Author: mopress

  • A Grassroots Leadership Report on Operation Streamline

    By Nick Braune…

    Back in 2005 a very profitable federal policy started up, Operation Streamline — for whom it is profitable would be worth exploring. It was a bad immigration enforcement change.

    Historically, there has always been “unauthorized entry” into this country by people leaving poorer countries and looking for work. This is not surprising, this being the famous “nation of immigrants,” for goodness sakes. To be out of sorts with your paperwork, to be “undocumented,” was always a civil offense, a compliance issue, not a criminal offense. But in 2005 that changed considerably with Operation Streamline.

    Back in 2005 the Bush crowd, and all their Republican and Democratic Party politician friends, were yelling about illegal immigration hurting the economy and even about “Arab terrorists” sneaking in from Mexico. At that time the “Minutemen” got plenty of press coverage, posing for pictures as they leaned against their pickups. (Minutemen groups were silly and miniscule, but the press liked them, and wacky Lou Dobbs and Bill O’Reilly, the anti-immigrant “populists,” praised their “patriotism.”) In 2005 Representative Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin was pushing his hate bill, HR 4437, which would almost make it a felony to talk to an undocumented worker. It nearly passed. That was the crazy year Operation Streamline started.

    During the hoopla and hate climate of 2005, in Del Rio Texas — it’s a small, sleepy town about halfway between Brownsville and El Paso — the Border Patrol announced the new policy, a policy which they now use all along the Mexican border, except in California where there is opposition to it. (The Del Rio Operation Streamline started as a policy toward Central American immigrants, not Mexicans, but courts later felt that was discriminatory and so now Streamline targets Mexicans too.)

    The Streamline policy runs undocumented civil offenders into court on criminal charges. Since 2005, many thousands of immigrants have been picked up (their wrists and legs shackled) and “streamlined” before magistrates. These immigrants, in assembly-line justice, immediately plead guilty and then are sent back to Mexico or Central America with a severe warning that they now have a criminal record and that a further pickup will bring surefire time behind bars. (If they hesitate to plead guilty, they are told they must wait in jail until a trial can be arranged. So, they all plead guilty.)

    Bob Libal, the Executive Director of Grassroots Leadership, a human rights advocacy group, has coauthored a 27-page report, Operation Streamline: Costs and Consequences, and he forwarded me a copy. The report describes how $5.5 billion has been spent since 2005 “turning undocumented immigrants into federal prison inmates,” and enriching private prison corporations.

    The report describes companies like Corrections Corporation of America getting rich through conveyor belt justice, which starts in local court rooms. For instance: “In Laredo, Operation Streamline client volumes are such that a Federal Public Defender must provide counsel to 20 to 75 clients in a span of just two hours. On Mondays, that number is regularly at 75, leaving each defendant less than two minutes to meet with an attorney.”

    In Tucson, there used to be a procedure where perhaps 70 people together would all plea together, “guilty.” But a judge ruled that it violated the fine rules of criminal procedure, and now they all say it individually: “Guilty,” “Guilty,” “Guilty.” It sounds like Money, Money, Money for Corrections Corporation of America. The report is available online at grassrootsleadership.org.

    *** ***

    Follow-up. The piece above first appeared in my regular column in the Mid-Valley Town Crier, 9-25-12. In order to publicize the report better, I emailed Bob Libal from Grassroots Leadership and asked him for a quick paragraph highlight of the report for carry-over purposes. He wrote back:

    “Our new report explores the impact of Operation Streamline, the immigration enforcement policy that is driving unauthorized border crossers into the criminal justice system instead of the civil immigration system. This policy has overwhelmed border courts, has resulted in a historic shift in prison demographics with Latinos now making up more than 50% of those entering the federal prison system, and has become a $5 billion give-away to private prison interests, all at the expense of tens of thousands of immigrants who are sitting behind bars due to this policy.”

    Libal also wanted to remind people in the Rio Grande Valley that because of Streamline, the Criminal Alien Requirement prisons are expanding, and the hated Tent City in Willacy Country (Raymondville) is now one of them.)

  • Ramsey Muniz: 'The world is not going to let them bury me in the prisons of America'

    As supporters of Ramsey Muniz gather today in Houston, we share a recent letter forwarded by his wife, Irma.–gm


    Dear Friends:
    I share a personal letter sent to me by Ramsey.
    –Irma Muniz


    Your father has given lectures like you have no idea or thought. He takes me all the way back to when we, the roots of our Chicano cultural, political, and spiritual movement, would speak about freedom, justice, and about having a voice in America’s process like never ever before in our history. I would ask why it was that we, Mexicanos, were the majority of population in the entire South Texas and we would at times not even have one city council or school board member.

    The conservative establishment was against me because I was arousing the consciousness of our people like no other in history. Before they knew it, Mexcianos, Chicanos, and Hispanic candidates were stepping forward in the life of democracy like never ever before. That is a history that was created with the help of God. Now we have Latinos, Hispanics, Chicanos, Mexican American U.S. Congressmen and Congresswomen and even Republican women as governors in New Mexico and in Nevada and all because we had a vision that one day we would be the majority and counted in this world. I sought happiness, peace, love, equality, and family love like never ever before and all of that has now gradually come to pass.

    Even our young people are going to witness changes in the entire Southwest of the United States like never ever before in our history and they can mark that down because it is going to happen. How do I know? Well, they would have to communicate with the spirits who are in heaven and those spirits only communicate with those that God has chosen.

    We will forever keep our hearts open and our souls ready to forgive those who never ever gave me a drink of water for my thirst, a piece of bread for my hunger, or a blanket to cover my body which was naked for days, weeks, and months shackled and chained the entire time.

    The world is not going to let them bury me in the prisons of America which is what they desire to do. Otherwise they would be up front seeking my freedom. We do not wish to die in the prisons of America and we are going to do everything possible because my freedom is the freedom for the masses of humanity out there in the so-called free world

    Amor,
    TEZ

  • Whitewashing Election Fraud

    By Greg Moses

    IndyMedia Houston / North Texas / Austin / NYC /
    Michigan / Atlanta / DC /

    ILCA Online / Portside / CounterPunch / DissidentVoice / OpEdNews

    Racism is best

    known among white folks for the overt
    ways that bigotry chooses to abuse. This is what
    allows

    white liberals to excuse themselves from
    charges that they are racist, because (God bless ’em)

    they don’t set out to hurt anybody. But Ralph Ellison
    titled his classic novel Invisible Man,

    because racism
    is a grim problem also of what white folks do not see.
    And this problem persists

    insufferably, right down to
    this morning’s news.

    On this day after the election-fraud

    hearings led by
    John Conyers and his Democratic colleagues at the
    Judiciary Committee, I am

    beginning to feel the
    effects of racism’s one-two punch. On the overt side,
    we have the written

    testimony of Judith A. Browne,
    acting co-director of the Advancement Project in
    Washington,

    D.C.

    For Browne, whose testimony to the Conyers committee
    is posted online, “voters

    of color” have been targets
    of Republican-led disenfranchisement in the elections
    of 2000 and

    2004.

    Click to access brownevotestmt12804.pdf

    “In

    2004,” writes Browne, “it became clear that there
    were efforts underway to dust off Reconstruction

    Era
    statutes in order to disenfranchise voters,
    particularly minority voters.”

    “There were clear warnings that challenges would be
    used to disenfranchise voters,”

    says Browne. “Prior
    to Election Day in Nevada and Ohio, 17,000 and 35,000
    challenges were

    filed, respectively,
    disproportionately in urban areas. (Over 17,000 of
    the Ohio challenges were

    filed in Cuyahoga County.)
    In addition, poll observers registered in
    unprecedented numbers in

    Florida and Ohio, with the
    intent to engage in massive challenges inside

    polling
    places.”

    Browne is referring to laws that allow pollwatchers to
    act as

    self-deputized vigilantes at voting precincts,
    thrusting their bodies between ballot boxes

    and
    voters, demanding proofs of identification and
    registration.

    If you have never

    seen this process at work, then you
    might not feel the nausea. But I have seen them, the
    close

    shaven, starched-pants Republicans who show up
    on election day to a black community center and

    lean
    over old women with their dirty questions. Makes you
    want to spank them on their freshly

    cut heads. Didn’t
    their mothers teach them no manners?

    “The targets,” Browne

    reports, “were new voters in
    urban areas.” Or to put it more plainly, new Black
    voters, the

    “Vote or Die” crowd that P-Diddy was
    trying to mobilize.

    Add to this the “felon

    purge” technique, in which
    Republican Party officials, knowing that they are
    working with

    “felon” lists “tainted by racial
    discrimination”, set out to challenge thousands of
    voters by

    the batch.

    “This,” says Browne, “is voter suppression in 2004.”
    And this is what

    we may call racism of the overt
    bigotry kind. Racism type one. On this form of
    racism,

    Browne’s statement continues for several more
    pages at the Conyers hearing

    website.

    Which brings us to racism type two, the invisibility
    maneuver. For this type

    of racism, it’s best to begin
    with liberal columnists. Scan their morning-after
    reports for

    words like “minority”, “black”, “civil
    rights.” Or try this Google test. First do a

    news
    search for Conyers hearings. Very good, lots of fresh
    hits. Now try a news search for

    Judith Browne
    Advancement Project under “News.” See there. Your
    search did not match any

    documents (at 9:25 am CST).

    Overt racism by right-wing Republicans is the core
    dynamic

    at work here, but it is aided and abetted by
    invisibility racism found in left commentators

    and
    media reports, who fail to center the civil rights
    struggle. An issue that is clearly about

    racism and
    civil rights has been whitewashed into “voter fraud”
    generica. Type one racism

    answered with type two.
    Browne’s careful citation of race-based discrimination
    followed by

    Browne’s invisibility in the press. The
    one-two punch continues.

    There may not be

    much that can happen to change the
    results of the presidential election, so the
    whitewashing of

    “election fraud” may not have an
    immediate consequence for those who are focused on the
    Bush

    machine today. But here in Texas, Republicans
    are taking three newly elected Democrats into a

    costly
    process of hearings before a Republican-controlled
    chamber. “Election fraud” is the

    allegation that
    Republicans are bringing against the Democrats.

    In Texas, therefore,

    the generic cry of “election
    fraud” will very likely make invisible the crucial
    civil rights

    component that ties together the fates of
    three would-be state legislators with racist powers

    in
    Ohio and Florida.

    In particular, take the case of Hubert Vo, a
    Vietnamese

    immigrant who beat a Republican powerhouse
    by about 30 votes. If the Vo election is

    overturned
    by a Republican-led Legislature on whitewashed charges
    of “election fraud”, then the

    losers will be a
    coalition of urban voters who worked hard on this
    grassroots coup. And the

    winners will be white
    suburban voters, again.

    Yet, if the pattern of injustice in

    “voter fraud” is a
    pattern that seeks to favor white suburban voters over
    struggling urban

    voters, wherever they are, then
    making this pattern visible, for once, could tip this
    30 vote

    scale in Vo’s favor, and reverse for the first
    time in more than 30 years a steady trend

    toward
    Republican domination of Texas politics.

    The white left is meaningless without

    a civil rights
    coalition. The sooner the white left embraces this,
    in deed and word, the sooner

    we’ll be able to see a
    real future in front of us. The sooner, also, that a
    national movement of

    progressives can make a real
    difference in the

    South.

  • Opinon: Perfect Backlash

    The

    November feud between the Texas A&M University administration and the Young Conservatives of Texas over

    the impropriety of an “affirmative action bake sale” reveals that the concept of “diversity” need

    not entail a commitment to civil rights. Soon after the president of the university appealed to the

    YCTs for civility and diversity, he suspended civil rights in admissions.

    Whether one

    opposes civil rights loudly and uncivilly, as with the bake sale, or loudly and civilly, as with the

    suspension of affirmative action, the common bond is opposition to civil rights as we know them in the

    21st Century….
    The administration’s emphasis on a strategy of “diversity” without civil

    rights serves to frame the process of admissions as something the University confers solely by its own

    good graces. This construction of the matter evades recognition that some applicants, as members of

    protected classes under the Civil Rights Act of 1964, hold civil rights that the University is bound to

    respect.

    At “Sections,” the Texas Civil Rights Review provides the essential history

    of how Texas pledged to undertake affirmative action as a way to meet its responsibilities under civil

    rights law. The decision to suspend affirmative action breaks that promise and declares that Texas A&M

    will serve as its own authority in matters of civil rights enforcement.

    (I don’t know

    where these recent developments leave the athletic department, which has been quite vocal in its

    opposition to the YCT bake sale antics. Now the coaches and recruiters work under a president who is

    telling the state’s elected leaders of color that he’s not going to respect their demands for civil

    rights at Texas A&M.)

    Adding all this up, it is tempting to conclude that the

    administration is mostly irritated by the YCT lack of tack, presenting the Aggie attitude in ways that

    make the administration’s policies much more naked than they otherwise might have seemed. The YCTs

    also serve as a more scary alternative to leadership that at least recognizes the importance of

    diversity.

    The YCT’s opposition to “diversity” policy as such reveals that attitudes

    of racist supremacy still thrive. They could not even tolerate the administration’s appointment of a

    “diversity officer.” In this context, the administration’s promise to provide “diversity” without

    civil rights may be viewed as a way of pandering to a climate of racist opinions.

    The

    dramatized tensions displayed between the YCTs and the president over the question of holding an

    “affirmative action bake sale” served to keep the focus of the community mired in reactionary

    alternatives to the status quo.

    Thanks to the YCT flap, the president is able to swoop

    in to “defend” his new diversity chief, announce a “bold new program” of pure salesmanship, and

    never mention that he is deliberately breaking commitments made by the state of Texas to federal

    offices of civil rights.

    140 years after the emancipation proclamation the party of

    Lincoln returns triumphant to the South, so Southern that Lincoln is surely wincing at the meaning of

    it all. Whether we consider the “affirmative action bak sale” by the YCTs or the unilateral

    suspension of affirmative action by the administration, Texas A&M provides evidence that it is still a

    pre-eminent incubator of racist leadership. Keep an eye on those YCTs as their careers blossom before

    your eyes.

    (Gates taught the YCTs a lesson all right: Looks kids, stop pushing

    cookies. Watch a real pro at work.)

    In the end, the showcase dispute over the value of

    “diversity” does not mask the fact that there is no disagreement between the YCTs and the

    administration about the substance of civil rights. And without any clear commitment to civil rights

    there can be no “excellence in leadership.”

    If we sum together Texas A&M’s suspension

    of its civil rights commitments and the Republican-driven redistricting plan that is now under judicial

    review, then we come up with an image of perfect backlash in Texas.

    gm–last revised

    Dec. 12, 2003