified as failing or in need of improvement get sanctioned and Title I funds are further reduced.

Identify schools as failures, order them to improve, then take away the money that will make improvements possible, said Houston of the American Association of School Administrators.

The assumption of the NCLB system is that the test results represent what an educated person should know and be able to do. Few would say that an educated person only has high test scores. Most would say good scores are desirable but not sufficient to define an educated person. Most would say that schools must also produce good citizens, strong family members, contributors to society, and people engaged in democratic governance. None of these characteristics are measured by or deemed of importance in the federal accountability system.

"You teach a child to read, and he or her will be able to pass a literacy test,'' Bush said (Townsend, Tenn., Feb. 21, 2001). One just needs to pay attention to Bushs grammar to know that scores alone dont mean you are an educated person.

READ ALL ABOUT IT.... 2003 10 Worst Corporations
Read them and weep!



ZNet Commentary
The 10 Worst Corporations of 2003 February 18, 2004
By Russell Mokhiber and Robert Weissman

Bayer:
2003 may be remembered as the year of the headache at Bayer. In May, the company agreed to plead guilty to a criminal count and pay more than $250 million to resolve allegations that it denied Medicaid discounts to which it was
entitled. The company was beleaguered with litigation related to its
anti-cholesterol drug Baycol.
Bayer pulled the drug -- which has been linked to a sometimes fatal muscledisorder -- from the market, but is facing thousands of suits from patients who
allege they were harmed by the drug. In June, the New York Times reported oninternal company memos which appear to show that the company continued topromote the drug even as its own analysis had revealed the dangers of the
product. Bayer denies the allegations.

Boeing:
In one of the grandest schemes of corporate welfare in recent memory,Boeing engineered a deal whereby the Pentagon would lease tanker planes -- 767sthat refuel fighter planes in the air -- from Boeing. The pricetag of $27.6billion was billions more than the cost of simply buying the planes. The dealmay unravel, though, because the company in November fired for wrongdoing boththe employee that negotiated the contract for Boeing (the company's chieffinancial officer), and the employee that negotiated the contract for the
government. How could Boeing fire a Pentagon employee? Simple. She was no longera Pentagon employee. Boeing had hired her shortly after the company clinched the
deal.

Brighthouse:
A new-agey advertising/consulting/ strategic advice company,
Brighthouse's claim to infamy is its Neurostrategies Institute, which undertakesresearch to see how the brain responds to advertising campaigns. In acutting-edge effort to extend and sharpen the commercial reach in ways never
previously before possible, the institute is using MRIs to monitor activity inpeople's brains triggered by advertisements.

Clear Channel:
The radio behemoth Clear Channel specializes in consuming or
squashing locally owned radio stations, imposing a homogenized music play liston once interesting stations, and offering cultural support for U.S. imperialadventures. It has also compiled a record of "repeated law-breaking,"accordingto our colleage Jim Donahue, violating the law -- including prohibitions on
deceptive advertising and on broadcasting conversations without obtainingpermission of the second party to the conversation -- on 36 separate occasions
over the previous three years.

Diebold:
A North Canton, Ohio-based company that is one of the largest U.S.voting machine manufacturers, and an aggressive peddler of its electronic votingmachines, Diebold has managed to demonstrate that it fails any reasonable test
of qualifications for involvement with the voting process. Its CEO has worked asa major fundraiser for President George Bush. Computer experts revealed seriousflaws in its voting technology, and activists showed how careless it was with
confidential information. And it threatened lawsuits against activists whopublished on the Internet documents from the company showing its failures.

Halliburton:
Now the owner of the company which initially drafted plans forprivatization of U.S. military functions -- plans drafted during the Bush Iadministration when current Vice President and former Halliburton CEO DickCheney was Secretary of Defense -- Halliburton is pulling in billions in
revenues for contract work -- providing logistical support ranging from oil tofood -- in Iraq. Tens of millions, at least, appear to be overcharges. Someanalysts say the charges for oil provision amount to "highway robbery."

HealthSouth:
Fifteen of its top executives have pled guilty in connection with amulti-billion dollar scheme to defraud investors, the public and the U.S.
government about the company's financial condition.
The founder and CEO of the company that runs a network of outpatient surgery,diagnostic imagery and rehabilitative healthcare centers, Richard Scrushy, is
fighting the charges. But thanks to the slick maneuvering of attorney BobBennett, it appears the company itself will get off scot free -- no indictments,
no pleas, no fines, no probation.

Inamed:
The California-based company sought Food and Drug Administration approval for silicone breast implants, even though it was not able to present long-term safety data -- the very thing that led the FDA to restrict sales of
silicone implants a decade ago. In light of what remains unknown and what is known about the implants' effects -- including painful breast hardening which can lead to deformity, and very high rupture rates -- the FDA in January 2004 denied Inamed's application for marketing approval.

Merrill Lynch:
This company keeps messing up. Fresh off of a $100 million fine levied because analysts were recommending stocks that they trashed in private e-mails, the company saw three former execs indicted for shady dealings with
Enron. The company itself managed to escape with something less than a slap on the wrist -- no prosecution in exchange for "oversight."

Safeway:
One of the largest U.S. grocery chains, Safeway is leading the charge to demand givebacks from striking and locked out grocery workers in Southern California. Along with Albertsons and Ralphs (Kroger's), Safeway's Vons and
Pavilion stores are asking employees to start paying for a major chunk of their health insurance. Under the company's proposals, workers and their families will lose $4,000 to $6,000 a year in health insurance benefits.

January 17, 2004



Blacks and Latinos Try to Find Balance in Touchy New Math



By MIREYA NAVARRO







The Web site for Black Entertainment Television put the question bluntly: "Does it bother you that Hispanics now outnumber African-Americans in the U.S.?"



The response has been torrential. One visitor to the site wrote, "Blacks are beginning to experience another wave of racial bias and favoritism not in our favor." The writer complained that employers now have a preference for bilingual applicants, and bemoaned "attempts to replace our threatening stance against discrimination with a Hispanic vote."



But another cautioned: "Sounds like the same old trick to me. `Divide and conquer.' Are we really going to let some numbers dictate how we treat one another?"



The BET.com message board is only one forum, but it has evoked some of the emotions, worries, hopes and even awkwardness that have been felt nationwide over a singular moment in American demographics. Last summer, the Census Bureau announced that Latinos had surpassed blacks as the country's largest minority, with blacks making up 13.1 percent of the population in 2002, and Hispanics 13.4 percent.



That statistical shift, years in the making, hardly came as a surprise. Yet it has captured the attention of both Latinos and blacks, who have been grappling with its meaning in meeting rooms, on radio shows and on the Internet.



Those conversations have raised hard questions: Does the ascendance of Hispanics mean a decline in the influence of blacks? Does it doom, or encourage, alliances between the two groups? Does the old formula for those alliances shared grievances have much meaning given the diversity of income and status even within each group?



The rising number of Latinos has not escaped the notice of whites or other groups, whether in business or politics. President Bush's recent proposal to grant temporary visas to illegal immigrants is seen by many as just the latest effort to woo the Hispanic vote. But many blacks and Hispanic Americans say the demographic milestone has special meaning for the nation's two largest minority groups, forcing them to reassess a relationship that has sometimes brought cooperation, and sometimes conflict.



Many Latinos feel their growing numbers have finally grabbed the notice of black leaders.



"They realize we're a force to be reckoned with already," said Lou Sobh, chairman of the National Association of Hispanic Automobile Dealers. "There are some African-Americans that are going to see us as a threat, but a lot see the necessity of using each other."



Mr. Sobh's group agreed last year to merge with the black-led National Association of Minority Automobile Dealers after receiving assurances that the Latinos would be equal partners.



"The census was just something that demanded the focus of attention of anyone involved in business," said Sheila Vaden-Williams, president of the latter association. Uniting with the Latino group, she said, can help her members appeal to the growing Latino market and persuade carmakers to raise the proportion of new-car dealerships owned by minorities to 15 percent from the current 5 percent.



Not every discussion has been so fruitful. When a panel of blacks and Latinos gathered last fall at the annual meeting of the Congressional Black Caucus to address the issue "How Will the Growth of the Hispanic Population Affect the African-American Community?" many people came away unhappy.



One panelist, Arturo Vargas, the executive director of the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials, said afterward that he felt "a degree of anger" over the hostility he sensed in questions from the mostly black audience about his stance on matters like illegal immigration and reparations for blacks. One questioner, Alona Clifton, a Democratic Party leader from the San Francisco area, said she left "extremely disappointed" that some Latino panelists like Mr. Vargas seemed uninformed about the issues she cared about.



The ill feeling has some people worried. Troubled by the way some news reports portrayed the new statistics as if Latinos were in a horse race against blacks, the Institute for Multiracial Justice in San Francisco, an organization that encourages better relations between ethnic groups, persuaded 45 Latino artists, professors and community leaders from around the country to sign an open letter "to our African-American brothers and sisters."



"In the Latino community," it said, "we will combat the competitiveness that could feed on those headlines."



The letter, sent last summer to African-American Web sites and published by several newspapers, got the biggest reaction in places with large black populations where the Latino population has soared, said Elizabeth Martinez, the institute's director. "You have neighborhoods that used to be all black and are now half Latino," she said. "People go into a hotel in Georgia, and the chambermaids used to be black and now they're Latina. The feeling is that they're taking over."



Keith Murphy, host of a radio call-in show in Milwaukee with a mostly African-American audience, devoted one show to discussing the letter. "It's still a matter of distrust," he said. "It's a feeling among African-Americans that Latinos are coming in and getting the jobs and are getting preferential treatment."



But many African-Americans and Latinos say that no two racial or ethnic groups could benefit as much from collaboration. The two find powerful common ground in their disproportionate numbers of the country's poor and their organizations' agreement on a long list of policy issues, including support for affirmative action and changes in the criminal justice system.



"We have as much or more in common than any two ethnic or racial groups in the country, and that's because of the phenomenon of racial discrimination and how it affects our community," said Hilary Shelton, director of the Washington bureau of the N.A.A.C.P.



Latinos and African-Americans need each other to pursue that joint agenda, Mr. Shelton and others said. While Latinos may dominate in sheer numbers, many are not citizens or are too young to vote, so their political clout is largely unrealized. They also have yet to achieve the power African-Americans have won in other arenas, including what one Latino leader called "gatekeeping positions" in corporations and foundations that determine hiring and funding of programs for other minorities.



In major cities like New York and Chicago, the two groups together make up a majority of the population. "Both groups have the capacity to either help or hurt each other," said Raul Yzaguirre, president of the National Council of La Raza, a civil rights group that works with African-American organizations.



But while there has been much joint work by black and Latino national groups around specific issues, alliances do not come naturally. In many places, the two groups have battled over political representation, jobs and public funding.



Many blacks and Latinos say the ideal of an enduring "rainbow coalition" is unrealistic.



Hugh Price, a former president of the National Urban League and now a senior adviser to the New York law firm Piper Rudnick, said the increasing fragmentation by class, culture and national origin within the two populations prevented much more than "floating coalitions around key issues."



Nicolas C. Vaca, a sociologist and lawyer in California, argues in his new book, "The Presumed Alliance: The Unspoken Conflict between Latinos and Blacks and What it Means for America" (Rayo, 2004), that the groups should not be expected to join forces automatically, given their differences and the tendency of ethnic groups in this country to look out for their own interests.



Some paramount concerns for many Latino organizations, like legalizing the status of illegal immigrants, conflict with those of black groups, such as the loss of unskilled jobs to those Latino workers, Mr. Vaca noted. And in places where one group dominates, as Latinos do in Miami and blacks do in Compton, Calif., he said, neither has shown more consideration for the other in sharing appointments and programs than when they had much less power.



"Whether you're an African-American in the South, or a Latino in California, you have the right to advance your own agenda," Mr. Vaca said. "To the extent they can do it cooperatively, great. To the extent they can't, they're going to have to work out some kind of strategy to avoid conflict."



Some collaborations come more easily than others.



When the Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees International Union called attention to immigrant rights last September by replicating the freedom rides that sought to integrate interstate bus and train terminals in the South in the early 1960's, it won the blessing of the N.A.A.C.P., the Congressional Black Caucus and the Coalition of Black Trade Unionists.



When Christy Haubegger was knocking on doors in the mid-1990's to sell investors on the idea of a magazine for Hispanic women, she found a kindred soul in Ed Lewis, the chairman and chief executive of Essence Communications, which publishes Essence, a magazine for African-American women. Mr. Lewis and Ms. Haubegger paired up to start Latina magazine, which is now owned by Solera Capital, with both Essence and Ms. Haubegger as minority shareholders.



Pulling together or staying apart sometimes depends on whether the black and Latino populations in an area have comparable status and see their fates as linked, said Gary M. Segura, a political science professor at the University of Iowa who has written about "black-brown" coalitions.



In New York, for instance, the 2001 mayoral race brought together blacks and Latinos in a political alliance to back the candidacy of Fernando Ferrer, who lost the Democratic primary. But that same year in Los Angeles, Latinos overwhelmingly supported Antonio Villaraigosa, the Latino former speaker of the State Assembly, while blacks threw their support behind James K. Hahn, the white city attorney who won the race.



Mr. Segura said one factor in black support for Mr. Hahn was the tension between the groups there. "In New York there's a Latino community, but the Latino community is not perceived as marginalizing the African-American community as it does in L.A." he said.



Some Latino groups, like Puerto Ricans and Dominicans, who themselves have large black populations, find more common ground with African-Americans than others. Mr. Segura said that Hispanics who were born in the United States and speak English were much more likely to perceive similarities with black Americans than their immigrant, Spanish-speaking counterparts.



But most Latinos and African-Americans have not lived in proximity until recently because of the concentration of blacks in the South and East and of Latinos in the Southwest.



As a result, conversations between the groups are taking place for the first time in places like Gainesville, Ga. Faye Bush, director of the New Town Florist Club, said her civil rights group started meetings last year with Latino groups to start bridging a divide that opened up as Latinos grew to a third of the city's population; blacks account for about 16 percent.



"They don't interact with each other," she said of the two groups. "Language is the biggest barrier."



At the state level, the Georgia Partnerships Network, a project of the Southern Regional Council, a civil rights organization, formed in 2002 to try to increase the joint political power of blacks and Latinos by coalescing on specific issues. One is allowing illegal immigrants to get driver's licenses, said Dwayne Patterson, director of racial unity programs for the council.



"It's only a very small effort around specific issues to build a relationship of trust and respect," he said. "You have two strong entities who are entering into a partnership. That's powerful. That's unprecedented in the South."

Revisiting history; More teachers are exploring the adverse effects of
California's missions on Indians
02/20/2004 - SACRAMENTO CA

By Stephen Magagnini -- Bee Staff Writer
The two sides of Father Junipero Serra took center stage last week at
Del
Paso Manor Elementary School in the Arden area, where 30 kids performed
a
musical titled "California Missions - and More!"
A pint-sized Father Serra declared, "I'm just a humble Franciscan friar
doing the best service I can," then sang cheerfully, "grain is rising,
so
civilizin."
But the Serra character was followed by a mournful chorus of California
Indians left homeless when the missions were sold off after Mexico
gained
its freedom from Spain in 1821.
"Where do we go? You gave us shoes and taught us how to plow/But all
the
land belongs to you now," they moaned in a minor key. "What do we do?
We've
lost the skills to hunt and to track/Too late to learn too late to turn
back."
Serra - who started the system of 21 California missions along El
Camino
Real ("The King's Highway") from San Diego to Sonoma built between 1769
and
1823 - looms large in California history. Schools, streets and parks
bear
his name. A larger-than-life statue of Serra perches piously in Capitol
Park. A 20-foot concrete-and-steel sculpture of Serra - a finger
pointing
out the path to heavenly enlightenment - sits off Interstate 280
("Father
Junipero Serra Highway") near Hillsborough.
But while Serra remains a candidate for sainthood - Pope John Paul II
beatified the priest in 1988 - a growing number of elementary school
teachers are gingerly exploring the devastating effect Serra's beloved
missions had on tens of thousands of California Indians who gave their
lives
and freedom to build and maintain them.
Each year in California, elementary school students, typically
fourth-graders, take up the role of the missions as they study the
state's
history.
Though fourth-grade textbooks have changed little in the last 30 years,
the
emergence of California Indians as a political and economic force has
generated new respect for Indian sovereignty and a less-sanitized view
of
California's mission history.
Judy Dronberger, whose students performed "California Missions - and
More!",
said that when she first began teaching six years ago, she taught
strictly
by the book sanctioned by the state Department of Education, which "led
kids
to the point where Father Serra was doing only what was right, he was
basically a good guy. It really doesn't question him."
Now, Dronberger and other teachers are using plays, videos, extra
readings
and field trips to missions so that kids can decide for themselves
whether
Serra was a saint or a sinner.
Dronberger's students - like many teachers - were divided on Serra's
sanctity. Jacob Cannon, the 8-year-old who played Serra, said that what
happened to the Indians "was cruel and shouldn't have been done, but it
wasn't his fault."
Jacob's classmate, Brooke Carroll, was less forgiving: "Trying to make
(Indians) into Christians was a good idea, but not making them into
slaves.
He tricked people into thinking he was a good guy, but in the end they
found
out he was sort of mean."
Before long, even Serra's image as a well-meaning missionary who wanted
to
"civilize" native Californians may fade into history.
Edward Castillo, chairman of the Native American studies department at
Sonoma State University, has received a state grant to revamp
California's
public school curriculum to address Indian sovereignty and more fully
explore the impact of missions on indigenous people.
"We want to put the Indian back in mission history, not just as
victims, but
as active participants," he said. "They had rebellions, they poisoned
priests, they occupied some missions and burned others to the ground."
Castillo, a California Indian from the Cahuilla and Luiseño nations,
said
his ancestors were enslaved at several missions. "My grandparents
called it
the 'slave church,' " he said.
His book on the impact of California's missions, "Indians, Franciscans
and
Spanish Colonization," paints a picture of genocide.
"About 70,000 Indians died at California missions from 1769 to 1837,
most
from measles, mumps and chickenpox, and there's not a single headstone
for
any one of them," Castillo said. "The average life span was 12. As they
were
dying, the fathers were saying, 'You're dying because you're pagan.' "
The missionaries, however, kept meticulous records of those who died
and
why, and Castillo said he helped raise $32,000 to erect a wall in 1998
at
the Sonoma mission listing the names of almost 700 Indians who died
there.
"We put an asterisk next to the children's names," he said.
Serra was more quixotic than demonic, Castillo said. "He really thought
he
could take these Indians and transform them into a perfect society
under the
careful tutelage and strict discipline of the missionaries. The
missions
were only supposed to last 10 years, then be turned over to the
Indians, but
the Indians kept dying off."
Castillo, a former public school teacher, doesn't think fourth-graders
need
all the gory details, such as how soldiers and some priests raped
Indian
women. "But you can teach that some of the mission soldiers were cruel
to
the Indians and stole their wives, and that some priests were good and
tried
to help the Indians," he said.
Castillo and Cindy LaMarr, president of the National Indian Education
Association, said it's up to individual teachers to give the Indian
perspective on California's missions.
Jennifer Stampfli, a teacher at Frontier Elementary School in Rio
Linda,
said that she wasn't satisfied with the standard fourth-grade textbook,
"Oh
California!" So Stampfli got her Parent Teacher Association to buy her
students "California Studies Weekly," a newspaper that gives a more
detailed
history of the mission era, including an account of 600 Kumeyaay
Indians who
revolted at Mission San Diego de Alcalá in 1775, burning it to the
ground.
"I realize I can speak the truth," said Stampfli, 27. " I don't have to
tell
what's exactly in the textbooks."
Serra is treated more charitably at Holy Family, a Catholic elementary
school in Citrus Heights.
"Father Serra is presented as a wonderful human being acting in
accordance
with his conscience," said Vice Principal Stephanie Jones. "He believed
the
native people needed to be disciplined and enlightened and - just as
they've
been taught about slavery - the children are taught that this was
thought to
be perfectly correct. We've come a long way since then."
Jones said Serra has a legitimate shot at sainthood.
"He brought Spanish architecture to California, he brought art, he
brought
education in a limited form to the Indians, he taught them basic
European
agriculture, and he brought Christianity and Catholicism to California,
which exerted positive forces and still do," she said.
But Jones said her students also are taught that Indians were
mistreated and
stripped of their culture.
"The teaching of history has changed as we have become a more educated
and
sensitive society," she said. "When I was a child ... in San Francisco
public schools in the 1940s - Father Serra was presented as an absolute
savior to the 'heathens.' "
Jones is happy today's kids get a less saccharine view of Serra. Her
fourth-graders now have a choice: They can make a model of a mission,
an
Indian settlement or a California ranchero.
"They're usually Styrofoam," she said.
"Things have improved since we had a classroom filled with ants from
the
sugar cube missions the kids used to make in the 1970s and 1980s."
Father Junipero Serra (1713-1784)
Father Junipero Serra grew up in on the Spanish island of Mallorca. He
was
educated by the Franciscans and was ordained at age 24. Serra taught
philosophy at a university for a dozen years before choosing to be a
New
World missionary in 1749. One theory is that he left Spain because he
feared
the Inquisition would punish him for having a Jewish grandfather. He
landed
in Vera Cruz, Mexico, then walked 260 miles to Mexico City, a trek that
left
him disabled for life. After Serra spent 20 years in Mexico, the king
of
Spain sent him to New California where on July 16, 1769, he founded San
Diego de Alcalá, the first of 21 missions on the El Camino Real. The
missions included presidios, or fortresses, occupied by Spanish
soldiers.

Fox seeks to open U.S. borders


By Audrey Hudson and James G. Lakely
THE WASHINGTON TIMES


Mexican President Vicente Fox yesterday said he favors open borders across North America, not amnesty for his countrymen illegally residing in the United States.
The alien work program announced last week by President Bush would not encourage aliens to remain in the United States, because they love their home country, the Mexican president told the "Fox News Sunday" program.
"We are not looking for an amnesty [for] Mexico. It's not that we're looking for these Mexicans working productively in the United States to become U.S. citizens. They like tacos, they like their families, they like their community, they like Mexico. Unfortunately, they don't have the opportunities that they would like to have as persons, so that's why they move," Mr. Fox said.
Mr. Fox said all immigration barriers should be removed to allow people to live and work in the country of their choosing, whether it be Mexico, the United States or Canada.
"On the long term, this North American bloc can be the leading bloc on the world and be the most competitive bloc on the world by working together and, through that, be able to keep increasing the quality and the level of life of our citizens," Mr. Fox said.
Mr. Bush heads to northern Mexico today to participate in the Summit of the Americas talks in Monterrey. A key subject will be his proposal allowing millions of Mexicans in this country illegally to remain for three years if they have jobs that citizens don't want.
Mr. Bush began lobbying Congress to pass a new alien work program in 2001, but the issue was sidelined after the September 11 terrorist attacks and renewed concerns over border security.
Critics say the program amounts to amnesty for illegal aliens because they can reapply for a second permit and stay in the United States an additional three years.
Commerce Secretary Donald L. Evans said there will be no guarantees for alien workers in this program.
"No guarantee they'll be able to stay permanently, and no guarantee they won't be able to stay permanently," Mr. Evans told CNN's "Late Edition."
"And what the president has said is that we've got to get a system in place that only allows legal immigrants to take jobs that may otherwise go to an American. It also will make our borders a lot safer."
Critics say the timing is suspect and that the proposal is an election-year ploy to garner Hispanic votes. Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut called it "an election-year conversion by George Bush."
The proposal is "a little step forward, but not enough," Mr. Lieberman told CNN. "We've got to find a way to make them legal, have them contribute to the system, become part of the American family, and then start again at trying to make the flow of immigration in here legal and not illegal."
National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice said the program will give Mexican workers "dignity."
"I can't think of anything better for a worker who has worked under these circumstances, kind of in the shadows in the United States, to finally have a way to come out of the shadows, to have certain protections that are not there now because they're having to live in the shadows, to have recognized that they are an important part of a strong American economy, and to get that kind of status," she said in a press briefing on Friday.
The Mexican government also will be expected to do a better job policing its border to protect its citizens, she said.
"The Mexican government doesn't like to see people trying to cross the border illegally, particularly because, just in even humanitarian terms, the harshness of what faces these people when they try to walk across the Rio Grande is really, really awful," Miss Rice said.
In addition to migration, world leaders at the summit will discuss the implications of international terrorism and poverty.
Mr. Bush meets today with Mr. Fox, Chilean President Ricardo Lagos and Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva.
Tomorrow, Mr. Bush will have his first private meeting with Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin, and later meet with President Nestor Kirchner of Argentina and Bolivian President Carlos Mesa.

Fox Supports Bush Proposal on Immigration

By DEB RIECHMANN
Associated Press Writer

MONTERREY, Mexico (AP) -- President Bush won strong support from Mexican President Vicente Fox on Monday for his new immigration proposals as the two leaders worked to smooth strained relations and pursue broader trade ties.

At a joint news conference, Fox, who opposed the war in Iraq, congratulated Bush for the capture of Saddam Hussein by American forces. "He will be taken to trial, to judgment. We fully support that," the Mexican president said.

Bush offered a forceful defense of the war, despite U.S. casualty totals approaching 500. "The decision I made is the right one for America. And history will provide it is the right one for the world," he said.

On another issue, Bush declined to criticize former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill, whose new book says the administration aimed to topple the Iraqi government even before the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks against the United States.

"First, let me say I appreciate former Secretary O'Neill's service to our country," he said. He said that when he became president, he inherited a policy of "regime change" from former President Clinton and adopted it as his own. "So we were fashioning policy along those lines and then all of a sudden Sept. 11 hit," he said.

LATEST NEWS
Bush, Fox Agree on Immigration, Iraq

Release of Jailed Nicaraguan Leader OK'd

U.S.-India to Expand Hi-Tech Cooperation

Summit of Americas Begins Amid Disputes

Text of Bush, Fox Comments



The leaders seemed eager to overcome past differences. Bush invited Fox to his ranch on March 5-6, and said at one point they were good enough friends to disagree "without the loss of friendship."

Bush said that both he and Fox were committed to free trade and that trade between the two countries had grown over the past decade - the lifespan of the North American Free Trade Agreement - from $100 billion to $232 billion.

Fox said Mexico had the lowest unemployment rate in the Americas, and he attributed that to the NAFTA treaty with the United States and Canada. "Trade undoubtedly reduces poverty. Trade among countries promotes human capital," he said.

The two countries are part of a broader new Central American trade pact that is awaiting approval by several governments.

The issues of Iraq and immigration had produced sustained disagreements over the past two years, and both came up at the news conference.

Fox said Bush's immigration proposal marked "a very important step forward," and said he hoped it would be approved by Congress.


The president is expected to unveil details of his plan as part of the State of the Union address on Jan. 20. Administration officials say the plan will provide legal status to millions of undocumented immigrants working in the United States. It is unclear how the proposal will be received by lawmakers.

"This plan is not amnesty," the president said of his plan to match workers with jobs. "I oppose amnesty because it encourages violation of our laws."

Speaking of Mexico and other countries, he said, "Our neighbors will benefit as productive citizens return home with money to invest" and help the economies in their own nations.

The trip was Bush's fourth to Mexico since he took office nearly three years ago, more than to any other country.

The Bush White House saw the face-to-face meeting not only as a chance to mend ties between the two countries, but also to earn some political capital for a president who wants a second term.

Bush arrived in this industrial city at midday at an airport where gun-carrying troops and security officers roamed the grounds. He and his wife, Laura, through a phalanx of Mexican officials - all men wearing dark suits.

The couple was followed in the procession of greeting by Secretary of State Colin Powell, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice and White House chief of staff Andy Card. Once in his motorcade, Bush passed large expanses of brush and cactus- covered land. Men digging ditches alongside the road stopped and leaned on their tools to watch him pass by.

On a 90-minute flight here from Texas, Bush got a briefing from Rice and Powell on the Summit of the Americas that Bush and Fox were attending, said press secretary Scott McClellan.

Bush dismayed Fox when he put immigration reform on the back burner after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks. Their relationship further soured when Mexico failed to back the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.

Amid the congenial handshakes among leaders at the summit will be disagreements. Latin American nations butted heads with the United States until nearly dawn Sunday in failing to agree on several points of a draft document to be debated at the two-day summit.

The United States wants the draft to call for re-emphasizing a 2005 deadline for finishing negotiations on a Free Trade Area of the Americas, a hemisphere-wide trade zone that is one of Bush's top policy goals for Latin America. Brazil and Venezuela say the summit is not the place to discuss it.

The United States also wants to kick corrupt governments out of the Organization of American States, a move opposed by several Latin American nations.

Bush Administrations Immigration Reform Pitches False Hopes

No Concrete Proposal for Comprehensive Legalization
of Undocumented Immigrants Families

Oakland, CA. The proposal for immigration reform outlined today by President George Bush promises little hope for fair wages or decent working conditions, much less opportunity for legal status, for the millions of undocumented immigrant workers in the U.S. Instead, the proposed new policy amounts to little more than another guestworker program, with even fewer protections and opportunities than programs currently under consideration in Congress.
The Bush proposal might be good for employers wanting cheap and vulnerable labor, but does little to contribute to the human rights and well-being of immigrant workers.
>The National Network for Immigrant and Refugee Rights and other
>immigrant rights advocates hoped that the Administration would finally
>follow through on its pledge of over two years ago to consider a path to
permanent residency for the hundreds of thousands of undocumented
immigrants who live and work in the U.S.

However, the main fix that the President proposes ñ a three-year,
renewable temporary worker visa ñ provides no definitive path toward
legalization, but rather, ensures a pool of cheap labor for bad jobs that American workers try to avoid. Nor did the proposal specify how immigrant families could be united or remain together in the U.S., only that participants could leave to visit home countries and gain re-entry.

The President also spoke of the tragic deaths of migrants at the U.S.-Mexico border, indicating that his proposals for temporary work visas would help migrants who have been victimized by smugglers.
However, he also reaffirmed border security policies which themselves have contributed to discrimination, abuse and violence against immigrants in the border regions, sometimes at the hands of border
patrol agents. After September 11, stepped-up militarization of the border has forced desperate men, women and children into more hazardous migration situations.

The Presidents proposal did not specify changes to the current legal immigration program, which is woefully backlogged and inadequate in addressing the demand for immigration access. Since participants in the new temporary worker program would have fall in line to apply for
permanent residency status, they too would be thrust into the existing backlog that itself contributes to undocumented immigration. The fact that the Department of Homeland Security, which is dedicated to national security, would be responsible for implementing the proposed program is also disturbing. DHS immigration enforcement programs, as described in NNIRRs recent report, Human Rights and Human Security at Risk, already jeopardize community safety and compromise access to immigration services. DHS oversight provides little incentive for undocumented immigrants to emerge from the shadows and identify themselves through a program that carries little hope for longterm legal residency.

Comprehensive immigration reform must include opportunities for permanent residency and family reunification, labor protection, access to due process, safety and community security. Undocumented immigrant students, many of whom have lived in the U.S. most of their lives, have been waiting for President Bush to support pending legislation that would provide them with access to permanent residency and a future free from fear of deportation. Farmworker unions have negotiated with agribusiness to bring to Congress legislation that would protect their rights as workers and create a path for legal residency. President Bushs proposals made no mention of these efforts. Instead, his announcement, which comes less than a week before he is scheduled to meet with Mexican President Vicente Fox, has the transparency of a pre-election appeal to Latino voters -- not a serious attempt to chart a path towards a fair and just program of much-needed immigration
reform.

National Network for Immigrant and Refugee Rights (NNIRR)
310-8th St., Ste. 303
Oakland, CA 94607
510.465.1984
510.465.1885 (fax)
Visit us at http://www.nnirr.org

Summit of Americas Begins Amid Disputes

By LISA J. ADAMS
Associated Press Writer

MONTERREY, Mexico (AP) -- Disagreements over free trade and penalties for corrupt nations threatened to deepen rifts between countries across the Americas as their leaders opened a two-day summit Monday.

President Bush, who arrived in this industrial northern city with first lady Laura Bush, wants to punish corrupt nations and set a firm deadline for a free trade agreement of the Americas.

Latin American nations are fighting those initiatives, with Venezuela pushing for an international humanitarian fund to help countries during financial and natural disasters.

Leaders from 34 nations in the Americas, excluding only Cuba, will try to work out their differences after they begin the Special Summit of the Americas later Monday.

Bush met with Mexican President Vicente Fox on Monday to smooth relations strained by Fox's refusal to back the Iraq war. Bush won strong support from Fox for his new immigration proposal, which is designed to grant legal status to millions of undocumented immigrants working in the United States.

LATEST NEWS
Bush, Fox Agree on Immigration, Iraq

Release of Jailed Nicaraguan Leader OK'd

U.S.-India to Expand Hi-Tech Cooperation

Summit of Americas Begins Amid Disputes

Text of Bush, Fox Comments



Later Monday, Fox accepted Bush's invitation to visit his Texas ranch, a further sign that the two neighbors have mended recently rocky ties. Fox had planned to travel to the ranch in Crawford, Texas in 2002, but canceled his trip after U.S. authorities refused to halt the execution of a Mexican convicted of killing a Dallas police officer.

Bush was scheduled to meet with Canada's new prime minister, Paul Martin, on Tuesday. Martin spokeswoman Melanie Gruer said that would be "a chance to talk about mutual priorities."

Even before the summit, several Latin American leaders were complaining about U.S. policy. Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez said he believed the summit was a "waste of time" and he criticized U.S. officials for having "a lack of information, great contradictions."

U.S. officials privately worry that Chavez is working with Cuba to oppose pro-American democracies in the region.

When he arrived, Chavez was even more biting.

"We meet, we greet, we sign a declaration, we take a picture, we smile, there are meals, but nothing happens," he complained.

Chavez toned down his comments from Sunday, when he said during his weekly television show that he was worried the United States would promote ousting him by unconstitutional means if a recall referendum on his rule doesn't succeed.

The leaders will have plenty to disagree about when they consider the summit's draft document, which leaves several contentious issues to be resolved.

The United States wants to kick corrupt nations out of the Organization of American States, arguing they should receive the same punishment as undemocratic nations.

The United States also wants the summit declaration to call for a firm 2005 deadline for finishing negotiations on a Free Trade Area of the Americas, a hemisphere-wide trade zone that is one of Bush's top policy goals for Latin America.

Brazil and Venezuela say the summit is not the place to discuss that, and Venezuela instead is pushing for its humanitarian fund.

Another sticking point deals with remittances, or money sent home by migrants living in the United States. While all OAS members agree that the fees for sending money home should be cut in half, they haven't decided when they would do that.

----

On the Net:

Organization of American States: http://www.oas.org/