October, 19 2016, 02:45pm EDT
In Wisconsin Senate Debate, Feingold Stands for Immigrants & Working Families, Johnson Embraces Trump
In response to Tuesday's debate between Wisconsin Senate candidates Ron Johnson and Russ Feingold, Voces de la Frontera Action issued the following statement from Executive Director Christine Neumann-Ortiz:
MILWAUKEE, Wisc.
In response to Tuesday's debate between Wisconsin Senate candidates Ron Johnson and Russ Feingold, Voces de la Frontera Action issued the following statement from Executive Director Christine Neumann-Ortiz:
"On Tuesday night, Ron Johnson embraced some of the most extreme aspects of Donald Trump's agenda and rhetoric. He was also dishonest about his own positions and their impact. Johnson echoed Trump's baseless and dangerous claims about a rigged election and urged supporters to be poll watchers to prevent non-existent voter fraud, a clear invitation to intimidate voters, particularly African-Americans, Latinxs and Muslims. Like Trump, Johnson embraced Trump's anti-worker policies, such as opposing a living wage. Johnson failed to acknowledge his own Senate voting record of opposing a minimum wage increase, and during the debate, appeared to flip flop, stating that his new position is to raise the $7.25 minimum wage only as high as inflation. This limited increase would still keep working people in poverty. Johnson and Trump alike are corporate CEOs who can't relate to the struggles of working people. Both have personally profited from the stagnation of workers' wages and from pro-business trade agreements like the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which Johnson voted to fast-track.
"On immigrant rights, Johnson's proposed massive guest worker programs run by individual states would further drive down wages and labor conditions for all workers, who would compete with a very oppressed, controlled workforce. The Southern Poverty Law Center has said these guest worker programs are "close to slavery." Johnson failed to acknowledge that migration from Mexico to the US is net-zero. Instead of wasting more resources to increase militarization of the border, we need greater accountability and human rights protections. We need to address how our own foreign policy - especially pro-corporate free trade agreements and US support for repressive governments - contributes to forced migration from other countries.
"In sharp contrast, Russ Feingold put forward a vision of government responsive to working people, including immigrant families, and set out clear policy objectives to advance these goals. Feingold made a strong case for comprehensive immigration reform with a path to citizenship for the 11 million undocumented families in the United States today, which polls show over 60% of the country supports, as well as 60% of Wisconsinites. Feingold affirmed the dignity of all working people when he said immigrant workers should not have to fear the police or fear they'll be separated from their families when they're driving to work. Feingold also recognized the vital contributions immigrants make to the Wisconsin and US economy, pointing out that the dairy industry and manufacturing depends on immigrant workers, and that Wisconsin industry supports a path to citizenship. Russ Feingold was confident and informed, and he clearly articulated his pro-worker positions and exposed Johnson's pro-corporate record. Latinxs will vote in record numbers on November 8, 2016 and the choice could not be clearer."
19 de octubre de 2016
PARA DISTRIBUCION INMEDIATA
Contacto: Sam Singleton-Freeman, 414-469-9206, sfreeman@vdlf.org
En debate para ser Senador de Wisconsin, Feingold apoya a los inmigrantes y trabajadores, Johnson abraza a Trump
Milwaukee, WI - En respuesta al debate del martes entre los candidatos para Senador federal de Wisconsin Ron Johnson y Russ Feingold, Voces de la Frontera Accion publico la siguiente declaracion de la directora ejecutiva Christine Neumann-Ortiz:
"En el debate Ron Johnson estuvo de acuerdo con los aspectos mas extremos de la agenda y la retorica de Donald Trump. Tambien fue deshonesto sobre sus propias ideas y su impacto. Johnson enfatizo las quejas no justificadas y peligrosas de Trump que la eleccion sera falsificada en su contra e insto a los seguidores a ser observadores electorales para prevenir el fraude electoral (que no existe), una clara invitacion a intimidar a los votantes, especialmente los afroamericanos, latinxs y musulmanes. Durante el debate, Johnson cambio su posicion completamente sobre el salario minimo. Aun asi, su nueva posicion - al parecer, para elevar el salario minimo actual de $ 7.25 por hora solamente por la tasa de inflacion - que todavia mantendria a los trabajadores en la pobreza. Al igual que Trump, Johnson apoya a polizas que solo benefician a los ricos. Johnson y Trump por igual son ejecutivos corporativos que no pueden relacionarse con las luchas cotidianas de los trabajadores. Ambos se han beneficiado personalmente del estancamiento de los salarios de los trabajadores y de los acuerdos comerciales favorables a las corporaciones como la Acuerdo Transpacifico de Cooperacion Economica, de que Johnson voto a favor.
"En los derechos de los inmigrantes, los programas aumentados estatales de trabajadores extranjeros de Johnson bajarian las condiciones de trabajo para todo el mundo, obligando a los trabajadores de los Estados Unidos que competen con una fuerza laboral oprimida y controlada. El Southern Poverty Law Center ha dicho que programas de trabajadores huespedes son "similares a la esclavitud" porque dan a empleadores el derecho de deportar a los trabajadores y no tienen protecciones suficientes para los derechos laborales. Johnson no admitio que la migracion neta es cero, y que en lugar de gastar mas recursos en la militarizacion de la frontera, necesitamos mejor contabilidad y proteccion de los derechos humanos. Tenemos que cambiar nuestra propia politica exterior - especialmente acuerdos de comercio libre favorables a las corporaciones y el apoyo estadounidense a los gobiernos represivos - que contribuye a la migracion forzada de otros paises.
"Russ Feingold propuso un gobierno mas sensible a las necesidades de los trabajadores, incluidas las familias inmigrantes, y establecio objetivos claros para avanzar esta vision. Feingold hizo un caso fuerte sobre la necesidad de una reforma migratoria con camino a la ciudadania para los 11 millones de familias indocumentados en los Estados Unidos hoy en dia, que las encuestas muestran que mas del 60% del pais apoya, asi como el 60% de los residentes de Wisconsin. Felicitamos Feingold por defender a todas las personas trabajadoras cuando dijo que nadie debe tener miedo de la policia o tener miedo que podrian ser separados de sus familias cuando estan conduciendo al trabajo. Feingold tambien reconocio las contribuciones importantes que los inmigrantes aportan a la economia de los Estados Unidos y Wisconsin, y senalo que la industria lactea y de fabricacion depende de los trabajadores inmigrantes, y que la industria de Wisconsin apoya un camino a la ciudadania. Russ Feingold mostro confianza y sabiduria, y claramente articulo sus posiciones a favor de los trabajadores al contrario de Johnson, que demostro su record a favor de las corporaciones. Los latinxs van a votar en numeros historicos en esta eleccion el 8 de noviembre y las opciones no podrian ser mas claras."
Keep reading...Show less
Voces de la Frontera is Wisconsin's leading immigrant rights group - a grassroots organization that believes power comes from below and that people can overcome injustice to build a better world.
LATEST NEWS
House Dems Voice 'Deep Concern' Over Biden Claim That Israel Is Legally Using US Arms
A letter from 26 lawmakers notes the "stark differences and gaps" between what Biden administration officials say and the opinions of "prominent experts and global institutions" accusing Israel of genocide.
Apr 16, 2024
More than two dozen House Democrats on Tuesday challenged the Biden administration's claim that Israel is using U.S.-supplied weapons in compliance with domestic and international law—an assertion made amid an ongoing World Court probe of "plausibly" genocidal Israeli policies and practices in Gaza.
Citing "mounting credible and deeply troubling reports and allegations" of human rights crimes committed by Israeli troops in Gaza and soldiers and settlers in the occupied West Bank, 26 congressional Democrats led by Texas Reps. Veronica Escobar—who co-chairs President Joe Biden's reelection campaign—and Joaquin Castro asked U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, Secretary of State Antony Blinken, and Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines "whether and how" their agencies determined Israel is lawfully using arms provided by Washington.
"We write to express our deep concern regarding the U.S. Department of State's recent comments regarding assurances from the Israeli government, under National Security Memorandum (NSM) 20, that the Israeli government is using U.S.-origin weapons in full compliance with relevant U.S. and international law and is not restricting the delivery of humanitarian assistance," the lawmakers wrote in a letter to the Cabinet members.
The letter acknowledges the "grave concerns" of institutions and experts around the world regarding Israel's "conduct throughout the war in Gaza, its policies regarding civilian harm and military targeting, unauthorized expansion of settlements and settler violence in the West Bank, and potential use of U.S. arms by settlers, in additional to limitations on humanitarian aid supported by the U.S."
The legislators noted Israeli attacks on aid convoys, workers, and recipients—like the February 29 "
Flour Massacre" in which nearly 900 starving Palestinians were killed or wounded at a food distribution site—and "the closure of vital border crossings" as Gazan children starve to death as causes for serious concern.
While the lawmakers didn't mention the International Court of Justice's January 26
preliminary finding that Israel is "plausibly" committing genocide in Gaza, their letter highlights the "stark differences and gaps in the statements" made by Biden administration officials and "those made by prominent experts and global institutions"—many of whom accuse Israel of genocide.
The lawmakers' letter came amid reports of fresh Israeli atrocities, including a drone strike on a playground in the Maghazi refugee camp in northern Gaza that killed at least 11 children. Eyewitnesses described a "horrific scene of children torn apart."
While Biden has called out Israel's "indiscriminate bombing" in Gaza—much of it carried out using U.S.-supplied warplanes and munitions including 2,000-pound bombs that can level whole city blocks—his administration has approved more than 100 arms sales to Israel, has repeatedly sidestepped Congress to fast-track emergency armed aid, and is seeking to provide the key ally with billions of dollars in addition weaponry atop the nearly $4 billion it gets annually from Washington.
This, despite multiple federal laws—and the administration's own rules— prohibiting U.S. arms transfers to human rights violators.
According to Palestinian and international officials, more than 110,000 Palestinians have been killed or wounded by Israeli forces since October 7. Most of the dead are women and children. At least 7,000 Palestinians are also missing and presumed dead and buried beneath the rubble of hundreds of thousands of bombed-out homes and other buildings.
Around 90% of Gaza's 2.3 million people have been forcibly displaced in what many Palestinians are calling a second Nakba, a reference to the ethnic cleansing of over 750,000 Arabs from Palestine during the establishment of the modern state of Israel in 1948.
A growing number of not only progressive lawmakers but also mainstream Democrats are calling for a suspension of U.S. military aid to Israel.
On Tuesday, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)—who was criticized earlier in the war for not calling for a cease-fire—stood beside a photo of a starving Gazan girl while declaring "no more money for" the far-right government of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his "war machine."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Weasel Words': Julian Assange's Wife Slams US Assurances to UK
"The diplomatic note does nothing to relieve our family's extreme distress about his future—his grim expectation of spending the rest of his life in isolation in U.S. prison for publishing award-winning journalism."
Apr 16, 2024
The wife of jailed WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange sharply criticized "assurances" the U.S. government made as the U.K. High Court considers allowing the 52-year-old Australian's extradition to the United States, where he faces 175 years in prison.
The U.S. document states that if extradited, "Assange will have the ability to raise and seek to rely upon at trial (which includes any sentencing hearing) the rights and protections given under the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States," though it points out that "a decision as to the applicability of the First Amendment is exclusively within the purview of the U.S. courts."
"A sentence of death will neither be sought nor imposed on Assange," the document adds, noting that he has not been charged with any offense for which that is a possible punishment. It comes after the U.K. court ruled last month that the Biden administration had until Tuesday to confirm that he wouldn't face the death penalty and if it did not, he could continue appealing his extradition.
Responding on social media, his wife, Stella Assange—who is an attorney—blasted the U.S. assurances as "weasel words."
"The United States has issued a nonassurance in relation to the First Amendment, and a standard assurance in relation to the death penalty," she said. "It makes no undertaking to withdraw the prosecution's previous assertion that Julian has no First Amendment rights because he is not a U.S citizen."
"The Biden administration must drop this dangerous prosecution before it is too late."
"Instead, the U.S. has limited itself to blatant weasel words claiming that Julian can 'seek to raise' the First Amendment if extradited," she added. "The diplomatic note does nothing to relieve our family's extreme distress about his future—his grim expectation of spending the rest of his life in isolation in U.S. prison for publishing award-winning journalism. The Biden administration must drop this dangerous prosecution before it is too late."
The U.K. court's next hearing is scheduled for May 20. Last week, reporters asked U.S. President Joe Biden about requests from Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and members of the country's Parliament to drop the extradition effort and charges. He said that "we're considering it."
So far, the Biden administration has ignored significant pressure from Australian and U.S. politicians as well as human rights and press freedom groups, and continued to pursue the extradition of Julian Assange, who was charged under former President Donald Trump—the Republican expected to face the Democratic president in the November election.
Assange was charged under the Espionage Act and Computer Fraud and Abuse Act for publishing classified documents including the "Collateral Murder" video and the Afghan and Iraq war logs. Since British authorities dragged Assange out of the Ecuadorian Embassy in London—where he lived with political asylum for seven years—he has been jailed in the city's Belmarsh Prison.
The WikiLeaks founder's wife, with whom he has two children, was not alone in condemning the U.S. assurances on Tuesday.
"This 'assurance' should make journalists even more worried about how the Assange prosecution could impact press freedom in the U.S. and globally. The U.K. should grant Assange's appeal and refuse to extradite him," said the Freedom of the Press Foundation. "The U.S. doesn't disclaim the ability to argue that the First Amendment doesn't apply to Assange because of his nationality or other reasons, or for a court to rule against a First Amendment challenge to his prosecution."
Jameel Jaffer, director of the Knight First Amendment Institute, similarly said that "no one who cares about press freedom should take any comfort at all from the United States' assurance that Assange will be permitted to 'rely upon' the First Amendment."
"If the prosecution goes forward, the U.S. government will be trying to persuade American courts that the First Amendment poses no bar to the prosecution of a publisher under the Espionage Act," Jaffer warned. "And if the government is successful, no journalist will ever again be able to publish U.S. government secrets without risking her liberty."
"So the government's First Amendment assurances aren't responsive at all to the concerns that press freedom advocates have been raising," he concluded. "This case poses essentially the same threat to press freedom today as it did yesterday."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Workers Stage Sit-Ins to Demand Google End Israeli Cloud Contract
"Just as people of conscience demanded institutions cut ties with apartheid South Africa in the 1980s, the time is now to rise up in support of Palestinian human rights," said Google employees in an open letter.
Apr 16, 2024
Following recent reports that Google may soon expand its tech collaboration with the Israeli government, dozens of the company's employees on Tuesday entered its offices in New York City and Sunnyvale, California and announced that they wouldn't leave until executives pull out of its $1.2 billion cloud services and data contract with the country.
The No Tech for Apartheid coalition—including the Muslim-led MPower Change and the Jewish-led Jewish Voice for Peace—organized the sit-in, which marks an escalation in Google workers' protests against Project Nimbus, the 2021 contract under which Google and Amazon provide cloud infrastructure across Israel's government.
The deal includes a stipulation that the companies cannot prevent Israel from using Project Nimbus for any government agency, including the Israel Defense Forces (IDF)—which means Google employees' work may be directly supporting the country's assault on the Gaza and its killing of at least 33,843 Palestinians since October.
"Workers will NOT allow business as usual while Google continues to profit from the genocide of Palestinians in Gaza," said MPower Change.
In Sunnyvale, workers began occupying the office of Google Cloud CEO Thomas Kurian, while employees in the company's New York office began a sit-in in a common space.
Outdoor rallies were also scheduled to take place in San Francisco and Seattle, with both Amazon and Google employees attending.
Former Google cloud software engineer Eddie Hatfield, who was fired last month for disrupting a Google Israel event, was among those who protested in New York.
The sit-ins came a week after Time magazine reported that Google has entered further negotiations with the Israeli government in recent weeks, even as international human rights experts raise alarm that Israeli officials have directly caused famine to take hold in parts of Gaza by blocking humanitarian aid.
No Tech for Apartheid released an open letter addressed to Kurian and other Google and Amazon executives, saying that as long as the companies' "tech continues to power the Israeli military and government, [they] are actively complicit in this genocide."
"Your workers do not want to be complicit in genocide," reads the letter, which has been signed by 93,000 supporters. "Just as people of conscience demanded institutions cut ties with apartheid South Africa in the 1980s, the time is now to rise up in support of Palestinian human rights, to end the Project Nimbus contract, and join calls to end the Israeli occupation and siege of Gaza. This has never been more urgent. We hope that you will take this opportunity to be on the right side of history. End the Project Nimbus contract and reestablish your companies' commitments to human rights."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular