Category: Uncategorized

By Nick Braune
Mid-Valley Town Crier<br
by permission

Although I am a sourpuss and think President Obama is beholden to much the same crowd as was ex-President Bush, there are many people anticipating that things will change for the better soon. And so there is a resurgence of progressive activity going on, and that is good.

One source of optimism is that Michael Chertoff is gone as Homeland Security head. Two weeks ago, after another disturbing factory raid by ICE in Bellingham, Washington, Janet Napolitano, the new DHS chief, said publically that she had not even been informed the raid was going to happen and that she was ordering a full review of it. “I want to get to the bottom of this,” she said. It is not a clear message, but it provides a glimmer of hope that the recent workplace raids, dramatically handcuffing and imprisoning working people, might be softened in favor of restarting discussions about comprehensive immigration reform.

Interestingly, Napolitano also sent the Rio Grande Valley a signal last month. When Brownsville’s city commissioners had been pressured by Homeland Security to put up more border fencing right in the middle of an area that the city had planned for development, Napolitano stepped in, saying that she was not aware that a deadline had been given to the city and that she wanted to reconsider some of these projects. How far she will go is a mystery, but recent events have provided some hope.

Another sign of hope is that President Obama seems more favorable to labor organizing, and a press release I saw from a local uni*n group quotes Obama that labor is not “part of the problem but…part of the solution.”

Since I have not reported anything on labor recently, let me do that now.

Several weeks ago I reported attending an interesting anti-NAFTA event held by the Southwest Workers (SWU), which is based in San Antonio but also does work here in the Valley. SWU has started an organizing effort in Edinburg, trying to reach the school district’s bus drivers, cafeteria workers and other low income employees. I phone-interviewed organizer Anayanse Garza.

Braune: The SWU is trying to reach workers in Edinburg, but the district is balking. Is that correct?

Garza: Yes, we already have members, but we want more. But the ECISD (Edinburg School District) has been uncooperative. About a month ago, an assistant superintendant yelled at us, saying that if it were up to him there would be no uni*ns allowed. After we made his comments public, we had a series of meetings.

Braune: You certainly should have the right to organize.

Garza: Certainly, and we feel that the workers are being given false information and it is having an intimidating effect. Some are being told what we are doing is illegal. Some are being told it is against ECISD policy to be part of the SWU. Actually, it goes against ECISD policy to discourage us from getting members.

Braune: I know you had a rally in front of the school board last Tuesday night. What was your message there?

Garza: We were trying to inform the board about our continuing problems. We have met with a couple of board members but not with the whole board, and we have not spoken, even after about a month of this dispute, with the head of the school board. One of our SWU representatives and one of the bus drivers spoke at the public testimony session last night while the rest of us were rallying with signs outside. We told them that we want to have a meeting and that we have been trying to schedule a way to work out the problems. But so far today we have not gotten a call from them.

Braune: Your organization has experience with this sort of organizing; I take it what you immediately want is a fair opportunity to meet with the workers.

Garza: Yes, and we are surprised at the problems we are facing. The school district workers have mandated lunch and break time, and they discourage employees from leaving the campuses. So there are lunch rooms and meeting rooms where the workers congregate. We have simply asked that we can meet with them at the breaks on occasion. Part of the disinformation is that we want to interrupt the work time, which is not true. We simply want to visit during the breaks.

Another bit of disinformation is that we are demanding that we can just walk into the schools at any time. That is ridiculous. We would sign in at the desk like all other legitimate visitors. In other districts where we have members, we are able to meet with the workers in an orderly way with no problem.

We hope the ECISD School Board will hear us so that we may work together to correct these issues and help our schools, our families, and the community of Edinburg prosper as a whole.

Braune: Thanks for your work and the interview. Keep us informed how it is going.

By Nick Braune

The South Texas Civil Rights Project sent out a press release this week on a lawsuit filed against Cameron County. The suit contends that the county has retaliated against Gail Hanson, a minister and former volunteer chaplain at the county jail, after she spoke publicly about the conditions women prisoners face at the jail. The suit contends that her free speech rights have been violated.

Hanson, through her church, became an official volunteer chaplain in 2000, and had visited with and prayed with prisoners weekly up until February of 2008, but her visits were stopped after she made the public comments about the jail and criticized the sheriff.

“Preventing someone from volunteering their time to help rehabilitate prisoners because she was critical of the County is outrageous,” said Mrs. Hanson’s attorney, Scott Medlock, quoted in the press release. Medlock is Director of the Texas Civil Rights Project’s Prisoners’ Rights Program. “Mrs. Hanson should be commended for her dedication to ministering to the women held in the jail, not punished for speaking the truth about what she saw behind prison bars,” he said.

The press release explains that in February 2008, “Mrs. Hanson criticized conditions in the jail at a candidate forum in advance of the Democratic Party primary. Prisoners told her they were denied sanitary napkins, forced to sleep on the floor, given adulterated food with hair and gnats in it, and held for long periods of time without being brought to court for trial.”

The suit is not asking for money but for the simple restoration of Hanson’s access to the jail so she can continue her ministerial visits.

These complaints against the Brownsville facility are not the first. There have been many complaints over the recent years about the county jail there. The press release quotes Hanson, “I just want to make sure these women’s voices are heard. I never thought the County would prevent me from praying with them for speaking about what I saw in the jail.”

I contacted Corinna Spencer-Scheurich from the Texas Civil Rights Project for a quick comment.

Braune: I read a previous article on the Texas Jail Project website, and it sounds to me that the Cameron County Jail is improperly run and is a stressful place for women to be held, particularly stressful for the pre-trial detainees. Do you think what your client has said publicly has hit some nerve? And do you think they revoked her privilege to visit the women in the jail as a message to others to be quiet too?

Spencer-Scheurich: Clearly what Gail Hanson said hit a nerve. And, it is also clear that banning her from the jail was calculated to chill free speech on the issue of jail conditions. One of the purposes of the 1st Amendment is to protect exactly what Mrs. Hanson did — speaking out about injustice that she witnessed or heard about first hand. While there is reason to believe that things have gotten better in the jail lately, protecting Mrs. Hanson’s right to talk about the conditions is almost as important as improving the conditions themselves. Otherwise, the women in the jail would have no one to advocate for them, no one to tell their stories. What kind of society would we be if we isolated these women to the point that they suffer atrocities without us knowing?

Dear Friends:

I have just returned from a three day visit with Ramsey in El Reno, Oklahoma. Our time spent together was blessing, as we shared our faith and plans for the upcoming months.

Ramsey was sent to El Reno, Oklahoma just after he had been transferred closer to home in Three Rivers, Texas. His transfer to Three Rivers came about through the assistance of congressmen, senators, and many supporters.

He had been in Three Rivers, Texas just over five months and had begun to see his attorney so that he could reopen his case and prove his innocence. Without warning, he was transported to El Reno, Oklahoma where he is now detained. The reason for this move was never substantiated and Ramsey Muniz is in exile once again for political reasons.

At the end of 2008 we submitted an application for a Commutation of Sentence, knowing that the chances for it being approved were slim. Attached [below] is a letter from Mr. Ronald Rodgers, Pardon Attorney, who responded to the application.

Ramsey Muniz was not granted a Commutation of Sentence and through research we learned that pardons and commutations were granted to those who had close political ties or had made substantial contributions to the Republican Party. We now plan to submit an application under the administration of President Barack Obama.

Because we have a different administration, we are formulating strategies for a movement to move Ramsey back to Texas. We will seek your support once again and know that we will provide details in the near future.

Ramsey asks that everyone remember Cesar Chavez and take part in events that commemorate his birth. Cesar Chavez was born on March 31, 1927, and there will be marches in San Antonio, Texas, Corpus Christi, Texas, California, Colorado, and many other states throughout the country. This is important because our time has come! We must seize the moment as others are doing to proclaim our spirituality, culture, history, and identity during these changing times!

Sincerely,
Irma Muniz

US Department of Justice
Pardon Attorney

Washington, DC
January 29, 2009

Memorandum

To: Warden
Federal Correctional Institution – El Reno

From: Ronald L. Rodgers
Pardon Attorney

Subject: Ramiro R. Muniz
Application for Executive Clemency

Please advise Ramiro R. Muniz that his application for executive clemency was carefully considered in this department and the White House, and the decision was reached that favorable action is not warranted. The application was therefore denied on Dec. 23, 2008. Under the Constitution there is no appeal from this decision. As a matter of well-established policy we do not disclose the reasons for the decision in a clemency matter. In addition, deliberative communications pertaining to agency and presidential decision-making are confidential and not available under existing case law interpreting the Freedom of Information Act and Privacy Act. If the applicant wishes to reapply for executive clemency, the applicant will become eligible to do so one year from the date on which the President denied the current application.

Please ensure that the applicant receives a copy of this memorandum reflecting the denial of this clemency application.

Editor’s Note: bold faced emphasis in original.–gm

by Greg Moses

To seal the border would they kill the river? For the time being, US Border Patrol officials say they will not spray herbicides to kill the wild Carrizo Cane along the banks of the Rio Grande River. But wary residents along the river have filed a federal lawsuit to guarantee their rights to an ecologically safe border.

In lawsuit documents released on Wednesday, an association of residents who live near the Rio Grande River charge that the Border Patrol did not take a “hard look” before declaring that proposed helicopter spraying of herbicide would have “no significant impact” on the river environment.

Residents of the Barrio De Colores association say the August 2008 environmental impact statement issued by the border patrol “cannot stand” because the analysis of impacts was not adequate, reasonable alternatives were not fully considered, and residents were not adequately notified of their rights to participate in the environmental impact review.

Some recent news reports have villified the wild Carrizo Cane plants for their ability to grow tall and thick enough to serve as co-conspirators in border smuggling operations. But environmental scientist Dr. Jim Earhart argues that poisoning the plants is not necessary if goats and donkeys are allowed to eat them.

The plants have been considered pests in the valley since they were introduced by European settlers centuries ago. Spraying herbicides from helicopters, however, would only compound the damage done to the river by outside forces.

“The Rio Grande does not belong to the United States,” said Executive Director of the Rio Grande International Study Center Jay Johnson-Castro at Wednesday’s outdoor press conference. “Nor does it belong to Mexico. It belongs to we the people.”

Residents of the Barrio De Colores association are not satisfied by this week’s assurances that the spraying has been postponed as a consequence of meetings between the border patrol and Mexican officials.

Says attorney Israel Reyna, “The day the court says it’s not going to happen, that’s when it’s not going to happen.”

[Sources: KGNS, FoxNews.com, and Barrio De Colores. Read the federal court petition here.]