The following originally appeared on Project Economic Refugee.

In case you missed it, the DREAM Act was featured on Countdown with Keith Olbermann, highlighting how it has the potential to be a first step towards comprehension immigration reform to solve our broken immigration system. Keith had Rep. Luis Gutierrez on to discuss how this momentous vote has the potential of impacting the “enthusiasm gap” for Democrats that the media keeps on obsessing about. Rep. Gutierrez talked about how President Obama clearly feels passionate about his support of passing the DREAM Act and about how the legislation would support our national security.

Keith also had Clarissa Martinez on from the National Council of la Raza to discuss how Republicans better be careful if they plan to block a vote on the DREAM Act because Latino voters, whether they are registered Democrats or registered Republicans, will not forgive a “no” vote on the DREAM and will remember that come this November at the voting booth.

Watch the two segments here.

Overall, it’s very rewarding to see the DREAM Act rising to national attention like this. However, I’m a little puzzled as to why other MSNBC hosts have chosen to ignore the DREAM Act vote. I’m not surprised that Chris Matthews has not covered the DREAM Act on his show yet because he tends to be disconnected from how important the Latino vote is … but no coverage from the Rachel Maddow show? The DREAM Act has the potential of completely altering the dynamics of the November midterm elections and yet no mention of it? What is going on? Also, Ed Schultz’s show did not cover it either, which is also a bit disappointing because sometimes Ed can be a little bit edgier than his fellow MSNBC hosts.

For more on this, please visit Project Economic Refugee.

The following originally appeared on Project Economic Refugee:

It’s official: poised to make a downpayment on immigration reform, Senator Reid announced that the DREAM Act, which would allow children of immigrant economic refugees to attend college, will be introduced as an amendment to the Defense Reauthorization bill. 

[...]

This is HUGE news, taking place after months of inaction and mere lip service by this Congress and President Obama on the matter of immigration reform and right on the heels of hearing word that the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell would be also voted on next week in a similar congressional maneuver.   

[...] putting it into context-while all the attention in the media was on the uber-conservative Tea Party wins on primary night 09/14, it seems that the progressives bagged a few victories of their own this week-Don’t Ask Don’t Tell was declared unconstitutional by a federal judge and will now be put up for a vote next week, the DREAM Act was scheduled for a vote for next week as well, and finally they were capped by progressive candidate Ann McLane beating conservative Democrat Katrina Swett for the Democratic Party nomination for one of the New Hampshire seats on the House of Representatives.  Definitely interesting…

Updates on this are developing quickly; for the latest visit Project Economic Refugee.

The following originally appeared on Project Economic Refugee:

Excellent point that George Lakoff makes on this TruthOut OpEd piece titled Disaster Messaging that tackles what Project Economic Refugee has been covering on the [In]Secure Communities Program:

End a Bad Law: 287(g)

Bad laws, laws that hurt far more than they help, should be eliminated. Section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) is a bad law. Here’s why.

Almost all immigrants who entered the US without papers are honest, hard-working, decent people, who have often risked their lives to come the America. They do essential work, mostly for low wages, work that makes the lifestyles of most Americans possible: cleaning homes, caring for children and the elderly, gardening, cooking in restaurants, working on farms, doing odd jobs, working on construction. They deserve our gratitude. They are America’s mainstays, good guys. There are 12 million of them in America, helping us all live better every day.

A small number, as in any population, are bad guys: occasional murderers, human traffickers, drug dealers, gang members and thieves. They need to be captured and convicted.

But 287(g) mostly harasses, jails, harms and deports the good guys and, in doing so, mostly lets the bad guys escape.

The 287(g) program allows local police and jailers to act as deportation agents with ultimate power over the lives of the good guys, who are assumed to be guilty until proven innocent. Their very entry into the US without papers constitutes sufficient “guilt” to justify their mistreatment and deportation.

The 287(g) program promotes a form of racial profiling – 287(g) is immoral, an affront to the human rights that define what America is about.

The 287(g) program is also ineffective in getting the bad guys, partly because it uses so many resources on going after the good guys.

As Alex DiBranco reports, the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of the Inspector General (OIG) found that 287(g) is poorly managed, ineffectively organized and arbitrarily implemented from place to place; ignores or actually provides false information to the public; fails to focus on noncitizens who pose a safety threat; gives shoddy training; lacks oversight; and has not terminated those local partners who have clearly violated the terms of the agreement – local law enforcement officials running amok in hunting down harmless undocumented immigrants. The 287(g) program also deters undocumented immigrants who witness a crime from coming forward and encourages racial profiling in which Latinos are “guilty until proven innocent.”

The 287(g) program should be ended and replaced by a law that protects the good guys and pays serious attention to catching the bad guys. It is not just ineffective; it is downright immoral.

To read more on this and for further updates, visit Project Economic Refugee.

The following originally appeared on Project Economic Refugee.

“What’s in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet.”
-From Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet

In the case of Arizona, perhaps the more appropriate question should be “would calling Arizona’s SB 1070 law by any other name other than “Nazi” make it any less racist or any less authoritarian?”

It’s time to stop apologizing for calling out racism and for categorizing Arizona’s immigration law as what it truly is about. Now that Judge Susan Bolton (a conservative judge that was recommended to the bench by Republican Senator Jon Kyl) has struck down major portions of Arizona’s authoritarian police law, new major dynamics have consolidated for both opponents and supporters of Arizona’s runaway law. On the one hand, opponents of the immigration law have been validated: by the blocking of major provisions of SB 1070, other states have been put on notice; also, opponents of the immigration law have been proven right in the arguments that classify Arizona’s dacronian law as an alarming threat to American liberty itself. On other side of the debate, by fighting Judge Bolton’s decision, Governor Brewer and her camp are looking more and more like nothing else but right-wing authoritarians that have embraced ideals that are in direct opposition to American values. Bottom line is that by continuing to peddle such immigration laws, right-wing Arizonan politicians are forcing honest well-intentioned police officers to act as some sort of gestapo agents.

Before you start to argue otherwise, let’s take a hard look at why it has been hard not to make the gestapo comparisons. When you hear about the horrible acts that are being committed in the name of “immigration enforcement”, it is hard to not compare what Arizona is doing to Nazi and/or white supremacist ideology. When you hear about how actual neo-Nazis are literally out hunting down immigrants, it’s hard not to call it “Nazi”. When you hear about how white supremacist nationalists are behind the legal defense fund in support of SB 1070, it’s hard not to call it “Nazi.” When you see cases where racial profiling has led to such barbaric acts such as the time when a pregnant woman was forced to give birth cuffed by the wrists and ankles, it’s hard not to use the word “Nazi” … and again, when you find out that SB 1070 was written by and introduced to the Arizona legislature by people that are proud to identify themselves as “Nazis”, it’s hard not to use the word “Nazi”. Equally unsettling, it’s been at times difficult to understand just how some have argued otherwise. Perfect example was the furor that was spread in local Southern Californian media outlets when Congresswoman Linda Sanchez pointed out something that is very much the case: how some of the people behind the Arizona law actually ARE white supremacists. After her comments, it was astounding to see how the right-wing talking points started to shape media coverage of the chain of events: implying that she was a racist for merely calling out and standing up to the true racists! What an upside-down world we live in, truly.

Speaking of mainstream media coverage, there was one particularly reporter that went out of his way to promote the argument that using Nazi comparisons in describing Arizona’s SB 1070 was completely inappropriate. Last May, Robert Jablon of AP interviewed a prominent rabbi, implying that the Nazi comparisons were going too far because they diminished the Holocaust, stating that:

Arizona’s tough new law against illegal immigration has prompted furious protests and boycotts but Jewish groups say opponents who compare it with the rise of Nazi Germany are going too far.

“It diminishes the Holocaust,” said Rabbi Marvin Hier, founder and dean of the Wiesenthal Center, an internationally known Holocaust studies center based in Los Angeles.

“Survivors and others are very upset about this,” he said Friday. “When you exaggerate, it’s very harmful to them when they know that their mothers and fathers were taken to the gas chambers without any recourse to the law. They lost children.”

First off, I completely agree that comparisons between the Holocaust and Arizona’s immigration law would be completely inappropriate. However, I highly doubt that most people are actually comparing Arizona’s law to the actual Holocaust. What most people are doing, is comparing Arizona’s law to the threat of racist authoritarian supremacist acts. It also begs this question: if it talks like a Nazi, acts like a Nazi, and in fact calls itself “Nazi”, are we then safe to assume that it IS “Nazi”? Reporter Jablon, to his credit, did mention that Rabbi Hier’s homebase, The Wiesenthal Center itself, has actually come out in opposition to Arizona’s immigration law. Nevertheless, it seems that the reporter went one step further to try to paint the picture as if there was widespread consensus on this matter on the part of Jewish groups; quote:

The national director of the Anti-Defamation League, Abraham H. Foxman, wrote earlier this month that comparisons between Arizona’s laws and Nazism “delegitimize and trivialize the deaths of 6 million Jews and millions of others and soldiers who fought to defeat Nazism. They also play into the hands of those who support the Arizona law.”

He noted that some opponents of President Barack Obama’s policies have compared him to Adolph Hitler.

“It seems to happen with greater regularity in American political debate today than ever before: When anger reaches a fever pitch on a particular issue, out come the inevitable comparisons to the Holocaust,” Foxman said in an article in the Jewish Telegraphic Agency. “It has become a rule of thumb, an all-too-convenient catchphrase of the times.”

What the reporter failed to mention was that The Anti-Defamation League itself has also come out in staunch opposition to Arizona’s immigration law, going as far as filing an actual legal challenge to it. Lastly, in the reporter’s AP note there was absolutely no mention whatsoever of how, again, the law was written and introduced by people that are proud to consider themselves supporters of actual neo-Nazis.

To downplay what Arizona’s law truly is about is just as dangerous as to overplay it. All in all, I’m reminded of the words of Holocaust survivor, Elie Wiesel: “No Human Being is illegal”. So what’s in a name? Do you think the Nazi comparisons are spot on? Or do you think otherwise?

For more updates and video on this, please visit Project Economic Refugee.

The following originally appeared on Project Economic Refugee.

In case you missed the Air America – The Good, The Bad, The Ridiculous panel with Josh Norton, Laura Flanders, and Sam Seder, click here to access the video of the entire panel.

Here’s my previous post when I found out Air America had folded. Suffice to say, I thought it was depressing to see Air America disappear from the air waves.

Most revealing tidbits from this panel for me: how a memo was discovered being circulated, advising sponsors not to advertise on Air America. Also, sounds like management did not know how to really interact with their progressive audience … in other words, sounds like they were clueless about having an Integrated Marketing Communications strategy. It was all old model and old ways of marketing and not really about building an interface to effectively interact with its progressive audience.

Missed the speech? Watch the whole speech, link here.

Positive: the President mentioned the DREAM Act. Called out the mistaken notion that taking on immigration reform is “bad politics”. Pointed out what few dare to admit with the passing of immigration laws similar to Arizona: how they actually increase crime because they plant fear in immigrants and deter them from trusting police to report crimes. Recognized the nature of the humanitarian crisis going on in our borders: having thousands upon thousands of human beings risk their lives, with many dying in their treks in the quest to escape oppressive poverty for themselves and their families.

Negative: on parts of the speech the President relied too much on conservative buzz phrases, which tends to constrict the immigration debate to issues of legalese rather than on fighting the extreme poverty that drives people to flee their countries in the first place to take refuge in the U.S. economy, in other words: the root of “illegal immigration”.

Evocative: the choice of location was designed to evoke the memory of Senator Ted Kennedy, who was an icon for Latinos and other immigrants in the advancement of their civil rights.

Follow up questions: what was the purpose of the speech? It was powerful, as President Obama’s speeches usually are. There was no mention of a specific timeline for next steps, no mention of what are the actual next steps, no actual commitment to pass a specific part of immigration reform (like the DREAM Act, for example). Was the speech intended to be more of a campaign promise for the Latino vote going into the upcoming difficult midterm elections?

For more updates, visit Project Economic Refugee.

The following originally appeared on Project Economic Refugee.

It is heart breaking enough to observe how British Petroleum’s negligence (and arguably Halliburton’s by extension) has resulted in the wasteful destruction of vast natural resources and on the death of countless innocent animals but as if that were not enough now we get word that the cleanup workers are getting sick due to lack of proper protective equipment. Even more outrageous: there are now reports that BP threatens to fire its cleanup workers if they bring their own protective equipment. Keith Olbermann recently featured Marylee Orr of the Louisiana Environmental Action Network and discussed the atrocious working conditions that are causing cleanup workers to get sick.  Wath the video here.

As the gulf’s local ocean-dependent economic activities lie in shambles, it is not surprising to see people in the area impacted by the oil disaster risk their own health in desperate attempts to feed their families and help alleviate the disastrous situation. There is no question that the unprecedented nature of BP’s oil catastrophe on America’s coastline has forced everyone to improvise quick responses. Edward James Olmos was recently interviewed by Anderson Cooper and had this to say (to access video of his interview, click here):

[...] no one knows why things are happening the way they are here; I have friends and relatives who want to volunteer their boats, to come down here and help, save their backyard [...]

People are anxious to help, in fact, perhaps the diversity in cleanup workers should come as no surprise in the cause to clean up America’s waters. Last June 2nd, El Diario La Prensa reported (translation via New America Media):

NEW ORLEANS — As oil escapes from the depths of the Gulf of Mexico and washes up on the coasts of Louisiana, hundreds of Latinos are working hard on the clean-up efforts.

Among them are 40 women. They are part of a group of 500 people who are preparing the dam near Hopedale, two hours from New Orleans, for the arrival of the oil slick. These 40 workers are employees of the subcontractor Tamara’s Group, which was contracted by the company Oil Mop.

..and what are the thank you’s that they are getting for risking their health?

Exhibit A. AlterNet post: [Conservative] Cato Scholar Jokes About Using Undocumented Immigrants to Soak Up BP’s Oil.

Exhibit B. Mother Jones’ report: ICE Running Immigration Raids on Oil-Spill Workers.

The gulf needs all the help that it can get, but it seems that the usual corporate exploitation of workers is unsurprisingly taking precedence over good will. We need solutions to this disaster and we need them fast. In fact, In light of all this urgency, the cleanup activities have been downright chaotic (as reported by The New York Times), to say the least. Rachel Maddow on her blog highlights the conditions in which community members are forced to take actions into their own hands:

The local communities and shore areas most directly affected by the oil have been left, essentially, to fend for themselves. It’s a disgrace, it’s been a disgrace for weeks, and it needs to be fixed.

Many commentators on the media argue that there are no true experts on how to deal with an oil explosion of this magnitude and so that makes the President’s job all the harder. That may be partly true, but it ignores one key point that is not getting much play in the news: the expertise that does exist, is, in fact, not being tapped into. Yes, that may be hard to believe, but it is something that is well-known among in the environmental circles and that the White House for some reason seems to be oblivious to. Perhaps James Carville expressed best the urgent need for Obama to put an expert in charge. Prior to Obama’s more public engagement in the crisis, Carville said the following during an interview with Good Morning America (Via the raw story):

[...] The political stupidity of this is just unbelievable…

[...] Here you have a situation where you have eleven hard-working people blown off [an oil rig in the gulf] as a result of corporate malfeasance and maybe criminal negligence as a result of inept bureaucrats who were part of the — you can actually blame the previous Administration for this [...]

[...] These people are crying, they’re begging for something down here and he just looks like he’s not involved in this. Man, you got to get down here and take control of this, put somebody in charge of this thing and get this thing moving. We’re about to die down here.

Let me be frank: I am not a fan of Carville. His connections with the conservative arm of the Democratic Party, the DLC, have always irked me. However, I think James Carville made great points during his interview. He was absolutely right in saying that there needs to be a person put in charge by Obama. The person in charge should be someone that actually has expertise, unlike the mish-mash of bureacrats that have been handling the situation up to this point. In fact, word on the environmental circles is that the White House has virtually shut the Environmental Protection Agency out of the cleanup decision making process. In case you didn’t know, the EPA is the one agency in the nation that has the most expertise on oil spills and pollution response. Yet, the White House for some reason seems to be tying their hands! The current Administrator of the EPA, Lisa Jackson, would make an excellent choice to lead the cleanup efforts. Mark Gold, President of the Southern California-based environmental organization Heal the Bay had the following to say on Huffington Post:

Change the face of the federal response. Lisa Jackson is telegenic, bright, articulate, a Princeton graduate in chemical engineering, a specialist in toxics, and a Louisiana native! What more can you possibly ask for? Oh yeah. She runs the agency with the most oil spill and pollution response expertise: the EPA. A Hollywood casting call wouldn’t give you a better candidate to lead the cleanup effort. The buddy team for 2010 should be Lisa J. and Coast Guard Admiral Thad Allen. The public doesn’t want to see anyone from the MMS. Jane Lubchenko and the NOAA folks are mainly needed to trot out the latest scientific findings. And the other secretaries and special assistants just aren’t as reassuring to the public as Jackson. Stick a Saints hat on her head, give her some real authority beyond regulating dispersants, and let her lead. She will not disappoint.

It’s time to get our act together. Instead of raiding Latinos and other immigrants, we need to ensure that all workers and volunteers are protected. We need to make sure the cleanup efforts have the proper expertise and leadership behind them. We need to get our priorities straight. We need to protect America from the oil industry’s poisonous greed.

For more updates on this story, visit Project Economic Refugee.

The following originally appeared on Project Economic Refugee.

In more disturbing news related to border violence: two Latino men were killed; Immigration Talk with a Mexican American is reporting that one of the men found dead was clutching his birth certificate covered in blood and that eerily, this happened the day after Barbara Coe, leader of the hate group California Coalition for Immigration Reform incited attendees of a “Phoenix Rising” Rally to “lock and load”. Read that post here. It may be that the two events (the Phoenix Rising rally & the murders) have no relation to each other, but taking previous experience into account on the consequences of violent anti-immigrant rhetoric, it raises concerns nevertheless about the potential for such links to eventually take place. Here’s the video of the local Phoenix News segment.

Update: MyFoxPhoenix.com report.

The victims had tattoos indicating that they’re from the area. The victims were not carrying IDs, but one had a birth certificate on him so blood-soaked it could not be read. The Pinal County Sheriff’s Office has not made a conclusion on the victims’ legal status.

Here are some links to some local news outlets that reported on this: KTAR.com, azfamily.com, ABC15.com, CBS5, Arizona Daily Star, and CBS13, all of whom did not mention in their reports that one of the victims was found dead clutching a birth certificate covered in blood. To add to the strangeness, American Chronicle has this bizarre note up on its website:

Pinal County Sheriff’s Deputies, Arizona State and Federal Investigators are just now on the scene of an apparent double homicide near milepost 150 on Interstate 8, which is the same area that the U.S. Border Fire Report, [...] reported recently showing the same area as the Arizona Concerned Citizens set up watch posts to help detect illegal smugglers just east of Gila Bend Arizona. [...]

[...]According to the Concerned Citizens they offered and alert authorities and the public to the dangerous area between Gila Bend and Casa Grande Arizona their efforts were to help observe and report the daily invasion across our southern border with Mexico.

[...]Concerned Citizens group had just lift the area a few days earlier they say in view of this latest shootings they are ready to deploy again, to video tape and educate Americans about the real threat to National Security and our public safety.

The group is in support of Jan Brewer signing SB1070 and say they want to help educate the public. They say “It´s time to bring back the” Minuteman Type Lines”

The group pointed out that there are 30 miles of area in a straight line that they covered the last time around. They’ll go back and do what they do best….. “DETERRENCE BY PRESENCE”

[...]The locations of deployment were the very area where these two killings took place. They established multiple base camps at major choke points.

Update # 2: here’s the video of the Phoenix Rising rally that Immigration Talk with a Mexican American refers to.

Updates on this continue to develop.  Please visit Project Economic Refugee to stay informed.

The following originally appeared on Project Economic Refugee.

MSNBC reported just this morning that border patrol shot and killed a 14-year-old boy. The AP note can be found online on FoxNews’ site here.

Stay tuned for more updates on this.

Update: via the raw story on the boy that was shot.

At the El Paso Times, Daniel Burunda reports, “U.S. authorities would not confirm if someone died, but Mexican news media reported a young man was dead. Some outlets showed photos of the body under the Puente Negro, or the Black Bridge, just west of the Paso del Norte Bridge.”

Update #2: El Paso Times now has the picture of the boy’s feet here and reports this:

Special Operation Supervisor Ramiro Cordero said border patrol agents on bikes were assaulted Monday night by rock-throwing members of the group. He said members of the group entered the United States through a gap in the border fence.

They threw rocks at agents, Cordero said. Then one of the agents fired at the group.

Chihuahua state officials said today that the boy shot dead was Sergio Adrian Hernandez Huereca, a Mexican national. They asked for a full investigation of the shooting.

[...]The Border Patrol did not identify the agent who fired. He has been placed on paid leave, Cordero said.

The Mexican Secretary of State today condemned the death.

Mexican officials said they want the U.S. to conduct a full investigation into the events that prompted the shooting.

The use of firearms in response to a rock attack is a “disproportionate use of force,” officials said.

Reports on this are developing quickly, for more updates, go here.

The following originally appeared on Project Economic Refugee.

Mexico’s President visited The White House & Congress in the aftermath of Arizona’s new authoritarian and racist immigration law.

President Calderón made headlines this week, more than anything for his address to a joint session of U.S. Congress where he asked for the reinstatement of the assault weapons ban and for the rejection of Arizona’s new authoritarian police law. Watch his full address by clicking here.

Full disclosure: for those that don’t know, Calderón is actually a social and fiscal conservative, whose Presidency is still tainted by allegations of election fraud, which prevented progressive presidential candidate Lopez Obrador (click here for Obrador’s website) from becoming President instead of Calderón. Current Mexican President Calderón is also a big supporter of Mexico’s oil privatization to open it up to even more agressive foreign controls, something that would please U.S.-based corporations very much. Having said that, you would think that conservatives would love Calderón. Instead, he has been lambasted by the U.S. right-wing media for urging Congress to pass immigration reform, God forbid!

I can’t tell you how many times the tired old argument surfaces with conservatives again and again: that Mexico’s own immigration laws are just as authoritarian as the United States’ and so that somehow justifies draconian immigration laws. First, I’ll repeat here what I have already stated on Project Economic Refugee’s site previously:

…two wrongs do not make a right. For the sake of argument: just because Mexico or any other country might have been guilty of having an inhumane immigration policy of its own in the past, it does not mean that it is okay for the U.S. to have an even more horrible one. The U.S. is supposed to be better, not worse, than other countries.

So what are the facts on Mexico’s own immigration laws? Via ThinkProgress:

In 2008, the Mexican Congress voted unanimously with 393 votes to decriminalize undocumented immigration to Mexico. Undocumented immigration is now a minor offense punishable by fines equivalent to about $475 to $2,400. However, just because Mexico reformed its laws doesn’t mean its law enforcement authorities got the memo. Amnesty International recently issued a report saying there is still “widespread abuse of migrants in Mexico,” largely because Article 67 of Mexico’s immigration law still requires law enforcement to demand that foreigners prove their legal presence in the country — which is nearly identical to provisions in Arizona’s immigration law. The Interior Department is reportedly working to repeal Article 67 “so that no one can deny or restrict foreigners’ access to justice and human rights, whatever their migratory status.” However, rather than seeing it as a source of hypocrisy, the U.S. would be wise to examine Mexico’s experience with illegal immigration as an extreme, but poignant case study of the deputization of immigration law and what can happen when it turns immigrants into criminals.

I am clearly not here to defend Calderón nor Mexico’s politicians for their shortcomings to their own people but before you start believing the right-wing propaganda machine’s demonizing of the solutions he proposed during his address to Congress, maybe you should take a closer look at what he actually said (something that the corporate media tends to gloss over). Let’s review the transcrip from the Mexican President’s address to Congress to examine what he actually advocated for:

A stronger Mexico means a stronger United States … and a stronger United States means a stronger Mexico … Let us create more jobs for American workers and more jobs for Mexican workers; members of the Congress, I’m not a President who likes to see Mexicans leave our country searching for opportunities abroad; in migration our communities lose their best people, the hardest working, the most dynamic, the leaders of their communities, as migrants, as parents, [sometimes] will never see their children again.

…today, we are doing the best that we can do in order to reduce migration to create opportunities and to create jobs for Mexicans in our own country where their homes are and where their families are; as many jobs as we can, and Mexico will one day be a country in which our people will find the opportunities that today they look for outside of the country. Until then, Mexico is determined to assume its responsibility. For us, migration, is not just your problem, we see it as our problem as well. My government does not favor the breaking of the rules, I fully respect the right of any country to enact and enforce its own laws but what we need today is to fix our broken and inefficient system; we favor the establishment of laws that work and work well for us all, so the time has come for the United States and Mexico to work together in this issue, the time has come to reduce the causes of migration and to turn this phenonemon into a legal order and secure flow of workers and visitors. We want to provide the Mexican people with the opportunities they are looking for, that is our goal, that is our mission as government to transform Mexico into a land of opportunities to provide to our people with jobs and opportunities to live in peace and to be happy.

I don’t know about you, but that didn’t sound as crazy to me as the right-wing propaganda machine is making it out to be.

To view more updates on this, please visit Project Economic Refugee.