|
| Volume 3, Issue 8 -- April 28, 2006 |
|
From the JPIC Office Since the last newsletter, we celebrated and continue to celebrate the glorious Resurrection of Jesus. Peace and joy to all of you! In putting together this newsletter, I am reminded that while Jesus died on the cross two thousand years ago, His sacrifice so that we may have life to the fullest is challenged daily as we confront some of our times’ most pressing social issues. Every day we have a choice to embrace or reject Jesus’ gift of life in how we respond to questions such as immigration, economic justice, war and the environment. This week we share with you two pieces, one on the U.S.-Mexico border and the other about immigration, in which people have chosen to embrace Jesus’ gift of life in the face of powerful forces. Our third piece is about the latest free trade agreement between the United States and Peru. The agreement once again gives us the opportunity to stand in solidarity with our sisters and brothers in the United States and Peru who could be devastated if the agreement is ratified by Congress. We hope that when the time for action comes, you will speak your voice for those whose voice is silenced.
Message from the Border By Columban Father Bill Morton First of all, a special thanks to all of you who continue, after nearly three years, to offer your prayers and support to the people on the mesa in Lomas de Poleo. It has been an amazing struggle here along the Texas-New Mexico-Mexico border, at times more like a roller-coaster, but God is good and hope is still alive. As mentioned a couple weeks ago, Pedro Fuentes Zaragoza had his guards, once again, at the back gate of the Lomas de Poleo colonia. They are there around the clock, but have not tried to shut the gate or interfere with any or our activities. On Monday, April 24, he started posting his guards at the front gate as well. As of Friday the 28th, they were being more aggressive and keeping half the gate shut. This makes it more difficult to get through and is clearly a form of intimidation. Again, they are not fully shutting the gate or trying to keep us from bringing material through but they are there with maybe 10 or 12 vigilantes, and their mere presence is a threat, as you can imagine. On Monday, some of the men went to the state police (CIPOL) who helped us in the past and they are open to the idea of coming back to make sure the gates are kept open. We’ll have to see how it works out. The lawyer from the Agrarian Attorney General’s Office continues to work faithfully with the people. He said he is certain that a federal magistrate will be here within one month to review all the people’s claims for their land. In fact, this imminent arrival may be part of the reason Zaragoza is trying to secure the gate again—to give the impression that he is in control of the land on the mesa. We had good crowds at our little chapel of Jesus de Nazaret over Holy Week. Marek Stupek, a recent immigrant from Slovakia, joined us on Good Friday and Columban Father Tim Mulloy, the rector of our seminary in Chicago, joined us for the Easter Vigil. We believe in the power of the resurrected Jesus to bring new life and transformation to His rebano on the mesa. Again, thank you for keeping us in mind and in prayer. Migration This week we share with you a reflection by one of our readers who participated in her local and historical immigration rally on April 9.
MARCHING IN MINNESOTA I am not Hispanic. I am not Somali. I am not an undocumented worker in this great country of ours. But I am a member of the human race. So when I learned of the march and rally for immigration reform being planned for April 9, I knew I would be there in support and solidarity of my brothers and sisters from around the world. So my friend Shelly Hiemer and I hopped in her van and off we went to the other side St. Paul, Minnesota. The plan was to gather at the St. Paul Cathedral and proceed down the grassy boulevard to the Minnesota State Capital. The parade was lining up at the designated time, but no one was moving. I asked a nearby police officer what the hold up was. He explained that the march organizers had originally given them a crowd estimate of 5,000. “The plan was to have everyone proceed down the sidewalk, but the people are coming by the bus loads. I would estimate the crowd at 10,000 right now and growing! We need to shut off the entire street now.” I looked in the direction he had pointed and sure enough, thousands of bodies were pouring up the street toward the Cathedral. Eventually this would prove to be the state’ largest immigration rally in history with the participation of 40,000 people, well exceeding the original estimate of 5,000. Suddenly, a huge wave of cheering flowed up through the crowd. Our beloved Archbishop Harry Flynn appeared from the cathedral doors to address the people. “It is important for us to march together to let our representatives and senators know what kind of country we want. We want a country willing to remove the barriers to participation present in our current immigration system that keep us all from building our future together. American citizens have a responsibility to welcome and support immigrants—both documented and undocumented.” He went on to say, “If the federal government decides to make this assistance, this bridge-building, this compassion, into an illegal activity and reason to be taken to jail, then we will all need to make a decision as to whether or not we obey a human law, which would have us turn our backs on the immigrant, or a higher law, the law of God, which commands us to welcome the stranger.” For me, the archbishop’s words are the ultimate validation of my deepest convictions. Now the huge crowd began to move toward the State Capital. They were empowered by the words of Archbishop Flynn, and confident of God’s mercy. As I looked around, I realized there were very few individuals like me. Most were families—mothers pushing babies in strollers, children on their dad’s shoulders, and grandparents. These are the people we term as criminals? These are the people our country is afraid of? There is something wrong with this line of thinking. “Si, se puede!” Yes, we can!,” was the chant heard over and over that day. And when I looked around at the 40,000 people who felt it important enough to be there, I realized just how true that is. Franciscan Father Eugene Michel from the St. Paul parish of Sacred Heart put it in prospective when he said, “What an incredible way to begin Holy Week, by marching for justice…. I couldn’t be pro-life and then ignore the immigrant whose life is threatened … by fines and deportation.” Economic Justice
Just a few months short of the one-year anniversary of the signing of the Central America Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), trade negotiators from the United States and Peru have signed a bilateral trade agreement (Peru-FTA) that mirrors many of the controversial provisions in CAFTA.
U.S. Signs Peru Trade Deal; Timing For Hill Action Unclear U.S. and Peruvian officials today signed the U.S.-Peru trade agreement, amid uncertainty about when Congress will actually take up the deal. Key House Democrats reprised their charges that the pact lacks adequate worker protections, bringing into question whether the Bush administration will have the kind of broad-based support that House GOP leaders like to see before moving forward with trade deals. “The U.S.-Peru FTA fails to address the reality on the ground in Peru where workers do not have their rights in law or in practice,” Rep. Sander Levin, D-Mich., said in a statement. Administration officials and GOP congressional aides were vague about when the deal will come before Congress for approval, saying they will wait until an International Trade Commission economic impact study is released—expected in late May—before deciding when to move the legislation. The White House could seek congressional approval as early as June. Congressional sources said the administration would like the deal in place before Peruvian President Alejandro Toledo leaves office July 28. A key question is where moderate New Democrats in the House will come down on the deal. Trade Representative Portman has made copious efforts to court New Democrats on trade deals, and their support would ease the blow of potentially losing Democrats like Levin and Ways and Means ranking member Charles Rangel, D-N.Y. “I am confident we will have more support from Democrats” for Peru than on the Central America Free Trade Agreement, said Christopher Wenk, trade policy director for the National Association of Manufacturers. "Ambassador Portman has done yeoman's work to reach out to New Democrats and I think that will pay off at the end of the day." A U.S. trade official said, "We’ve been proactively seeking creative ways to work on labor and other issues with members on both sides of the aisle." Levin differed with that assessment, saying there remains “a very widespread dismay and concern that the administration is failing to try to build a bipartisan coalition on trade.” Levin, Rangel and other Democrats have said they will support the Peru deal if the White House agrees to add language obligating Peru to meet International Labor Organization core standards. The agreement makes 80 percent of U.S. exports of industrial goods to Peru—and two-thirds of U.S. farm exports—duty-free immediately. It strengthens protections for U.S. investors and sets up a process for citizens to seek review of a country’s failure to protect the environment, a provision sought by Senate Finance ranking member Max Baucus, D-Mont. Peruvian opponents of the agreement said in a conference call today that political opposition to the agreement is building in Peru. “The FTA will lead to increased social unrest in Peru, which is already being seen in the electoral process that is under way,” Archbishop Pedro Barreto of Huancayo said through a translator. Huancayo said increased imports of U.S.-grown farm products to Peru that would result from the deal may cause domestic farmers to resort to coca production. Activists said a national elections board has certified a nationwide referendum to quash the U.S.-Peru deal. But they acknowledged that the Peruvian Congress, with a coalition of Toledo’s party and the National Unity party opposing the referendum, has the power to block it. Contact Us
We welcome submissions, comments and suggestions.
|