SWOPblogger

Check out this great article on the breakdown of the Hispanic vote and how a candidates stance on immigration can determine if they'll get the Hispanic vote or not.

But before that:

Here's my lightbulb of the day from a conversation with a co-worker:

co-worker: The Republicans don't need to win the Hispanic vote, they just need to lower the amount of hispanics voting for democrats. That means if they are not going to vote for McCain they need to figure out how to make them stay home.

me: Now I get why on KKKob they've been asking people to abstain from voting. They've been saying for months now, "don't vote for the lesser of 2 evils, if you don't beleive a candidate can lead our country, stay home." Damn that's sneaky.

********
ALBUQUERQUE—As New Mexico emerges as a key swing state in the 2008 elections, the two parties are increasingly focusing on the state’s Latino electorate as a key demographic.

Nationwide, Barack Obama has nearly a 3-to-1 advantage over John McCain among Latino voters, according to a poll released June 16. The telephone poll of Latino voters conducted by Pacific Market Research in collaboration with University of Washington political scientists found that 60 percent planned to vote for Obama, 23 percent for McCain and 16 percent were undecided. The researchers combined New Mexico data with other southwestern "battleground" states and found Obama leading McCain in those states 57 percent to 26 percent.

During a May 30 foreign press briefing, Susan Minushkin, Deputy Director of the Pew Hispanic Center, described the enormous growth as well as the increasing dispersion of the Latino community across the nation, but also explained that Hispanic eligible voters are concentrated in a few select states, giving Hispanics more influence in presidential elections due to their ability to influence key state races.

New Mexico has the largest rate of eligible voters who are Hispanic of any state: 38 percent. California and Texas have 25 and 23 percent, respectively. In seven other states, Hispanics constitute between 11 and 20 percent of eligible voters: Florida, New York, New Jersey, Illinois, Arizona, Nevada and Colorado.

Of these states, the so-called "battleground" states are New Mexico, Colorado, Nevada, Florida, and possibly Arizona.

Given the statistics and the winner-take-all nature of the electoral college, the significance of Latino voters in New Mexico becomes apparent.
But in New Mexico, Obama can’t take the Latino vote for granted.

Continue reading here

Labels: 2008 Elections, Hispanic vote

A new twist on the conventional wisdom of Intel's math

Moore's law may yet be in need of an update to keep up with the times. SWOP has offered a hidden equation - dubbed "SWOP's Law" - which may also need updating...but that's another story.

NY Times 6/30/08 - Intel’s Dominance Is Challenged by a Low-Power Upstart

NYtimes.com: From mainframes to minicomputers and then PCs, each new computing generation has displaced its predecessor by reaching a broader audience and costing far less. And each time, the dominant company in one generation loses control in the next.

Intel hopes its tiny new Atom chip will fend off a British rival. That’s why the PC industry’s commanding chip maker, Intel, might do well to be alarmed by the computer chips being designed by Qualcomm, a maker of chips for cellphones. An engineer at Qualcomm’s gleaming corporate campus here demonstrated a palm-sized circuit board capable of displaying high-definition video. What was striking about the demonstration was not the quality of the video images, which is now commonplace. Rather it was that the microprocessor chip, called Snapdragon, drives the display with less than half the power of a similar chip recently introduced by Intel. Qualcomm designers say it will also cost less.
Continue Reading.

Putting the "Anti" in Trustiness

NY Times 5/7/08 - In Turnabout, Anti-trust Unit Looks at Intel

NYtimes.org: WASHINGTON — A global legal battle between the two largest makers of computer processors took an abrupt turn this week when the Federal Trade Commission opened a formal antitrust investigation of the Intel Corporation.

Continue Reading.

NY Times Editorial 5/15/08 - The Intel Investigation

NYtimes Editorial: It certainly took its time. But the Federal Trade Commission’s decision to open a formal antitrust investigation of Intel is very welcome.
Continue reading.

Labels: Anti-trust, corporate accountability, Intel, Moore's Law

The Colorado Springs Gazette reported earlier this week that Hewlett Packard was offering its 800 call center employees there the opportunity to relocate next year to Rio Rancho when their new facility is built here. You know the one. It was heralded with much fanfare last week by the Governor.

Trip and I reported on the news coming out of Colorado Springs for the New Mexico Independent. Trip had already included in his original story the details about what are pretty standard economic incentives given to companies who relocate to New Mexico. You know those also. In plainer language: transfers of tax money, or tax breaks--to benefit corporations.

In the case of HP:

The company could receive as much as $8 million to $10 million in state subsidies for training workers and more than $20 million in state tax credits for creating high-wage jobs, Economic Development Secretary Fred Mondragon said last week. The governor also will ask the Legislature to provide $12 million in capital improvement financing for the project. The majority of that capital outlay money will go toward constructing the building...

Anyhow, its business as usual. In a nutshell:

New Mexico offered an incentive package in order to compete for the Hewlett Packard call center. That's what States do--it's been going on for a long time. Many feel we simply have to do this.

Given that States find themselves competing like this, most of us are usually (somewhat) understanding of our economic development professionals and politicians who feel they have to
offer tax breaks and other benefits, like job training dollars, to bring us more jobs.

But in return, we ask for a few simple things, one being that the jobs actually go to New Mexicans.

But maybe we're just a bunch of simpletons. Because according to New Mexico economic development spokesperson Toni Balzano:

"There's nothing about our incentives that makes them hire 100 percent of New Mexicans," she said. "That is entirely up to HP. If they choose to move people here or choose NM residents, that is their call."

Balzano said the state hopes that the majority of jobs at the Rio Rancho center go to New Mexicans.

Balzano said that even if they bring outsiders in for the jobs, many of which are expected to pay $40,000 plus a year, just having the jobs alone will be good.

So what do you think? Is it enough to just have the jobs here, or should a multi-million dollar investment of tax dollars mean that New Mexicans, at the least, get a first shot at them?

cross-posted on m-pyre.

Friday June 27th, 5:30-8:00pm


Come Join us for an unforgettable night of art, music, culture, food and of course social justice history.

Looking for affordable art? Here's your chance and you don't want to miss it.

Dinner will be available at 6:00pm for a $10.00 donation.

Download your own copy of the invitation and send it to your friends!

invitation_art_auction.pdf

Labels: Arte Si Guerra No, New Mexico art, Silent Art Auction, South by Southwest, Southern Echo, Southwest Workers Union

From SWOP Director Robby Rodriguez:

Intel is rejecting its own community front group’s recommendation to raise the height of its pollution stacks.

****
See the video here.

Intel is building new smokestacks, and some people in Corrales are fighting to have them built taller.

Residents said the higher stacks will bring less air pollution to their neighborhood.

Intel is building the new smokestacks 30 meters tall, shorter than the 38 to 40 meters recommended by Intel's own community group. The company said 30 meters is already taller than what is mandated and any taller would interfere with neighbors’ views.

..."As you go to much higher stacks, the concentration of material that gets down to ground level will be less," said [Hugh] Church...who was on Intel's community environmental working group. "I think 30 meters is too short."

Read the full article.
****

What the Channel 7 report does not say is that NMED’s own staff stated publicly and on the record that “Intel could be culpable for residents illnesses”.

That statement was made by Mary Uhl of the NM Environment Department after an independent air modeling study found extremely high correlation between Intel’s pollution plume and resident complaints to the Environment Department. After that statement, Governor Richardson through his Secretaries for Environment & Health shut down the task force process.

The task force met anyway to make recommendations and Intel did agree to raise the height of their stacks.

Given all this, why does Intel stop at 30 meters when their own cheerleaders are calling for 38-40? What’s another 8-10 meters?

What a bunch of jerks.

Labels: Envirionmental Justice, Intel

By Malkia A. Cyril and Jen Soriano, Center for Media Justice

Conservative Fox News host Bill O’Reilly has done it again.

Sensationalism, exaggeration, and inaccuracy are the cornerstones of Right-wing punditry- so it wasn't surprising when Bill O’Reilly ripped the 2008 National Conference on Media Reform with ridiculous and unsubstantiated claims that “lunacy”, “danger” and “hatred” dominated the event. His “news” crew clearly didn’t experience what thousands of others did: the amazing speakers, strategic dialogue, and insightful information that predominated the conference.

What was surprising was that while some leaders of the movement for media reform rightly chastised Bill O’Reilly for his bullying, they were strangely silent on his obvious use of racist and homophobic stereotypes to bolster his claims – stereotypes we believe were leveraged to marginalize and divide our movement along lines of race, class, and gender identity.

How exactly did Bill O’Reilly try to use racism and homophobia to marginalize media reform?

During the Fox “news” show that aired on Monday June 9th, 2008, O’Reilly showed a clip of National Hip-Hop Caucus President Rev. Lennox Yearwood speaking passionately against Fox and commented, “Our crew felt they were in physical danger at this conference”. Then Mary Katherine Ham, Bill O’Reilly’s white female commentator, compared Rev. Yearwood to Barack Obama’s controversial former pastor Rev. Wright by saying that media reformers “apparently [have been] studying in the Reverend Wright school of oratory”. Most blatantly, O’Reilly said to Black Fox News correspondent Juan Williams, “Juan, you’re an African-American, you know this much better than I do – the hatred, Juan, at that conference…. was just off the chart.”

Um, why would “hatred” and (the erroneous insinuation of) “violence” be better understood by a black man?

And the homophobia…lawd-a-mercy. O’Reilly stated that in contrast to the so-called “liberal media”, Fox “played it straight” in providing critical coverage of Obama. He then claimed Fox to be a watchdog of media reform activists by touting that Fox is “outing them every time”. This wasn’t the first time that O’Reilly claimed to be “outing” media reform activists. In the lead-in show that appeared the Friday before the main story, O’Reilly referred to “outing” Dan Rather. His commentator answered, “Was he ever in the closet?”

African-Americans and queer communities might disagree with O’Reilly about the degree of their representation at the 2008 Conference on Media Reform, especially after he conjured up enough stereotypes to make his meaning clear: the media activists at the National Conference on Media reform were dangerous black men and closeted gays who represent a serious threat to traditional American values.

Let’s talk about the response.

Instead of directly confronting the bias, thereby increasing the scope and breadth of our movement, Free Press attempted to fight right wing conservatism with liberal conservatism and framed an attack on an entire movement as an attack against the narrowest version of its leadership.

Free Press’ video response to O’Reilly’ depicted Bill Moyers’ demand that O’Reilly appear on his show and stop “pretending to be a journalist." The written response was similar, echoing the demand for real reporting and correctly claiming that media reform is a “main street” issue that belongs to everybody.

Movements that attempt to win the support of both the right and the left often choose not to confront racism because of the need to move quickly, or because of the challenges posed in moving issues through the legislature. These are real considerations. But whether under attack by Bill O’Reilly or by corporate media consolidation, ignoring blatant bias is un-strategic; it forces our movement into its most centrist position and surrenders rather than shifts the terms of debate.

And when this happens, our movement makes itself much smaller than we truly are. Today’s Main Street is no longer just middle-class white America; it is neglected and rural, targeted and urban, and more diverse than ever before. It is made up of communities structurally adjusted out of political and economic power – people of color, the foreclosed on middle class, poor & working class communities of all races, immigrants, women, queer & trans people, non-English speakers, disabled people, prisoners, progressives. Today’s Main Street requires a bigger vision for media change featuring us. Working together, we can establish compelling media policies that achieve Media Justice, with reform as a strategy on the road to an equitable redistribution of political, economic, and cultural power.

O’Reilly’s attempt to divide this growing movement for media policy change along lines of race, class and gender identity is just the latest example of the age-old tactic of using wedge communications to marginalize progressive fights with the potential to win real change. This strategy only works when elements within the targeted constituencies consent to splintering their own alliances. We won’t let that happen without a fight. We want our movement to do better. And we believe it can.

But we can only do better through broad-based alliances led by the diversity of people who make up the United States today. These alliances can only have integrity when their leadership sees racist, sexist or homophobic attacks for what they are, and chooses to respond. So when you tell O’Reilly that you don’t buy his journalism, tell him you don’t buy his racism either. And when you do, know that the Center for Media Justice and the Media Action Grassroots Network stand with all our constituencies and allies- including Free Press. Including you.

The only road to a truly free press is a movement united from the beltway to the hood against racism, sexism, and economic inequity- and for media accountability and justice for us all. In solidarity, CMJ.

Labels: NCMR2008

Eleanor Chavez went one-on-one with Elaine Baumgartel of KUNM news Friday, June 13 about what it took to win her NM House District 13 campaign, which unseated 22 year incumbent Dan Silva on the west side of Albuquerque. She also talks about legislative priorities, which include working to obtain universal healthcare for New Mexicans. Eleanor is Executive Director of NM District 1199 Hospital and Healthcare Employees Union, and a long time member and former Board President of the SouthWest Organizing Project. She has also been the chair of the NM Health Security for New Mexicans Campaign, which has led the fight for adequate healthcare for all New Mexicans.

Check it at 061308-ChavesQA.MP3

Labels: District 1199 Hospital and Healthcare Employees Union, health care, Health Security Act, NM Politics

SWOP members joined others from Stop the War Machine this past Friday in front of the Federal Courthouse to demand once again of the Justice Department and Bush Administration that the "Cuban Five" political prisoners be released.

Last week the 11th Circuit Appeals Court in Atlanta, Georgia - in a highly politicized verdict that sounded at times as if it were written by the Bush Justice Department itself - upheld the convictions of the prisoners, who are held in federal penitentiaries throughout the US.

The Five were sent to southern Florida in the 1990s to monitor right wing Cuban exile organizations based in Miami that have engaged in violent acts against Cuba (including murder) and gotten away with it for nearly 50 years. In 1998, information gathered by the Five was turned over to the FBI, which at the time expressed strong interest in the activities of such groups. However, instead of doing anything about the terrorists, the Justice Department instead moved to arrest the Five, accusing them of crimes ranging from failure to declare themselves as "foreign agents" to military espionage and conspiracy to commit murder.

After one of the longest trials in US history, a Miami jury found the Five guilty on all charges, including some for which the prosecution had even stated that there was not enough evidence to convict. The Five were given sentences totaling 75 years and four life terms.

The Atlanta court did find that three of the defendants must be re-sentenced. Below are a statement issued by the International Ctte for the Freedom of the Five and an AP story on the court decision. Keep up to date on the Five at the website of the National Committee to Free the Five.



RESPONSE TO THE ATLANTA APPEALS COURT RULING BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE FOR THE FREEDOM OF THE CUBAN FIVE

On Wednesday June 4th, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals announced its ruling in the appeal case for the Cuban Five.

In the 99-page opinion, the three-judge panel unanimously upheld the convictions against the Five Cuban Patriots. The court also upheld the sentences given to René González (15 years) and Gerardo Hernández (two life sentences plus 15 years).

The court¹s ruling on Gerardo¹s sentence, however, was not unanimous: 2 to 1. On page 16 of the written opinion, Judge Phyllis Kravitch states that the government did not present sufficient evidence to convict Gerardo of conspiracy to commit murder.

The sentences of Ramón Labañino (life plus 18 years); Fernando González (19 years) and Antonio Guerrero (life plus 10 years) were returned to Judge Joan Lenard's Florida court for re-sentencing. Lenard will need to call for a hearing to issue the new ruling - this is the same judge who imposed the excessive and unjust sentences in 2001.

The Atlanta Appeals Court's written opinion, which employs startling political rhetoric, states that the defense's arguments lacked merit and clearly favors the government.

The court's ruling exposes various contradictions between the opinions of two of the justices and the author of the opinion, Judge William H. Pryor, an ultraconservative appointed to the bench with the help of Republican John McCain despite opposition from the Senate.

The defense attorneys, Weinglass, MacKenna and Horowitz, ensured they will continue the legal battle that began in December 2001 when they were unjustly sentences. There are still some legal avenues open.

Given the United States government's legal ploys to expand the sentences of our Five Brothers, we are not surprised by the judicial ruling. On the contrary, it reaffirms our need to continue fighting tirelessly to denounce this colossal injustice.

Exposed once again is the contempt of the United States government, which yesterday, in another U.S. city, defended the criminal Luis Posada Carriles.

A man who, rather than fittingly declaring him a terrorist for his crimes against humanity and extraditing him to Venezuela where the government has declared Carriles a fugitive and repeatedly demanded his extradition, the U.S. government has granted him full liberty.

Gerardo is not surprised by the ruling. "This is the same system that has unjustly incarcerated Mumia for more than 20 years along with Leonard Peltier and the Puerto Rican political prisoners, he said today.

"We will endure as many years as necessary, 30, 40, whatever it takes. As long as one of you is resisting, we will also resist until there is justice."

Gerardo has asked that we communicate his confidence to all of you, "For anyone who asks, tell them I am fine, strong and always looking forward."

Along with all of our friends around the world we call for mobilizations beginning on the morning of June 6, in front of all headquarters of the terrorist U.S. government - in Europe, Latin America and the U.S. - which holds our Five Brothers imprisoned.

Only solidarity, constant condemnation and international mobilization will secure freedom for the Five.

International Committee for the Freedom of the Cuban Five
June 5, 2008


Court rules on sentences of 'Cuban 5'
By WALTER PUTNAM

Associated Press
06/04/08

ATLANTA (AP) - A federal appeals court has again upheld the politically charged convictions of five Cuban intelligence agents accused of spying in the U.S., but vacated sentences of three of them, including two who are serving life terms.

A three-judge panel of the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals returned those cases to a federal judge in Miami for resentencing based on findings in an opinion filed Wednesday that the spies gathered no "top secret" information.

It was the third time the case had come before the court.

The full 11th Circuit court already upheld the convictions of the so-called "Cuban Five" in August 2006. It rejected claims that their federal trial should have been moved from Miami because of widespread opposition among Cuban-Americans there to the communist Cuban government.

The five have been lionized as heroes in Cuba, while exile groups say they were justly punished.

In the appeal ruled on Wednesday, the five challenged a judge's refusal to suppress evidence from searches conducted under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, sovereign immunity, discovery procedures, jury selection and alleged lack of evidence to support their convictions.

"We conclude that the arguments about the suppression of evidence, sovereign immunity, discovery, jury selection and the trial are meritless, and sufficient evidence supports each conviction," Circuit Judge William H. Pryor wrote.

The latest decision included the life sentence for Gerardo Hernandez, who was convicted of murder conspiracy in the deaths of four Miami-based pilots shot down by Cuban jets in 1996. The panel split 2-1 to uphold Hernandez' life term.

The four slain pilots flew planes that were part of the Brothers to the Rescue organization, which dropped pro-democracy pamphlets on the island.

Hernandez and the others - Ruben Campa, also known as Fernando Gonzalez; Rene Gonzalez; Luis Medina, aka Ramon Labanino; and Antonio Guerrero - were members of what was known by Cuban intelligence as The Wasp Network.

The panel vacated the life terms of Medina and Guerrero and Campa's 19-year sentence, agreeing with their contentions that their sentences were improperly configured because no "top secret information was gathered or transmitted." The judges concurred with Campa that his sentence was too strict because he was not a manager of supervisor of the network.

The five acknowledged being Cuban agents but said they were not spying on the United States. They said their focus was on U.S.-based exile groups planning "terrorist" actions against the Castro government.

After a trial that lasted six months, they were convicted in 2001 of acting as unregistered Cuban agents in the United States and of espionage conspiracy for attempting to penetrate U.S. military bases.

A three-judge 11th Circuit panel overturned the convictions in 2005, saying there should have been a change of venue. But the full court reversed that decision, 10-2.

The National Committee to Free the Cuban Five denounced the decision to uphold the convictions.

"It flies in the face of the truth. The five men are not guilty of any crime," said Gloria La Riva, the committee coordinator. "They were saving lives by stopping terrorism. They never had weapons. They never posed any harm to the people of the United States."