According to a story in today’s Universal (Herald translation here): “Election officials say roughly 21 percent of the registered voters living abroad have already gotten their ballots in “. That’s a lot, if Beq’s (who is a well-educated professional) experiences with the absentee ballot process are at all typical.
First, you had to find the IFE website for Mexicans living abroad who wanted to vote.
First glitch: lack of publicity. I learned about the website through my university’s alumni newsletter. Otherwise I would have never been privy to this fact because I never saw it advertised anywhere. I emailed every Mexican living abroad I knew, but I never got word from any place about this.
Second glitch: the rules came inside the website (if you managed to find them by choosing the right tabs in a labyrinth of too much information). Something not lots of people understand or have access to… ok whatever, next.
The instructions: – you had to have your credencial de elector (how many paisanos travel with this in the first place? if you didn’t have it, you had to tramitarla, and that was a whole other ballgame); – you had to fill a downloadable pdf application and sign it; – you had to send this application along with photocopies of front and back of your credencial de elector and your signature… you had to also mail proof of foreign domicile (bank statement, state id, drivers license, something).
Most important glitch in my opinion: you had to send all these to a weird apartado postal address by “correo certificado” (according to instructions), and the deadline to postmark it was january 15, 2006. “Certified mail” by USPS is not possible to a P.O. box in an international destination. I tried. it didn’t get there. I tried Fedex. It also did not get there (address does not exist according to Fedex). In my last attempt I pleaded with USPS personnel to work with me and explained the situation. they offered “registered mail”.
I was unsure registered would work, I had to send it certified. but certified had already flopped, so I tried registered. That’s the one that finally went through and arrived safe and sound.
Now, if you’re anal and ocd like me, that difference (from certified to registered) is a huge deal. They’re requiring you to follow the instructions to the letter with no deviation or you might render the whole thing invalid, and their friggin instructions are wrong by one crucial word.
Anyway, let’s go on. Once the application was sent to Mexico, it had to be processed over there. if/when approved.
Then they sent you a packet.The packet included:
- A CD with all the candidates’ videos (or should I say one was a video and two sent a photo you had to stare at while you heard a taped speech) [for the record, I didn’t even consider the two lesser candidates, in my opinion they’re lost votes].
- A CD with audio (same thing, sans the visual pleasure of candidates’ photos).
- A booklet (same speech you heard in the CDs, only now in paper).
- A cotton-thread bracelet (“with my vote, Mexico is complete” … awww, you shouldn’t have).
- The boleta for your vote.
- Instruction pamphlet.
- And a self-addressed, self-stamped envelope (thank you!! no glitches sending the thing back this time!).
You just have to make sure you send those in time for the IFE to receive them before 8:00 amon July 1. That’s the end of it.
Wouldn’t it have just been easier to go vote at the local consulate or embassy? IFE personnel could have been present at voting boxes. the same personnel they needed to hire to take care of the applications and the packets and the vote counting in Mexico, just deployed to consulates and embassies rather than staying at home?
Hey, at least there’s no hanging chads!
Maybe “Nobody pulls one over on Fred C. Dobbs…” but Lou ain’t the sharpest tool in the cabana
The highly-regarded Orcinus dissected the Reconquista myth in his blog back in April.Apparently, though, the information was missed by those those crack researchers (or researchers on crack) at CNN. Bill Scher posted this story on the Huffingtonpost.com:
Yesterday, on “Lou Dobbs Tonight,” CNN ran a graphic sourced to the Council of Conservative Citizens(RACIST WEBSITE WARNING), a group deemed to have a “white supremacy” ideology according to the Anti-Defamation League.
“Next on Lou Dobbs Tonight… my interview with Reconquista leader Gold-Hat…”
We’re coming for you… and for your WEEEMEN!
President Vicente Fox will be taking his five-year battle for immigration reform to the front lines in the western United States. But analysts say Fox´s trip this week to California, Utah and Washington states may do more harm than good.
More harm than good for immigration? For the U.S. Senate? For Felipe Calderón? For AMLO? Or for himself?
The usual suspects (see post below this one) are going to blather on about the same old shit no matter what Fox does or doesn’t do. The U.S. Senate is worried about their own re-election. Calderón and AMLO — hmmm… with AMLO’s charges that Don Chente is mucking about in the campaign starting to stick (and the surprise announcement that PRI was willing to cooperate with PRD against PAN), maybe it looks better if the Pres. stays out of the campaign (and out of the country) for a few days. OR… given the U.S. is going to piss off the Mexican electorate in a big way later this week anyway, it’s Fox’s best chance to make the PANistas look tough — fighting til the last (sort of like Jim Bowie at … oh, never mind!) until overwhelmed by Santa Ana (well, he was a dumb President, who prefered to hang at his ranch while the smart vice president ran things behind the scenes… and to irretreivably damage his country… but who could I be thinking of?) .
… and d’you know that that thought just crossed my mind?
HUH? FOX News — apparently Elana Poniatowska is going to invade Arizona… or something like that
Links to racist hate sites like this: blahblahblah (verdana italic typeface)
In Mexico, my favorite TV show is Los Simpsons (who doesn’t love Los Simpsons?), which is produced by the U.S.’s Fox Network. One good thing about being in the U.S. is I can catch some other Fox comedies — Bill O’Reilly’s “No Spin Zone“, John Gibson (of “make more white babies or we’ll be overrun with brown ones” fame and “Your World With Neil Cavuto“.
Watching these programs requires a “willing suspension of disbelief” — you have to buy into the American Right, and their alternate universe where two opposite ideas coexist without, as on Star-Trek, destroying life as we know it.
On the one hand, the alternative reality folks tell us, “white Mexican elites” export their “problems” to the United States. On the other, those “elites” are planning to take back their problem (and add a bunch more). You see, it’s all a secret plan for the “Reconquista”
For those of you in the Real Mexico (and in the Real World) this is the ardent belief of tho residents of that alternative universe reality that Mexican plans to take over the territories ceded to the U.S. by the Treaty of Guadelupe Hidalgo. (Why not Spanish Louisiana , which once stretched as far as Manitoba?) .
While there is a group that Mexican authorities consider a possible right-wing foreign terrorists, and that talk about Reconquista, these U.S. based neo-fascists, like Aztlan (“brownshirts with brown skins,” as one friend called them) are tiny organizations that exist mostly on the internet, or in the nightmares of “white-wing” worriers (and the folks who they worry). I half suspect that at least half their alleged members and supports just enjoy scaring the bejeebus out of these folks. No one in the sanity-based world takes their aims very seriously.
By the way, these groups should NOT BE CONFUSED WITH THIS MERRY BAND OF RECONQUISTADORS — they have a sense of humor, which is to facists what water is to the Wicked Witch of the West.
In one variant of the theory, the Mexicans will join with the Yellow Hoardes of Asia to invade California, as in a 1915 Hearst produced serial starring Paulette Godard and reprised (as a theory — Paulette and William Randolf are both long gone) by a wacko U.S.Army Major last year.
Which brings me to another film director, Ron Maxwell. I never heard of him either — his film about the Battle of Gettysburg is praised by the Heritage Foundation, and other organizations unlikely to be heard of outside of wonky Republican circles or internet political blogs. Somehow, that makes him an expert on the Reconquista — he even wrote for the (offensive, but not officially racist) World Net Daily about it.
Which, in turn, brings me back to Fox News. While Vincente Fox blathered on (presumably in his slow norteño way — the sound was off) on one side of the screen, Neil Cavuto and Ron Maxwell chatted about the Reconquista on the other. According to Ron, it’s a common belief among “Mexican elites and intelletuals” that the Reconquista is real.
Prone to gi
ving even complete morons the benefit of the doubt, I did a little googling on this. Carlos Fuentes, once talked about the Spanish language and Latin American culture shaping the United States. Carlos Monsivais during a 1999 talk mentioned that California was as much Mexican as anything else (which it is). But, really, have you ever met Carlos? He’s a pudgy, balding, near-sighted writer who ventures out to the Sandborn’s katty-corner from Chapultepec Park for his morning coffee before returning to the comforts of home, his beloved cats and his
writing. Somehow I can’t see him leading the troops across the Rio Bravo del Norte.
Carlos Fuentes? He’s pushing 80, and frankly, he’s more at home in Washington or London than in Mexico.
Elena Poniatowska, maybe… having been born Princesa Hélène Elizabeth Louise Amélie Paula Dolores Poniatowska Amor, I guess she qualifies as one of those infamous “white elites”. She’s a bona fide intellectual and a tough broad. Even with those Polish and French warrior ancestors, I can’t image such a nice, quiet lady st
orming the gates of San Diego either.
SO… kids… who exactly are these Re-conquistadors? Anyway care to enlighten Neil Cavuto ?
Best article yet:
Carolyn Lochhead, of the San Francisco Chronicle, wrote what I think is the BEST ARTICLE YET on Mexican immigration to the U.S. in last Sunday’s edition (Give and take across the border 1 in 7 Mexican workers migrates — most send money home). Is Lochhead the only one to ever notice the obvious:
The migration is driven in part, experts say, by the large income differentials between the two nations. A rural Latin American migrant may earn 10 times in the United States what he or she can earn at home.
More highlights:
Migration is profoundly altering Mexico and Central America. Entire rural communities are nearly bereft of working-age men. The town of Tendeparacua, in the Mexican state of Michoacan, had 6,000 residents in 1985, and now has 600, according to news reports. In five Mexican states, the money migrants send home
exceeds locally generated income, one study found.
…Arriving in small monthly transfers of $100 and $200, remittances have formed a vast river of “migra-dollars” that now exceeds lending by multilateral development agencies and foreign direct investment combined, according to the Inter-American Development Bank.
The money Mexican migrants send home almost equals the U.S. foreign aid budget for the entire world, said Arturo Valenzuela, director of the Center for Latin American Studies at Georgetown University and former head of Inter-American Affairs at the National Security Council during the Clinton administration.
“Has anybody in the raging immigration debate over the last few weeks thought, could it be good for the fundamental interests of the United States … to serve as something of a safety valve for those that can’t be employed in Mexico?”
…But an equally intense pull comes from U.S. employers, including private households, who employ large numbers of illegal immigrants as nannies, housekeepers and caregivers, said Jeffery Passel, a senior demographer at the Pew Hispanic Center.
The U.S. information economy has created a split labor market, one with a powerful demand for high- and low-skilled workers, economists say.
…
Mexico is aging too, which will eventually cause migration to ebb. Its population trails the U.S. age profile by 30 years. By then, demographers expect Mexico may be importing labor.…
Given the predominance of Mexicans and Central Americans in illegal immigration to the United States, Papademetriou wonders why the Senate’s guest worker program would be open to all comers, if it is intended to provide temporary workers for the U.S. market.“If 60 percent of our illegal immigration comes from a single country, and another 20 percent comes through that country, logic would say the vast majority of visas should go to the country of origin,” he said. “The last thing
you would do is create a global temporary worker program, as if somehow we should need Bangladeshis or Russians to pick our fruits and vegetables.” Targeted visas could also leverage Mexican cooperation in undertaking politically difficult reforms, and would be more likely to keep guest workers temporary.…
Given that Mexico is the second-largest U.S. trading partner, the two nations’ economic integration is well under way, and labor is part of that, experts say.
I can’t find anything to carp about with Ms. Lochhart. I carped (ever so slightly) at Bruce C. Swaffield, who wrote an article on the need for journalists to cover Mexico in the Society of Professional Journalist’s publication Quill, managed to mangle a few facts about the country. Nothing serious — the usual “Cinco de Mayo is the major national holiday” type error. Dr. Swafford and I exchanged a pleasant e-mail about this. He is a professor of journalism at Regent University, an institute best known for its association with televangalist Pat Roberson. I think Professor Swoffield was beset by fact-checking gremlins … no need to call in an exorcist to repel printer’s devils!
The Associated Press’ Mark Stevenson, on the other hand, has by-lined two different stories in the last month, both comparing Mexican and U.S. immigration policies containing serious mistakes.
In “Mexico Bars Immigrants From Thousands of Jobs”(not a by-lined version, but the first I found “googling”) Stevenson and the AP again compare Mexican and U.S. immigration policy (the gist of the story is some sensitve municipal jobs, and most political offices are not open to non-native citizens). Again, the issue is apples and oranges (Mexico has never primarily been a nation of immigrants, and its independence movement was largely precipiated by the Spanish policy of reserving government jobs for non-Mexicans). The story has its faults, but it’s passable.
In his April 19 story, Few Protections for Migrants to Mexico, he claimed “Mexican law classifies undocumented immigration as a felony punishable by up to two years in prison, although deportation is more common.” Whether Stevenson or a careless editor is to blame, this created an uproar in the United States (especially in the right-wing blogosphere) and served as justification for congressional calls for draconian immigration legislation.
The big problem: THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A FELONY IN MEXICO. Mexico uses Code Law (“Napoleonic Code”) and not the Anglo-Saxon system. Felonies only exist in the Anglo-Saxon system. Code systems divide crimes into broad categories (crimes against the state and/or community; crimes against the family; crimes against individuals). Overstaying ones visa, or illegally immigrating into Mexico is a crime against the state, but then so is not licensing your dog.
For that matter, a lot of crimes, both in the U.S. and in Mexico (and everywhere else, for that matter) can land you in the slammer for up to two years. But they seldom do, and for what it’s worth, the only people I’ve ever met who were deported from Mexico (besides Guatemalan farm workers taking jobs from Mexican farm workers) were deported for something besides illegal entry… theft, drug offenses, endangering the welfare of a child, that sort of thing. The only exception might be the British soldiers suspected of espionage (actually it was hilarious), but countries in similar straits would find some way of tossing those James Bond wannabes out.
When I pointed out that Stevenson was running several stories on the same theme, and making errors, one person claimed Stevenson was a long-time Mexico reporter, and I’d just have to accept what he said was true. The source for that remark isn’t thought of as particularly reliable, but I did my best to check. As far as I can tell, Mark Stevenson has only been reporting from Mexico for the last year or so. His by-lines from before mid-2005 are from Guatemala and Haiti. Another person thought I was suggesting right-wing bias on the part of the Associated Press. Not that I’m aware of. Sloppy thinking and slovely editing aren’t limited to the far right.
Stolen from: José Luis Borgues
An internet friend, “one of those people who moved ” to a gated community where she and her husband — though gringos — are the poorest people in the complex, writes on the downside of life in “gringo gulch”:
Screw the revolution, drug cartels, police on the take, malaria, stomach bugs … the DOGS will get you!
On my street the people go armed with bear mace, bb guns, rocks blunt instruments. Don’t think we are afraid of being kidnapped or raped … just attacked by our friendly neighborhood pets.
If you are coming to Mexico I advice pepper spray (the larger the container the better — it is legal) rocks, canes, anything.My neighborhood is gated, 24/7 etc. but we are all armed to the teeth against the guard dogs let out to use the baño or just let out off leash. These dogs are well fed and trained.
A huge terrier attacked our dog when we were out for a alk. It came out of the blue, and went straight for our dog’s throat. I had the safety on the mace and my husband had to use his cane to fight the dog off. The caretaker found the house where the culprit was hiding, and a neighbor filed a report with the security guards.
My husband is hiding his black and blue wounds and his leg is really swollen. But we’re off to the vet — the dog needs antibiotics for his 4 puncture wounds — then to the doctor. The attack dog’s owner (of course) is out of the country, though his brother will pay the doctor/vet bills. Great. The dog is going to a ranch. Sure. This is his fourth attack.My attitude now is if I see a dog I don’t know, spray the bear mace and keep spraying. Then plead fear or just deny doing it.
Meanwhile, this bad dog report from a foreigner in a traditional Mexican village:
I was in the market square talking to my son on the phone at 10:30 pm. When I hung up and started back to my car, I was attacked by 6 or 8 dogs, who were seriously lunging and trying to bite me. I called them some real nasty names at the top of my lungs. I was angry, but fortunately, most of the local women couldn’t understand what I was saying. Finally, I managed to get my hands on a rock, and they evaporated instantly.
The next morning, my wife went down town to buy milk to make atole for her bachelor uncles. She came back rather excited, told me all the dogs were dead, that someone had poisoned them. I was horrified, because a lot of witnesses had seen me fighing those beasts. So, I expected to be blamed. Her cousin told me not to worry. They have a dog killer, the Mexican equivalent of our dog catchers. When the problem gets bad enough and street dogs are menacing people, the Municipal President writes a kill order, and the dog killer tosses around plenty of poisoned meat, and walks away. The next day, the street cleaners cart off the dead dogs.
I asked what happens if a good dog is out there. He said if people aren’t taking care of their dog, too bad.
I like dogs, and I’ve known some very nice street dogs. But, tossing rocks is always an option. Or using pepper spray and denying it. That works too.
I have no idea (the election)
According to the International Herald Tribune, Calderón is still the one to beat, but the Mexican press is reporting on a new development that could change everything. PRI candidate Roberto Madrazo Pintado suggested over the weekend that PRI MIGHT ally itself with PRD against what he sees as administration interference in the election (kinda ironic, coming from the PRI, which never had any compunctions about that before). Even Cuauhtémoc Cárdenas is seriously mulling it over.
AND… what effect the U.S. Senate’s considerations of Immigration will have (any U.S. media source) will have on the Mexican elections is still uncertain. Fred Rosen, in today’s Mexico Herald sees U.S. policy as undermining the Fox administration — and, I’d venture, making Calderón less and less the people’s choice.
I’m waiting for the next debate (6 June) to see what happens next. Stay tuned.
A better border solution…
Porfirio Diaz said of the border — “between Mexico and the gringos, the desert”. In his day, it was border crossings from the north that were the problem.
Until the late 20th century, there wasn’t much of a “broken border” problem. The real problem (and the reason for groups like “the Minutemen”) is just that there are a lot more folks — Anglos or Mexicans in the area until recently. Between the maquilladoras on the Mexican side, and all those ex-Minnesotan, Iowan, Nebraskan etcs. on the other, there’s cultural conflicts that rile up people (like the Minutemen) who should know better.
We can’t go back to Don Porfirio’s days… but maybe there’s no need to build a wall, bring in the National Guard, ramp up the border patrol, lay in land mines or launch blimps… wouldn’t it be cheaper, more cost effective and ecologically more sound to just give the border back to the Apaches?..
Ruth Rodríguez, El Universal 21 May 2006
(my translation):
The Primate of the Archdioces of Mexico considers a stronger willingness on the part of the United States as well and energy and vision from the Mexico government both lacking in the attempt to resolve the migratory problem.
As was printed this week in the Church’s official publication, “Desde la Fe“, Cardinal Norberto Ribera stated that the Catholic Church rejects the contention that building a wall will prevent illegal border crossings. 
Interviewed on the matter, the Cardinal said that the migration is a complex subject and that he is not confident of any resolutin, “because history has shown that the governments of the United States never have acted propiciously towards Mexico”. If they first bring in the National Guard and then raise a barrier, a wall, we hardly think they are developing an integral and complete immigration program. ”
The Cardinal added that “it is difficult for us to believe their words, when there is no evidence.
Asked if there were any hopes for the (Mexican) administration to negotiate a good migratory agreement, the Cardinal said “We hope that the government of the United States works not only with the Mexican government and industrialists, but with all of us. We must work together on this task, which is all of our’s problem.”
“Migrants don’t leave for no reason. Most of the time, it is out of necessity.”
Don’t drink the water… part 4,687,312
Amazingly, this real post from a tourist message board elicited mostly serious, thoughtful replies — 22 of them!
My sister is going to Mexico to stay at a time share type place with friends. She is limited as to what she is able to drink (non alcoholic). No soft drinks, no carbonation, no caffiene and no alcohol. Is plain non mineral bottled water available most places? Any US brands available – not US snob, needs to be able to read that it is plain in english.
The AMLO we know… sorta.
At last, an American study, but a “respectable political scholar” of AMLO… too bad its only available in Spanish.
As the always perceptive Kelly Arthur Garrett writes in today’s Herald,
Grayson’s critical biography had been eagerly awaited (at least by me) as a potential corrective to the ever-expanding line-up of love-him-or-hate-him AMLO books piling up at Sanborn’s. Grayson, a professor of government at William & Mary College in Virginia, is one of the foremost U.S. authorities on Mexican politics and society, and has been for many decades.
That puts him in a position to deliver what we’ve needed — a well-researched, fact-filled, fully
footnoted, thoroughly indexed biography in English of the most consequential and least understood human being in Mexico today. Now we have it, except for the “in English” part. For some reason, “Mesías Mexicano” has only been published in the Spanish translation.
That’s too bad, since monolingual Anglophones bored with “fiery leftist” and “populist” as handy AMLO definitions are denied an alternative mask for him — “Messiah.”
Grayson is William and Mary’s George Grayson, the Class of 1938 Professor of Government and the favorite Mexico expert of folks like Bill O’Reilly and the conservative (er, even more conservative) wing of the Republican Party. With articles in “stellar” publications like David Horowitz’s Front Page (“Feathering Their Casa”, April 28, 2006), and his involvement with the “Center for Immigration Studies” it’s easy to dismiss this as another yanquí imperalista complot. Still, the guy is a reputable scholar..
For the record, “Mesías Mexicano” isn’t just another AMLO- phobic tract. It is, after all, a biography, and the patient, forgiving reader will come out of it with a much better idea of who Andrés Manuel López Obrador is, as well as what George Grayson thinks of him. I especially liked the early chapter on AMLO’s boyhood and family history. Readers will appreciate the several charts and timelines that clarify some of the more Byzantine topics of Mexican politics, such as the background of the desafuero and the PRD’s internal factions.
Condescending and arrogant as he may be, the book is worth reading, if just for background on a a Mexican politician who doesn’t fit any of the old rules, and I’m betting will be the next President.
mexfiles.net 