If a random survey was to be conducted on Anywhere Street, USA, and people were asked to say the first word that pops into their minds when they hear the word "hispanic," chances are they would say things like: illegal immigration, gangs, protest marches, big families, beans, school dropouts, tequila, etc.

It's a good bet that no one would say technology or the internet.

Yet, as Latina Lista reported earlier this month on how young Latinos are using the internet in greater numbers than any other ethnicity, technology and the internet are far from being oxymorons when used to describe today's Latinos.


Latino students at Texas' Sam Houston State University
(Source: shsu.edu)

In a new study released today titled Hispanic Students and the Web: The E-Expectations of College-Bound Hispanic High School Students, some interesting discoveries were made regarding Latino high school students.

Hispanic students were far more likely, in fact twice as likely as white students, to download a podcast or a videocast — illustrating how they not just embrace technology but use it.

Those young Latinos who are college-bound understand the role the internet also plays in researching colleges too. The study showed that 57 percent of Hispanic students say they like to participate in online chats at college web sites, whereas only 48 percent of white students have the same interest. Fifty-four percent of Hispanic students would download a college web site video podcast versus 44 percent of white students.

And when it comes to cell telephones:

White students showed a higher rate of cell phone ownership, with 71 percent having their own phones versus 60 percent of Hispanic students. However, Hispanic students were more open to taking calls from college
representatives (66 percent compared to 60 percent of white students)and far more open to receiving text messages (61 percent compared to 46 percent of white students).

So, by the looks of this study, Latino college-bound students should be way ahead of their peers when it comes to researching and applying to colleges —

BUT that's not the case.

There is one detail that is holding Latino students back in a big way.

The largest behavioral gap between Hispanic students and white students appears to be the amount of parental support with college research. Just 48 percent of Hispanic students said that their parents are helping with "some of the research and paperwork," compared to 65 percent of white students. Half of all Hispanic students said they were doing all the college research and paperwork on their own, compared to 30 percent of white students.

Any of us who come from a Hispanic background knows that this discovery is nada nuevo. Whether it was because of a language barrier or the fact that our own parents never attended college and didn't know how to go about helping us, it was not unusual to do the research and applying on our own.

And that seems to be one of the keys in just how far some get in realizing their dreams.

Because Latino students are already so tech-savvy, the study targeted colleges with suggestions on how they can better help Latino students overcome the challenges of applying for financial aid to attend college.

Colleges were told that to better help Latino students and make the experience more one-on-one, contact and information should be shared via text messaging and other electronic communication styles Latinos already embrace.

But it doesn't erase the fact that the parents are not as involved as they should be.

And it could be the children's fault.

Pressed for time, impatient that their parents don't "get it" quick enough, students don't want to hassle having to explain everything when it's easier just to do it, and some parents are more than willing to allow that.

Yet, times are changing and no matter how much new technology is involved - it can't replace the fact that when parents are involved, children feel like they and their success in the future really matter.

It's not enough to just provide one night of financial aid information and college applications for parents and students. Unlike others, it's not just the Latino students who need their hands held during the whole process but the whole family.

The hope being that if it's done for the first child, then parents can learn and repeat it with the other children and teach their comadres and copadres to do the same for their children, and so on.

By 2014, it is reported by the Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, that Hispanic students will account for 47 percent of all high school minority students.

That's a lot of students and untapped talent that need guidance and nurturing to achieve their potential —

And as the old saying goes, it all starts in the home.

The U.S. Census reveals that Utah is pretty much a homogenous state when it comes to ethnic diversity. In 2004, 93.8 percent of the population was categorized as "white." Hispanics, the largest population of color, comprised only 10.6 percent of the population.

With those numbers, Utah doesn't even rank in the top 13 states with the highest number of Latinos but that didn't stop Utah Governor Jon Huntsman from naming Jesse Soriano as Director of the state's Hispanic/Latino Affairs department earlier this month.


Jesse Soriano
(Source: byu.edu)

It's commendable that Utah recognizes the need to establish such a department because it makes good sense. What better way to combat the challenges that face Latino communities on a national basis than tackling the problems that exist in their home communities?

And who better would know the limitations, the opportunities, available assistance and resources than people who know firsthand what their state can, cannot and does not do for Latino communities.

Several other states recognize, along with Utah, the importance of establishing councils or state agencies focused solely on addressing the needs of Latinos living in their particular states.

Latina Lista conducted a very unscientific survey of those states that had similar state commissions and found that among those that do are: Kansas Hispanic and Latino American Affairs Commission, District of Columbia's Office on Latino Affairs, Minnesota's Chicano Latino Affairs Council, Iowa Division of Latino Affairs, and Oklahoma's Governor Advisory Council on Latin American and Hispanic Affairs

We hope there are more.

But what was interesting, a quick visit to the state government web sites of Illinois, New York, North Carolina, California and Texas - states that are each home to half a million Hispanic residents - had no specific department (or one that was readily identifiable on the agency/commission web page) focused on the particular needs of their resident Latinos.

Now some would argue that having such an agency would be a waste of money since Latino residents would benefit from existing state agencies, but that is not the real issue.

The issue concerns recognizing that disparities between Latinos and the rest of the state's population, for whatever reasons, are growing wider in too many cases. Before the chasm becomes too wide, doesn't it stand to reason that there should be a concentrated effort to identify the problems and enact statewide solutions?

Aside from ensuring that all areas of a state, rural and urban, would receive the same attention and benefit from centralized efforts, accountability should be easier to measure when one community is benchmarked with another, because eveyone should be following the same guidelines.

It stands to reason that if states want to have a future workforce that will sustain their local economies and make them competitive in the national and global business arena, an investment of a special commission focusing on the largest group of future workers makes sense.

But as we too often see these days, the things that make the most sense are too often ignored until it is too late.

Did Latinos wield considerable voting strength in this month's election, or not?

Were Latinos the pivotal factor in deciding who kept the congressional office or who was sent packing?

Should Democrats be indebted to Latinos for winning their elections?

No, yes, maybe.


(Source: US Consulate Milan)

The latest Pew Hispanic Center factsheet titled Latinos and the 2006 Mid-term Election attempt to make sense of the national exit poll data.

Though the report admits that it's impossible to exactly say just how significant was the Latino voter turnout, there are a few crystal points:

Latinos voted heavily in favor of Democratic candidates. According to the factsheet:

The 2006 national exit poll showed that in elections for the U.S. House of Representatives 69% of Latinos voted for Democrats and 30% for Republicans. An analysis of exit polls in Senate and gubernatorial races around the country that produced a national estimate revealed essentially the same partisan preference. Meanwhile, exit polls conducted in eight states with large Hispanic populations by the William C. Velazquez Institute, a non-partisan think tank, estimated that Latino voters favored Democrats 67% to 29% in congressional races nationwide.

Overall, there was an 11 percent swing towards the Democrats.

Yet, Democrats shouldn't get too comfortable in thinking Latinos will blindly support them either.

The 2006 National Exit Poll revealed that among Hispanic voters, 69 percent voted Democrat while 30 percent voted Republican. Among white voters, 47 percent voted Democrat while 51 percent voted Republican. Only Black voters almost thoroughly support Democrats with 89 percent voting for them and 10 percent voting Republican.

If ever there was evidence that Latino voters look beyond party lines to the actual issue, these numbers appear to show it — and underscore the greater strength that Latino voters already possesses:

The capacity to think and reason instead of blindly following the crowd.

One day in October 2004 in Douglas, Arizona, Ronald Morales, his two young daughters and his father Arturo decided to cut through some land leased by rancher Roger Barnett while out hunting.

Barnett, with his AR-15 rifle in hand, stopped the group. From there, stories diverge.


Vigilante Arizona rancher Roger Barnett
(Source: Arizona Republic)

Morales claims that Barnett started spitting out racial slurs and pointing his gun and threatening the group.

Barnett denies the accusations while boasting to reporters that he has detained more than 100,000 migrants over a ten-year period.

Whether or not Barnett thought the group of Mexican-Americans was a group of illegally-arrived immigrants is not clear in the story being reported, but what is clear is that a jury thought there was enough credibility in Morales' story to award him a total of $210,000 but sending him home with $98,000 after finding him and his father partly responsible for the altercation.

As we face a growing list of towns where it is basically a danger to one's health and safety to "look" Latino, this court case may be the first of many yet to come.

Undoubtedly, there will arise a case where charges will be brought against the local law enforcement for assuming someone is an illegally arrived immigrant rather than a citizen.

At that time, we'll find just how far the rights of Latinos in this country will extend.

Today's situation with Latinos begs that the question be asked:

Is what is happening in more and more Hispanic-American communities paralleling what happened with Japanese-Americans in the 1940s?

Time will tell.

For a lot of families, Thanksgiving and Christmas are the two times a year when "family traditions" are observed.

Whether it be the same menu that is repeated every Thanksgiving Day and Christmas or how and when Christmas gifts are opened or even the yearly ritual of eating Thanskgiving dessert clustered around the television set watching football, this seems to be the time when "American tradition" can really be seen practiced in homes across the country.

Yet, after the holidays, on a national scale, "American tradition" seems to be put away until the next year.

Unlike in the Latino culture where so much tradition exists on an almost daily basis that, to most of us, other cultures seem almost dull - even American culture.

Yet, upholding the cultural traditions handed down by our grandparents, seems to many outside the Latino community to be "un-American" or unpatriotic - and that is hardly the case.

The restrictive mindset that something must be "all or nothing" just does not apply when people have the experience of two or more cultures.

We learn to integrate the two to form our next set of family traditions.


Mariachis take to the streets of the Boyle Heights neighborhood in East Los Angeles to celebrate the area's patron saint's day.
(Source: Hoy)

It is because Latino cultural traditions are so strong and intertwined in our family histories that they are not put away to be brought out at only certain times of the year.

If today we are to be thankful for anything, it's the fact that Latinos can still hold on to these traditions and work them seamlessly into our daily lives.

We are who we are — and we are all richer for it.

Feliz Thanksgiving!

With Latinos, espcially Mexican-Americans, having a higher incidence of diabetes than other groups, and the fact that Latinos are spending increasingly more hours in front of the computer, and that more Latinos seem to employed in hard labor outside jobs, it just makes sense that one in five Hispanics suffer from cataracts and have higher prevalence rates of early age-related macular degeneration.

Yet, as precious as we know our eyesight is, too many Latinos ignore the warning signs of early vision loss, and wait till the vision is too destroyed to recover it.

Clearly, the Hispanic community needs to educate ourselves on good eyesight.



A web site called Eyedidntknowthat that contains a range of information about our eyes - from how the eyes work to different eye diseases and problems, tips on how to know if it's time for glasses and a whole list of true and false questions about the eyes is available.


(Source: eyedidntknowthat.com)

But now, it's available in Spanish too. The companion Spanish site is yonosabiaeso. It has all the same information as the English site.

As we give special thanks for the people in our lives, it wouldn't hurt to give an early Christmas present to those who are long overdue to hear what the difference is between healthy vision and not-so-healthy eyesight.

If there ever is an issue that is literally black and white - this one is it.

There's a new $250.00 scholarship at Boston University. To apply, you have to fill out the application, submit two essays, have a 3.2 GPA — and be 25 percent Caucasian.

It's called the Caucasian Achievement and Recognition Scholarship and it's the latest sensational tactic by students, this time Boston University's College Republicans, to protest race-based decisions.


Boston University

The scholarship states that the group believes that "racial preferences in all their forms are perhaps the worst form of bigotry confronting America today."

The group further states that they did not set up this scholarship just "to give a scholarship to white kids" but to foster a discussion.

Their reasoning is that race-based scholarships are a way of the "majority" telling the "minority" that they are different and "inferior and incapable" of meeting the majority at their level and so must be especially accommodated. The group believes these racial preferences are absurd and contradictory to American "ideals of freedom and equality."

Too bad this group can't see past the Ivy walls of their city-surround campus. If they ventured out into the Boston neighborhoods where Latinos and African-Americans live then they might learn that the ideals of equality and freedom sound good when recited but, for too many, exist only within the pages of textbooks.

Where does freedom exist when families are generationally tied to poverty? How can education be valued when the return on investment is too long to wait for some families who live day by day and depend on every member of the family to work to pay the bills?

Where does equality exist when it's been documented that lending institutions treat people of color differently when granting loans or mortgages?

Where does equality exist when 90 percent of whites have a high school diploma versus 59 percent of Hispanics? Or that only 11 percent of all college students are Hispanic?

In an ideal world, all opportunities would be equal - education, housing, jobs but the truth is it just isn't — not yet.

Can the system be trusted to correct these inequalities without oversight or forced maintenance?

Too many times, it's proven that it can't — simply because those in the majority don't see that a problem, a.k.a. inequality, exists.

It happens every day and usually takes an act of Congress or a court order for people to react.

The latest case was the Dallas, TX elementary school principal who was cited by a federal judge for operating, at taxpayer's expense, a private school for Anglo children within a public school that was predominantly minority."

The principal was in essence segregating the children of color from the white students. She has until January 17 to correct it.

With situations such as these that exist in different pockets around the country, it's obvious things are not equal.

But who will speak out on behalf of people who suffer these injustices — more than likely the ones who have walked in those same shoes.

Since the enactment of the Revenue Act of 1913, the federal government has subjected non-U.S. citizens residing in the United States (with or without documents) to income tax in the same manner as U.S. citizens.

Low-income undocumented immigrants pay little or no federal income tax because of the offset against gross income of the standard deduction and personal and dependency exemptions. Their dangerous and underground existence, however, has led some undocumented immigrants to file as married filing separately taxpayers and to pay more federal income tax than they would if they were able to enter this country with their families intact. In addition to federal income tax, unauthorized workers pay Social Security taxes on every dollar of reported wages at 7.65%. Therefore, these poverty-level workers are paying federal income and payroll taxes at a minimum rate of 7.65%.


The above paragraphs were taken from a paper that first debuted in the spring of 2006 titled "Taxing Undocumented Immigrants: Separate, Unequal and Without Representation."

Researched and written by Professor Francine Lipman, whose background entails everything from being a Certified Public Accountant, practicing law, serving as the Graduate Editor of the Tax Law Review, writing countless articles on tax and accounting topics for legal and accounting periodicals to teaching a variety of tax courses at the Chapman University School of Law.

In other words, Dr. Lipman has made it her life-long work to deal with cold, hard numbers. She is not one to be swayed by political rhetoric or public hysteria.


Professor Francine Lipman

And that is why this paper deserves to be recognized within the context of the ongoing illegal immigration debate.

Dr. Lipman says that the "widespread belief that illegal aliens cost more in government services than they contribute to the economy is undeniably false."

It is an argument that has been made all along, but rejected because those making the argument (me included) don't have Dr. Lipman's credentials.

In her paper, Dr. Lipman systematically outlines why these overly publicized points of misinformation can't be true.

Her logic, and mathematics, in proving the opposite of what is used as the #1 argument to rid this country of undocumented immigrants have to make us all wonder if those who are propagating this campaign of misleading information are just poorly informed and don't have a head for numbers, or are purposely trying to turn the tide of public opinion against the undocumented.

Professor Lipman tells Latina Lista that if people think this current paper stirs emotions, her next one which will show that a history of institutionalized racism exists within immigration policy and the welfare system will reverberate even farther.

We hope that is the case - it's not whether people agree or disagree but that they're listening and caring enough to discover the truth for themselves.

Fundamental economic theory for immigration policy prescribes free movement of workers across borders to achieve free trade in the labor market. Migration of labor without restrictions across national borders could more than double worldwide real income. Unrestricted immigration could "increase production, create wealth and help reduce poverty." Immigration restrictions impose costs by driving up the cost of labor, which in turn drives up the cost of goods and services to consumers," destroying wealth and causing economic distortions throughout the world.

If the United States, as a market power, desired to maximize the economic welfare of its non-immigrants, it would eliminate all immigration quotas and "labor certification requirements" and impose appropriate tariffs on immigrants…

There's a new television show specifically targeting Latinos, and it's not on Univision, Telemundo, Telefutura or Galavision (some of the more widely known Spanish-language cable channels.)

It's a community service program titled "Worcester Latino" and it airs on Charter Communications cable television channel WCTR — in ingles.


Hosts of English-language Worcester Latino television show

Worcester Latino, though locally produced, joins but a handful of new television programming that is targeting Latinos who spend their days speaking more English than Spanish.

Some production companies recognized this budding trend among U.S. Latinos and decided not to wait for mainstream corporate USA to act on it. Companies like Si TV, who back in 1997, saw the disinterest many second and third generation Latinos had for Spanish-language programming, and decided to be among the first to create shows featuring Latino characters and which has since evolved into a full-fledged production company;



Aim Tell-A-Vision Group recognized the need English-speaking Latinos had for programming we could call our own and created
shows that answered that need. In the process, the CEO of Aim TV, Robert G. Rose, discovered that something was horribly wrong with the way Nielsen Media Research measures Latino viewers — they don't distinguish between U.S.-born Latinos and non-native born Latinos. That little detail makes a big impact on which shows are recorded as the most popular among Hispanics.

So, Rose is publicly challenging Nielsen with his Change the Sample campaign. By circulating a petition to call on Nielsen to adjust their methodology for measuring Hispanic viewers, he hopes to show the true reality of viewing habits among U.S.-born Latinos;



And finally, an emerging player in the field of targeting English-speaking Latinos is a multimedia company called VOY.



Mixing social networking with user-generated videos and traditional programming, VoyTV — an internet-based broadband channel, is the latest offering from VOY. In addition to allowing users to post their own films, the online channel has original programming like "VOY Filmmaker Showcase - highlights the best short films, music videos and commercials made by Latinos or featuring Latinos. LatinEyes - a licensed broadcast magazine show, focuses on Latin culture in the U.S. and abroad. VOY to Hollywood - features celebrity interviews, featurettes and behind-the-scenes news on movies and shows that interest Latinos."

Voy is not a marketing concept but an organic reflection of what Latinos are dealing with today across the country," said CEO of VOY Fernando Espuealas to Latina Lista. "In the media landscape, there isn't an accurate reflection of who we are as Americans who happen to be Latin.

We call these U.S.-born, predominantly English — the Next Generation Latino."

It's a generation that has already arrived. The only difference is that those who have noticed this arrival, like the Fernando Espuelas and Robert Rose's of the media industry, are doing something about it.

The time for talk is over.

It's time for lights, camera, ACTION — Chicas!!

According to the online reference site, TheFreeDictionary, the term "catchall" means: "Something that encompasses a wide variety of items or situations."

Big sorpresa that the newest catchall phrase quickly climbing the charts of popular usage in the English language is (drum roll here): ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS!

You think it's exaggeration?

Well, it's a safe bet that the term "illegal immigrant" has gone from being someone who is in the country illegally to being a term to encompass the closure, nonfunding or denial of certain services.


Group of undocumented immigrants rounded up for deportation.
(Source: cpoy.org)

The point was underscored in a recent story about a Texas county where the county commissioners voted to spend $500,000 more this fiscal year on medical care for the poor who live in their region.

By a 4-1 vote, the Collin County commissioners voted to give an additional $90,000 to nonprofit clinics that serve people who earn too much to get free public care. The Commissioners also approved $400,000 to let poor people get treatment at private walk-in health clinics.

The lone holdout to help the poor was a commissioner who just won re-election in last week's elections. His reasoning for not voting for the extra money to help the poor in his area — he was afraid that some of the money would be used to treat "illegal immigrants."

It was the same excuse used in a Georgia town for not funding a local library's budget. The people were afraid the money would be used to buy books in Spanish for "illegal immigrants."

It is clear that the attitude in the United States towards the undocumented has reached fanatical levels.

To deny services to our own citizens for fear that "illegal immigrants" would also benefit from them showcases the worst attitude any human being can exhibit towards another — extreme righteousness.

Not to mention a level of arrogance that elevates someone to thinking that because they don't suffer hardships, no one else does either.

Yesterday was the three-month anniversary of Elvira Arellano's stay in a Chicago-area church seeking sanctuary from deportation to Mexico.

During these three months, Elvira dare not leave the church because then she would be fair game for immigration officials to pick her up. Though immigration officials confess they have every legal right to march into the church now and take Elvira into custody, they don't.

The ill will that such a move would generate would be far worse — a public relations fiasco — than letting one undocumented mother essentially stay under self-imposed "house arrest."

Elvira claims not to be doing this for herself but for her 7-year-old son Saul and the over 3 million other children who are American citizens but whose parents face deportation because of their illegal status.


Elvira Arellano and her 7-year-old Saul
(Source: Somos un Pueblo)

Because Elvira cannot travel, Saul has taken his mother's place as the face of these families who are caught in political limbo.

Until this week, Saul had never been to Mexico - the land where his mother was born and where his grandparents and tios live in the poor village of San Miguel Curahuango, Michoacán.

Saul went to Mexico to plead his mother's case. His efforts were rewarded with Mexico's Chamber of Deputies unanimously approving a resolution calling on the United States to suspend Elvira's deportation, and those of other undocumented parents.

Today, Saul was to go before the Mexican Senate and ask the same.

It is very easy to criticize using Saul in this way, which is clearly a political strategy to gain sympathy, and I have gone on record at Latina Lista condemning Saul's participation.

But with each new U.S. town joining the list of those that are passing ordinances intent on driving out the undocumented, it is clear that U.S. lawmakers don't understand the scope of who comprises a good portion of the undocumented — the families.

Clearly, one more adult speaking out on behalf of the undocumented is not going to make an impact.

So, it will (unfortunately) be the children, like Saul.


From behind the walls of the church that have served as her sanctuary, Elvira spoke eloquently with Latina Lista by telephone about her feelings, the pride she feels for her son and where she thinks the future will take them.

I remain very positive and have much faith that everything will be resolved. I will continue to stay and fight, not just for Saulito and me but for all the other children who risk being separated from their parents.

What the Mexican legislators did this week by passing the resolution was not an attempt to interfere or tell the United States what to do. But it was a way to start a dialogue, to begin looking for a resolution to not just what is happening to me but to the millions of other families whose parents are undocumented and threatened with deportation.

That the Mexican legislators passed this resolution unanimously says something, even if it's symbolic. Since they are known not to agree on very many things.

On the one hand, I am happy that Saulito is having this experience and getting the opportunity to get to know the country of his family roots. But on the other hand, it makes me very sad that he has to travel to another country to ask for help for me.

When Saulito first got there (Mexico), I asked him how he liked it. He said he didn't like it. I asked him why, and he said there were too many poor people. It made me laugh that he would say such a thing. If he had said that he liked it and wanted to stay there then I would say let's go, but he said he wanted to come home because this is where his school and all his friends are.

How much longer will 7-year-olds be the face of the illegal immigration debate?

Until it is recognized that they are very much a part of the debate too.

As more and more towns join in the hysteria of proclaiming undocumented immigrants Public Enemy #1, it's more and more obvious these politicians and citizens don't want to know the people behind the label.

Who knows what would happen then?

Well, one University of South Carolina researcher thought it was time to get to know the people who were making her state one of the fastest growing destinations for undocumented Hispanic immigrants.

Dr. Elaine Lacy, research director for the Consortium for Latino Immigration Studies, delivered tonight the results of her two-year study on the Mexican immigrant population in South Carolina, titled "Mexican Immigrants to South Carolina: A Profile."



When Dr. Lacy and her team of graduate students interviewed the 181 Mexican immigrants, ages 17 and up in 15 counties across North Carolina, they were surprised to learn a few things that, in essence, dispelled four common myths held about Latino immigrants.

Myth No. 1: Latino immigrants want to move to the United States permanently and will remain here unless they are forced to leave.

Lacy said 60 percent of Mexicans plan to return to Mexico, where they prefer to live. They were in the United States to earn money. Only 28 percent of Mexican immigrants indicated they want to remain in the United States and would do so only if family members were with them.

That's no surprise finding to those of us of any Latino community in the nation. How arrogant some are to think that over 12 million people are so in love with another country that they would leave behind their children and loved ones.

It's all about survival and working and earning money - and it always has been.

It was only when the U.S. government tried so hard to keep people out that they were actually keeping them in, and that is the reason why 12 million people are stuck in a political limbo because most have been here too long, unable to return home — and now home is on this side of the border.

Myth No. 2: Latino immigrants overuse public benefits and make little economic contribution.

Of the 181 immigrants interviewed, only four were unemployed. "They came here to work," Lacy said. "They want to help with living expenses for family members in Mexico and to save money for housing, businesses and retirement in Mexico."

Other than public education, the only other public service utilized was WIC, a Medicaid program available to qualifying families when their children are born in the United States. Only 15 percent of the families interviewed had children born in the U.S., but not all of those qualified for the WIC program.

Lacy said undocumented immigrants are ineligible for any public assistance, and approximately 70 percent of the Mexican immigrants interviewed were undocumented.

Again, what person in their right mind who is here illegally would put themselves on the public radar by applying for services they know they aren't eligible for.

As painful as it is to say, further research warrants discovering if the majority of Latinos that people claim are taking advantage of public assistance are Latinos who are legal citizens.

The U.S. Census reports that 21.8 percent of Hispanics live in poverty and 32.7 percent lack health insurance. Common sense tells us those percentages are not all comprised from the undocumented population.


Myth No. 3: Latino immigrants refuse to learn English and do not want to assimilate into U.S. culture.

Nearly half the respondents said they were making efforts to learn English. One-quarter said they were taking formal English classes, while nearly an additional 25 percent said they were learning from purchased tapes, watching English television and reading English publications. Lacy said 30 percent cited learning the language as the biggest need of the Mexican community.

This myth is so easy to prove false in any community in the nation by just picking up the phone and calling those churches and organizations that offer English classes.

In Texas, these classes routinely have waiting lists. The same is being reported throughout the country. The undocumented want to learn English. Some are shier than others in trying to speak it, but the desire is there and was there when the decision was first made to come to this country.

Myth No. 4: Many immigrants are criminals who have no respect for the law.

Only two of the 181 interviewed reported any problems with law enforcement. Both cases were related to driving without a license. Lacy said many immigrants said they admired Americans for their belief in, and respect, for the law.

And who wouldn't when all they've known are corrupt law enforcement officials who will do anything for money?

Dr. Lacy discovered other information that was a surprise to her and her team but sadly have been known to the rest of us: there is a high incidence of depression among the undocumented because of the separation from their families and the stress of living in the United States.

Most of the undocumented live below or at the poverty level by earning $20,000 a year, don't have health insurance and live in overcrowded, sub-standard housing.

But perhaps the biggest revelation from Dr. Lacy's research that she fails to mention is that the undocumented, for all that they suffer, still have the ganas to keep going - and that says something about the human spirit.

Nearly half of the children born to Hispanic mothers in the U.S. are born out of wedlock, a proportion that has been increasing rapidly with no signs of slowing down. Given what psychologists and sociologists now know about the much higher likelihood of social pathology among those who grow up in single-mother households, the Hispanic baby boom is certain to produce more juvenile delinquents, more school failure, more welfare use, and more teen pregnancy in the future.

And so began an essay titled "Hispanic Family Values?" by Heather MacDonald, a fellow at the think tank, Manhattan Institute, and contributing editor to City Journal.


Heather MacDonald

MacDonald's essay, at its worst, is alarmist, in that she presents her case for the breakdown of Hispanic family values with data that definitely portrays Latinos in a negative light.

Forty-five percent of all Hispanic births occur outside of marriage, compared with 24 percent of white births and 15 percent of Asian births. Only the percentage of black out-of-wedlock births—68 percent—exceeds the Hispanic rate. But the black population is not going to triple over the next few decades.

As if the unmarried Hispanic birthrate weren’t worrisome enough, it is increasing faster than among other groups. It jumped 5 percent from 2002 to 2003, whereas the rate for other unmarried women remained flat. Couple the high and increasing illegitimacy rate of Hispanics with their higher overall fertility rate, and you have a recipe for unstoppable family breakdown.

Yet, while MacDonald's interpretation of the data would have everyone believing that the future source of all that is bad in society will be the fault of Latinos, other data is not so quick to condemn.

New data released today from the U.S. Census Bureau's American Community Survey says that of the 900,000 births to Hispanic women between the ages of 15 and 50 surveyed in the year prior to the survey, 66 percent of those mothers were married.

Also, married-couple Hispanic families were measured at 49 percent of Hispanic households — only 4 percentage points less than non-Hispanic white households.

But to be fair, the numbers are still low, or high depending on your perspective, when it comes to a culture that historically has idolized our reverence for family.

Yet, MacDonald's essay does underscore the fact that there are grave problems within our communities.

Dr. Ana Sanchez delivers babies at St. Joseph’s Hospital in the city of Orange, California, many of them to Hispanic teenagers. To her dismay, they view having a child at their age as normal. A recent patient just had her second baby at age 17; the baby’s father is in jail. But what is “most alarming,” Sanchez says, is that the “teens’ parents view having babies outside of marriage as normal, too. A lot of the grandmothers are single as well; they never married, or they had successive partners. So the mom sends the message to her daughter that it’s okay to have children out of wedlock.”

“It’s considered almost a badge of honor for a young girl to have a baby,” says Peggy Schulze of Chrysalis House, an adoption agency in Fresno. (Fresno has one of the highest teen pregnancy rates in California, typical of the state’s heavily Hispanic farm districts.) It is almost impossible to persuade young single Hispanic mothers to give up their children for adoption, Schulze says. “The attitude is: ‘How could you give away your baby?’ I don’t know how to break through.”

The most powerful Hispanic family value—the tight-knit extended family—facilitates unwed child rearing. A single mother’s relatives often step in to make up for the absence of the baby’s father.

It's very easy to take offense with MacDonald's essay but there's nothing that she writes that hasn't been noticed antecdotally by any of us with contact with our young hermanas in high school or those families for whom education is low on the list of priorities for their working-age children.

How many times have we heard young Latinas say they "want to have my boyfriend's baby."

Rather than be angry at MacDonald for being so blunt in her appraisal of the state of Latino families, it's time to own up that there is reason to be more than just concerned for the future of our community and our country.

What MacDonald's essay exemplifies is that for Latinas, the campaign to prevent teen pregnancy can't just be a school-focused campaign. It has to start in the neighborhoods and homes where traditional Hispanic family values are nothing more than front-porch stories of how life used to be in the "old" country.

It's going to take changing the mindset of las madres, tias, vecinas and abuelas.

Latinos have long practiced the concept of "it takes a village …," but instead of raising the child, we CARED for him.

Now, it's time to RAISE that child — and their parents too.

It's rather ironic that on a day when ground is being broken for the construction of the first memorial on the National Mall to honor Martin Luther King, Jr., that yet another town is passing ordinances to drive out people they deem undesirable.


(Source: wpxi.com)

Tonight, in Farmers Branch, Texas, a suburb of Dallas, city council members unanimously passed anti-illegal immigration measures, including one that makes English the official language.


Demonstrators protest anti-illegal immigrant measures outside Farmers Branch City Hall.
(Source: The Dallas Morning News)

It is the first Texas town to pass such strong measures against undocumented immigrants.

Supporters of this measure are using the cliche argument that because the federal government has refused to address the issue, the city itself must.

Some might not see what Martin Luther King Jr.'s Memorial has to do with Farmers Branch, Texas. In fact, there are many who are rankled and offended that Latinos compare the immigration issue with the Civil Rights movement.

After all, these immigrants are not citizens. They are not being deprived of anything that is lawfully their's anyway — not entirely true.

Though Martin Luther King Jr. fought for the civil rights of blacks everywhere, he was fighting for their dignity as well. He was fighting to elevate African Americans from being seen as "undesirable" to full human beings who had every right to live like their white neighbors and enjoy the privileges that come with being a fully vested member of the human race.

From that perspective, the fight for the undocumented immigrants is no different than the fight waged for African-Americans.

Such battles are not confined by country borders, handy labels or even historical context.

They are battles defined as one group being persecuted for who they are by another group.

It may not be a civil rights battle but it is a battle that pits human rights against man-made prejudices.

In that context, only one side will be memorialized while the other will be relegated as a footnote among history's greatest disgraces.

It is safe to say that the United States was a bit distracted the first weekend of November. There was so much focus on the November 7 elections that, as usual, the rest of the world, aside from Iraq, mattered little to the majority of us.

Otherwise, we would have paid more attention to the 16th annual Ibero-American Summit that took place in Montevideo, Uruguay.

As much as this election focused on immigration policy, at least in the minds of Republican politicians, so it was the topic of debate at the summit.

Yet, hardly any of us knew it.


Heads of state attend the sixteenth annual 22-nation IberoAmerican Summit
(Source: Cumbre Ibero-Americana)

Over three days, the leaders of: Argentina, Bolivia, Brasil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, México, Nicaragua, Panamá, Perú, Paraguay, Portugal, Principado de Andorra, República Dominicana, Spain, Uruguay y Venezuela, met and talked about immigration policy — basically U.S. immigration policy.

It seems our South American neighbors and European friends, who belong to the summit delegation, don't like the direction of our immigration policies.

They dislike the policies so much that all of them signed a resolution that has become known as the "Commitment of Montevideo."

"We believe the construction of walls does not stop undocumented immigration," said the resolution, adding that new border barriers lead to migrant-smuggling rings while harming "spirit of understanding" between neighboring countries.

It would be easy to dismiss this summit as just a U.S. bashing bash against our policies — if it weren't for something significant that happened at the summit:

"This the first time in the history of the Iberoamerican community that a joint declaration has been reached on immigration," said Enrique Iglesias, head of the summit's general secretariat, during the closing session that included Spain's King Juan Carlos and leaders or envoys of Portugal, Andorra and 19 Latin American nations.

"I believe immigration is the great issue of the century," Iglesias said, adding that the accord "will be the point of reference for ongoing dialogue of the 22 countries."

The significance of 22 nations making their feelings known about how much they dislike our policies is something not to be ignored - after all, our economic existence is as much intertwined with their survival as their's is with ours.

Yet, hardly any publicity of the summit was brought to the attention of the American public.

It's as if the scenario in the Middle East is happening all over again, when we scratched our heads and asked in ignorant innocence in the aftermath of 9/11 — when did the Muslim world start to hate us?

This may well be the beginning of the end in South and Latin America of tolerance of U.S. policy practices.

As proof that there is sound reason for the leaders of Latin and South America to be fed up with our policies, an unlikely column appeared today that outlined the evolution of global opinion turning against the United States.

What's so unlikely about the column is that it's not written by an activist or a blogger or even an opinion writer on foreign policy issues. It's written by someone accustomed to logically evaluating financial markets — financial columnist Malcolm Berko.

Without being defensive or in favor of a particular cause, Berko's column outlines the cold, hard facts.

It's up to us to either see them for what they are, or risk scratching our heads and being the only ones clueless as to why our global neighbors don't like us all that much.



Malcolm Berko


Financial pressures lead others to hate U.S.

By Malcolm Berko


Dear Mr. Berko: I recently returned from my first foreign posting in Turkey and I was amazed at the anti-U.S. mood of the people. But in May 2005, just before I left, you advised me to buy 125 shares of the closed-end Turkish Investment Fund, which I did at $14.75, and sold it when I returned this March at $28. It's now $17.05. Should I buy it back?

I know this second question isn't a stock question, but why do so many people in the world hate the United States? Sometimes I was afraid to step outside my workplace because I could feel the hate. I thought we were helping these people. What do we do wrong? If they hate us, why do they all covet the U.S. dollar?

T.E., Aurora, Ill.

Dear T.E.: At least two or three readers ask me that question each month, so it's time I responded. But meanwhile, don't buy back that Turkish Investment fund. The Turkish economy is beginning to founder and some observers think the radical Islamists in Turkey will suffocate the country in the next few years.

Money is the universal language, which is understood by every culture in every society. Because people share this column on the Internet, I've communicated with educated readers all over the world. These folks have investments in our market and while some suggest that "love makes the world go round," I can tell you from experience it's money that makes the world go round. It's the U.S. dollar, not the riyal, yen or peso that people use to measure their wealth. Heck, even the value of a barrel of oil is measured in U.S. dollars, as is an ounce of gold.

However, many of the folks with whom I talk believe this may not last much longer. They think that our government believes its manifest destiny is to convince the world that the "Anglo-Saxon race," its form of democracy, ideas and policies are naturally superior. Around the time of the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Congress began to keep report cards on other nations. If those countries fail to earn a passing grade, Congress will use political and economic sanctions to make them kneel.

Most educated people from South America, Europe or the Middle East know this is true. Some suspect this is our way of atoning for several hundred years of black slavery.

Congress keeps a detailed score of human rights, political, social and economic abuses of every country on the globe. We judge whether other countries allow their citizens the same freedoms and opportunities we do. If not, we threaten them with economic or political sanctions. How would you feel if France told the United States it must abolish the death penalty or it would forbid imports of American steel?

We grade other countries on their respect for religious freedom and insist they emulate our labor laws. We demand they limit their export of cheaper commodities like sugar, meat, oranges, wool, steel, ethanol, lumber, leather, etc. If not, Congress imposes political or economic sanctions. Congress withholds assistance from countries whose legal systems don't match our standards and limits trade with countries whose definitions of "free speech" are not as liberal as ours. Congress will use political sanctions against those countries that fail to promote our definition of democracy, that won't allow equal rights to women or accept our concept of a free press.

How would you feel if Japan insisted that we ban gun ownership in America or they would expel the American ambassador? Congress bans imports from countries using child labor, whose fishing nets do not use turtle extenders or that allow cock fighting. Congress tells other countries how to float their currencies, manage their health systems and their schools and insists on special investigations of airports and harbors. Gee whiz, can you imagine the uproar if Germany demanded to inspect our airports, railroad yards and harbors? Congress self-righteously sets itself as enforcer, judge and jury of other nations.

While some of these goals may be legitimate, we do not have the right to demand them of other nations. We don't have the right to force our form of democracy on Iraq, to insist that China ban child labor, to demand South American farmers stop growing poppies, to police the harbors in South Africa, to demand religious freedom in Russia, to influence elections in Venezuela or require Vietnam to limit the hours of its workday.

Congress, Republicans, Democrats, our religious organizations and corporate America do not understand the seething resentment this has nurtured aboard. We are so convinced of our superiority that we cannot see the clouds for the rain. And the tolerance of other cultures is being strained.

In today's opinion section of USA TODAY, there appears a column of mine.

In the column, I basically explain that while the turnout numbers weren't great for Latinos in this election it didn't mean that we don't have potential. As with every group, our potential to be a strong political force lies with our future generations.


Democratic supporters react to news of gaining majority in Senate
(Source: Reuters)

It seems the next generation of voters is already answering the call to perform their civic duty.

The Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning & Engagement (CIRCLE) released a study today that showed that an estimated 10 million young Americans under the age of 30 voted in this week's election. That was an increase of at least two million since the 2002 elections.

It seems voters under the age of 30 accounted for 13% of all voters.

Some additional facts were:

Nationwide, 61% of young voters voted for Democratic candidates.

The states with the highest proportion of young voters turning out were: Montana, Michigan, Minnesota and Missouri.

Which unfortunately leads us to the assumption that, at this point in time, that Latino youth are not as much of a contributing factor in this higher turnout rate.

By virtue of the four states above that had the highest youth voter turnout, none of them have high enough concentrations of Hispanic populations to be considered a viable factor.

Mark Lopez, research director of CIRCLE, told Latina Lista that when surges in youth voter numbers are seen like this, it's usually white and black college students who are driving the numbers. He said that often black college students will even outperform white peers in turning out for elections.

Of the states that do have high concentrations of Hispanics, Lopez said that there weren't any hotly contested or close races leading the researchers to believe that the Latino youth vote numbers hadn't really changed in those states.

But from Census data showing the steady increase in the Latino population, the potential is still there.

Just because the Democrats won, it still isn't time for the Latino community to celebrate.



There are still too many open wounds that are festering and becoming even more infected with misinformation, prejudice and unsubstantiated fear.

But what's worse is that though the debate has always been about undocumented immigrants, Latino citizens are finding ourselves standing side-by-side with the undocumented because we share a heritage, a look and a bicultural lifestyle.

In the minds of people who are not familiar with Hispanic culture beyond Taco Bell, Latinos are all the same.

At this point, it's annoyingly frustrating to have to reiterate our unique differences in one more effort to "educate" the rest of the country that some of us speak more English than Spanish, don't all come from Mexico, and didn't just arrive yesterday.

Yet, if we don't continue to do it, we risk being continually labeled as a homogenous group of "drug dealers, murderers and thieves."

Those were the words used to describe the Latino (immigrants) in Hazleton, Pennsylvania who have been leaving in droves in anticipation of the enforcement of the ordinance that put the town on the map for being the most unfriendly city to undocumented immigrants.

Though the man who used these descriptors was referring to undocumented immigrants, chances are that from a distance he wouldn't have known the difference between an undocumented Latino and a third-generation Latino.

And that crime rose because of the swell in population, who just happened to be undocumented immigrants, is an unfortunate fact that happens when you increase more people in an area than there are resources to fully meet their needs.

Crime would have risen regardless of the ethnicity of the new residents.

Yet in people's minds, the image of Latinos is not positive.

From the spring rallies and marches to the rise in gang crime, Latinos, regardless of citizenship status, are seen to be responsible more for what is wrong in society than for the contributions we make.

Which leads to the realization that the real dilemma facing the Latino community at this point in time is not how to find more Latinos to register to vote — but how do we change public perception?

The easy answer is to say we have to start changing those elements within our community that give us this kind of image, and that's true.

But that takes the kind of time that only allows negative images to be more deeply imbedded in the public psyche.

What the Latino community needs is a PR campaign that highlights contributions and our unique differences.

In the process of educating the greater public, such a campaign would also raise the self-esteem of our youth.

And that would be something to celebrate.

It's the day after — the election.

And as pundits and the media like to do, every minute factor contributing in some way to this election and what followed it, will be microscopically examined and re-examined until a bigger news story overshadows it.

See what happened when it was announced Rumsfeld was stepping down?

The Latino community will no doubt be part of that "after-election" examination.

But just because this election galvanized the community and sent more of us to the polls than would normally go, it's no time to relish in our mild success.

The problems that the Latino community had before the elections still exist and may just be getting worse.

I was alerted to this today by a posting by "Anonymous." It was in response to the posting about Justeen Mancha whose family, though they are legal, was subjected to a early morning raid by federal immigration officials at their Georgia home.

"Anonymous" (And as always is the case in cyberspace, we have to take a person's word they are who they say they are) goes to the same high school as Justeen. We are assuming "Anonymous" is a student, and that makes what this person says all the more troubling.

I attend Tattnall County High School and so does Justeen Mancha. This situation sickens me!. They can wipe up all them tears b/c the government is going to be striking anyway. I'm from around the county I've had encounter with cops, and they honestly don't give a fuck about the mexicans and if it was up to them..they'd take 'em all out.

It's a natural response to try and soothe this person's anger and say he/she is exaggerating until you read what else is coming out of Georgia.


Clayton County Schools officials are investigating claims that Forest Park High School Principal Delphia Young threatened to have misbehaving Hispanic students deported.

It is bad enough that young Latinos are being subjected to these experiences but it's worse when we can see firsthand how the erosion of trust and respect for authority is spiralling downwards.

If towns and states continue with their anti-illegal immigration hysteria and create hostile atmospheres in their attempt to drive out undocumented immigrants, the ones who will suffer the most are the children.

Instead of talking about what happened during the elections, the Latino community needs to talk about safeguarding the children so that they are not subjected to the measures used to demean and demoralize the undocumented adults - who are these children's parents, tios, primos, etc.


Latino students take part in a positive youth summit program.
(Source: Latino Youth Summit)

Children need authority figures in their lives and if they can't turn towards their local law officers or their educators, and their parents are being publicly stripped of their dignity, then how can society expect these children to "follow the rules" of the land when all they've seen is abuse and humiliation?

Soon, if not already, too many young Latinos will feel like "Anonymous" — but just like we wanted Washington to hear the Latina voz, we have to hear the pain of our young people — and respond sooner rather than later.

From the time the polls opened this morning, "talk" has been how the Latino vote just wasn't going to materialize like everyone knew it wasn't going to do.


(Source: CNN)

With every voter registration drive trying to capitalize on the numbers that turned out at the marches and rallies, there just never was enough "eligible to vote" Latinos to make the turnout impressive enough.

Yet, something did happen.

With Democrats' margins giving them victories in races across the country, it is a fact they were helped by the Latino vote.

In a Latino Exit Poll survey conducted by the William C. Velasquez Institute, it was found that most Latinos (of those surveyed in 8 states)voted Democratically, are dissatisfied with how things are going in the country and overwhelmingly want the troops brought home.

Latino numbers may not be the powerhouse that one day it is predicted to be, but tonight the numbers were enough to push one party over the edge.

Latino candidates are competing in 38 states for top federal and state offices in tomorrow's elections.

To see all the races with Latino candidates, check out the 2006 Election Profile compiled by the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials.

After the election, we'll run a tally and see which candidates won their races and examine why the others did not.

In the meantime, no matter that your day is busy tomorrow with work, errands, school, etc. — make time to vote.

Otherwise, nothing will change and we'll only have ourselves to blame.

If you're not sure where you go to vote, visit the site below and it should help you.

The countdown to Tuesday's elections have been underway for a while but with news from the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials that Latino candidates are competing in 38 states for top federal and state offices, an increase of 46% since 1998, Tuesday's races will be even more interesting to watch.


(Source: NALEO)

NALEO's Educational Fund's executive director, Arturo Vargas, said, "“Latinos have mounted campaigns in every region of the nation – from the Southwest, to the Northeast, to the Deep South, to New England, to the Midwest and America’s ‘heartland. This widespread competitiveness reveals the growing Latino political maturity. Latinos are demonstrating that they can raise campaign money, form political networks, organize their voting communities, and obtain key endorsements.”


(Source: NALEO)

That may be true, but the real test will be if mainstream voters can see past a Latino candidate's surname and not automatically link them, heart-and-soul, with the immigration issue that has been described as a "Hispanic issue."

If that is the case, then Latino candidates are at a disadvantage because, regardless of their stand on this issue, they have to be more than that in order to fulfill the role of a government representative for the people — duh!

Yet, it remains to be seen how easy a job that will be.

One Latina who is running for a state senate seat in Minneapolis, Patricia Torres-Ray, has already proven she is more than a Spanish hyphenated surname.



In articles about her, Patricia has effectively distanced herself from so-called "Hispanic issues" and has concentrated on those issues that affect everyone: education, health, housing, etc.

Torres Ray, 42, is a native of Colombia who moved to Minnesota 19 years ago with her husband, Minnesota native Jack Ray. She learned English, got two college degrees and established a 16-year career in social service administration at the county and state level.

From the local newspaper's editorial board endorsing her candidacy to members of her own party who praised her campaign to get on the ballot, Patricia is a candidate being seen for who she is, what she has accomplished, and what she plans to accomplish — not her ethnicity.

We can only hope the same will be said of the other Latino/a candidates.

We'll know soon enough.

Is the illegal immigration issue being blown out of proportion to distract voters from the real issues that threaten this country?

Of course, it depends on whom you ask. Yet, preliminary observations show that the immigration issue isn't that big a deal to voters come next week's election as Republicans hoped it would be.


Senator Kennedy at immigration reform rally
(Source: Radio Netherlands)

In fact, for many Republican candidates, their support of the measures taken against undocumented immigrants may play a part in their political downfall.

But with so many races to watch to see which candidates, who were strong anti-undocumented immigrant proponents, are winning or losing their races, it's an almost impossible task.

Luckily, there are some people who have accepted the challenge, and they've created a web site to help the rest of us make sense of how the issue is exactly playing out in political races across the country.

Organizers of the site, Immigration2006.org, say the site is an effort to catalogue how and where the immigration issue is playing this election cycle and to analyze some of what we see. According to the Cook Political Report, as of October 31, 2006, there are 61 highly competitive seats and in almost all of these seats the immigration issue has been raised. There are 13 competitive Senate races and again in these races immigration has been raised and hotly debated by all but a handful. And though the issue cries for a federal response, the issue has played in several gubernatorial races. The question of course is whether the issue is being used wisely and whether the Republican Party, which in the main is responsible for attack ads on the issue, is reaping the rewards it had hoped.

With links to key senate, congressional and gubernatorial races, along with, daily analysis of what's happening in some of the races, the site is very helpful in trying to grasp the impact of the issue on local elections.

If it is seen that in those races, tagged by this site, where illegal immigration is being overly emphasized by the Republican candidate, then the question must be asked: Did Republicans purposely seize this issue to not only distract a country facing more pressing problems but to divide an electorate, and paint themselves as actually doing something beyond disregarding sexual, political and financial misconduct of their Party members?

Republican strategists must have thought this tactic was a no-brainer.

What they didn't count on was that Latinos and other American voters do have brains.

November 7, 2006 will be a very interesting night for todos.

It was anticipated this was going to happen — federal immigration agents in their zeal to round up undocumented immigrants make a mistake and subject legal Latinos to the kind of kick-in-the-door, gun-in-your-face behavior usually reserved for hardened criminals.


Marie Justeen Mancha
(Source: 11alive.com)

But it happened in all its ferocity to 15-year-old, Georgia-born Marie Justeen Mancha. Back in September when Justeen was getting ready for school, federal immigration agents stormed her South Georgia house without a warrant.

"And one was holding a gun,” Justeen said. “And that really scared me. And they were screaming, 'Illegals,' and 'Mexicans,' and stuff like that. And they asked me if I was illegal, and I said, 'No.'"

Well, what the undocumented cannot do, Justeen can - she and four other U.S.-born Latinos of South Georgia are suing U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement for conducting raids in South Georgia and targeting anyone of Hispanic descent, just to catch undocumented immigrants.

The group is being represented by the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Justeen's mother, who was also born in the United States, has asked ICE why her house.

ICE has not responded.

To me, it was very unfair what happened to us,” she said. “And, yes, you know, I felt like they violated our rights. We are U.S. citizens, you know, and we are like everybody else, pay taxes, and stuff. And, to me, just because they see Mexicans, Hispanics, skin color, they think, you know, everybody’s [illegally] from Mexico.”

And that is the point.

Thanks to this hysteria sweeping the country, courtesy of politicians and pundits, legal Latinos' rights will be violated and with no apology from the government. Yet, many cities and towns aren't even waiting around for the immigration agents to come sweep their towns.

They plan on screening Latinos themselves.

And it leads to the question, just how can law enforcement officials tell the difference between Latinos who are legal or undocumented when they can't even tell the difference between real and toy guns?

In an op-ed, I've tried to address this very point:

Emerging from the modest home she has shared with her great-aunt and cousins, to whom her mother entrusted at the age of 5, Alma looked like a typical 21-year-old.

She sported a soft summer tan that was a shade lighter than the intense brown of her eyes, her hair was neatly styled and she carried the slender physique of a running enthusiast. And when she spoke, a slight Texas drawl dangled from each word.

She looked and sounded totally American — Texan to boot.

"I don't know Spanish," she confessed almost embarrassed as we slid into our restaurant booth. "I used to want my great-aunt to speak to me in Spanish, but I would get so frustrated when I couldn't understand that I would just cry for her to speak English."

Those were my recollections, almost 6 years ago, I wrote in a column after meeting with a reader named Alma. The young girl, who planned to go to college on scholarship and become a sports agent, suddenly discovered on her 15th birthday that a mother who was long dead had brought her illegally to this country from Mexico, as a child.

The stereotypical image of an undocumented immigrant as a dark-skinned, Spanish-dominant, poorly educated “foreigner” didn’t fit Alma. Yet, now that she knew she was here illegally, she shared the same fears as every other illegally arrived immigrant. But to look at her and hear her struggle to pronounce simple Spanish words, you would never know she wasn’t supposed to be here.

Alma epitomizes the fiasco in-the-making by local cities and states, who in their claim of frustration with the federal government’s slow response to do something to combat illegal immigration, are taking matters into their own hands.

One approach that is gaining consideration is the empowerment of local and state law enforcement officers to also act as immigration agents.

By partnering with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) under Section 287 (g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, local and state police receive training and oversight from ICE in enforcing federal immigration laws while conducting their regular duties.

As of now, ICE has signed seven 287 (g) operating agreements with state agencies and individual counties from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement to California’s San Bernardino Sheriff’s department, according to ICE Communications department.

The 287(g) is currently being considered by additional cities and counties from Texas to West Virginia.

Though part of the mandatory training includes classes on anti-racial profiling laws and multi-cultural training, the crucial question still remains: How does one identify the difference between Latinos who are legal or illegal?

Ask them?

Depending on the length of time an undocumented immigrant is in the country, it’s a question that in their hearts will be answered truthfully, but technically will be a lie.

If it is hoped that an accent will be a natural give-away to a person’s legal status, that strategy will have to be reworked. My own grandmother, even after living here for 70 years and becoming a citizen, never lost her distinct north Mexican accent.

Or in the case of people like Alma who grew up here — none exist.

Think fashion will give citizenship status away?

Before the days of NAFTA, it was a little easier. Nowadays, fashion is truly the outer reflection of a person’s inner soul, rather than a compass revealing their point of origin.

So all that is left is to ask for ID, right?

But what if they are out jogging and didn’t carry their wallet? Or ran a quick errand to the store and forgot their license? Or just a passenger in a friend’s car and didn’t bring their purse?

Innocent scenarios that happen every day with no worries that they could end with sitting in the back of a police car.

It is a fine line between enforcing a law and violating a birthright, and one that runs the risk of being erased.

The common complaint that has always existed within the Latino community is how people afuera (outside) the community think we are all the same.

Just as advertisers and the media are finally getting the message that Latinos are not a monolithic group (Spanish, Mexicans, Cubans, Puerto Ricans, etc.), we are back at square one trying to get the word out that just because we share roots in a culture that speaks Spanish, we definitely don't think the same.

Yet, probably evolving from political reasons, when it comes to issues, it is much easier to appear there is Latino strength and clout if the perception is fostered that we are all of the same mind on issues and/or political candidates.

The reality is that Latinos are individuals who don't cater to political party lines. In fact, one researcher has dubbed Latinos the Purple Voters.

In a University of Central Florida political scientist’s survey, he found something that has been common knowledge all along - Latinos vote for the issues, not the party.

The survey found that Latino voters are most concerned with the war in Iraq and the economy. The same as for non-Hispanic white voters.

The survey found that neither group was particularly concerned with immigration or morals as significant issues.

That kernel of news may surprise everyone who assumes that immigration is the main issue driving Latinos to vote in this election.

However, it's the "line in the sand" so to speak that illustrates there are two camps of Latinos in the United States - the legal and the undocumented.

Of course, among legal Hispanics are those who are sympathetic to the undocumented. But there are some who share the Republican view that the undocumented have no right to demand rights.

This group got fed up being lumped together with undocumented Latinos and sympathetic Latinos and wanted their voice heard.

So, in May 2006, they formed the group You Don't Speak for Me. Word now comes that they are forming their first local chapter in San Diego.



According to their press release, the group is joining with the San Diego Minutemen, among others, in showing their opposition to the undocumented.

A curious thing is that the co-founder of the group and the president of the new chapter in San Diego, Claudia Spencer, is herself a naturalized citizen from Mexico.

A quick Google search on her background reveals that she pretty much detests Mexico and its people, and has embraced the United States wholeheartedly to the point where she implies that racism exists in people's imagination because she never once experienced it.

But as we all know, everyone has their own universe and just because one person doesn't see it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist for others.

How ironic that this group, so intent on declaring that those Hispanics and undocumented don't "speak" for them, are doing the same thing that they claim to be fighting against.

By saying that discrimination and racism don't exist, Spencer and her group are trying to speak for all Latinos as well.

No wonder everyone outside the Latino community has such a hard time realizing that not all Latinos are the same - when there are still some Latinos who confuse personal experience as being representative of the greater community.

Halloween used to mean a time of scary fun, but it's pure scariness watching what's being passed off as legitimate political campaign commercials.


(Source: History Channel)

Thanks to the New Republic Online which has tracked down the 7 worst immigration campaign advertisements, there's no need this Halloween to watch The Exorcist or visit a haunted house to get frightened to death.

The advertisements, as pointed out by the Wall Street Journal Online, are all advertisements made by and for Republican candidates.


Political ad for Georgia's Mac Collins
(Source: YouTube)

The ads project an alarmist, us-or-them attitude. As usual, they lack the creativity to actually tell the truth, and instead are spinning the same old misinformation — and passing it on as fact.

In addition to getting their facts mixed up, the Republicans who made these ads got their holidays mixed up too — they must have thought today was April Fool's Day.

In 7 days, the nation will learn who the real fools are, and it might not be such a treat.