Hispanic leaders split over boycott tactics

Latino organizers of a May 1 economic boycott in the U.S. remain confident participation will be high, but factionalism has developed over planned tactics and, now, the government of Mexico is interjecting itself in what some see as an attempt to derail the protest altogether.

The boycott, announced in the wake of congressional debate on immigration reform that included making presence in the U.S. illegally a felony, was originally planned as a day on which Latinos and immigrants would refrain from spending. It garnered support from many labor and church leaders in the border states.

According to Hispanic Business magazine, Latino consumers in the U.S. account for over $820 billion in annual purchases – a number that is expected to reach $1 trillion by 2010.

"Not spending any money at all would show the economic impact of Latino purchasing power," United Farm Workers co-founder Dolores Huerta told the San Diego Union-Tribune.

But those wishing to send a stronger message to Congress and the public are also advocating workers stay home and students skip school on May 1, and that proposal is dividing boycott organizers.

"There would be a backlash against all of the positive energy that was created," said Linda Arreola of the Office for Social Ministry of the Roman Catholic Diocese of San Diego. "The message would be one that immigrants really don't want to be part of America, and that what they are really doing is hurting the U.S., and that would be hurting the movement."

Proponents of the work boycott, like Nativo Lopez, president of the Mexican American Political Association, counter that it's also important to focus on the value of immigrant employees.

"Why this tactic? All working people create value when they are participating in the production process," Lopez said. "That value is used by owners of industry to expand their business, reinvest and pocket the money for personal wealth. We are focusing on moving the power equation into the hands of workers who produce value."

While some Hispanic-owned businesses say they will close in support of their workers, they acknowledge it will be costly to do so.

"We're supporting them, but it makes it harder for us," said Hector Luevano, a native of Mazatlan and owner of a downtown San Diego coffeehouse and deli. "If we close, people will just go somewhere else. But if we stay open, and people ask why they have to wait, maybe when we explain it to them, it will be a better way to get a message across."

Labor unions with contracts that bar members from engaging in strikes and boycotts unrelated to a collective labor action are opposed to the work boycott and have told their members they cannot condone participation by members "in any action that violates our contracts."

"We think there are other ways to get the point across other than directing it at the economy of the nation and of families," said Ben Monterroso, executive director of SEUI Local 2028 in San Diego. "Most of the people we are talking about here ... are living paycheck to paycheck."

George Whalin, president of Retail Management Consultants in San Marcos, says participation in a full boycott is hard to predict, as is the possible economic impact.

"It's a little difficult to get a handle on how meaningful it will be," he said. "But if it gets big, it could have an impact on retail, gasoline, all kinds of things" due to a lack of staffing.

It is that potential for a negative impact on the U.S. economy that appears to be behind an unusual meeting called for Monday by Mexico's Foreign Relations Ministry. Government officials have invited U.S. Latino leaders to Mexico City to discuss the May 1 boycott. It is expected officials will ask that the economic action be reconsidered.

"We're in favor of a more moderate tone," one Mexican official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, told the Dallas Morning News.

The meeting, called at the request of U.S. Latino leaders who sit on a Mexican government advisory council, is aimed to give more information "about the current debate about immigration in the U.S. Congress." Mexican officials are reportedly worried the boycott could undermine their efforts on behalf of immigrants in the U.S.

We want America to notice us, to notice our economic and consumer power, to take us into account for that one day," said Nancy Guerrero of Dallas, who plans to go to Mexico City. "We pay on time and we pay in cash. We're great consumers. Don't take us for granted."

But Guerrero - like many Mexican immigrants - questions the Mexican government's intentions.

"The Mexican government shouldn't be involved in any of this," Guerrero said. "They shouldn't try to tell us what to do. We have to defend our rights on our own."

Mexican immigrants in the U.S. repatriate $20 billion annually to Mexico, a source of foreign dollars nearly as large as what the nation receives from petroleum sales. With that much economic clout over Mexico's economy, it's unclear how much influence the government can wield with immigrants in the U.S.

Jean Towell, the Dallas-based president of Citizens for Immigration Reform, a group that supports tougher immigration laws, isn't waiting for the planned boycott to fizzle over internal disputes over tactics or Mexico City tossing a wet blanket on the protests.

"We're telling our members if you have a big-ticket item that you want to purchase, wait till May 1 to shop," she said. "We're saying to our group, go out and shop and show that we can carry the economy without illegal immigrants."

In...an unusual meeting called for Monday by Mexico's Foreign Relations Ministry. (Mexican) Government officials have invited U.S. Latino leaders to Mexico City to discuss the May 1 boycott.

The meeting, called at the request of U.S. Latino leaders who sit on a Mexican government advisory council, is aimed to give more information "about the current debate about immigration in the U.S. Congress." in the U.S.

Unusual to say the least! Since when does a foreign government calling for political leaders to discuss how best to emphasize Americans reactions to tactics such as shutting down seaports and airports and to cross our borders, not become an unusual event in light of the 9-11 declaration of war on terrorism and the governments that harbors terrorists ?

According to http://michellemalkin.com/archives/005015.htm May 1 is the date of the illegal alien boycott. Nationwide planning is underway. Mass e-mails from plotters in Los Angeles, aim to shut down Los Angeles International Airport and the Port of Los Angeles by coordinating a work stoppage of truckers and cab drivers.

Let them 'plan' all they want and do their worst for al to see.. and let the media and the organizers try and downplay it, if they can.

Here's hoping a gubamint asleep at the wheel wakes the hell up before it is too late, if it isn't already.

"Not spending any money at all would show the economic impact of Latino purchasing power," United Farm Workers co-founder Dolores Huerta told the San Diego Union-Tribune.

FROM WHAT I'M TOLD, THESE PEOPLE MAKE A NICKEL AN HOUR. HOW IS NOT BUYING ANYTHING GOING TO HURT US?

BUT WE COULD RETURN THE FAVOR AND SEVERELY HURT THEM...

The illegals are getting nervous.

I can smell it, and I've certainly heard about it. Some are even planning to head back to Mexico before this blows up.

This is how things are in California (in my neck of the woods, Monterey)

I'm in.

Good! That should piss off everyone outside California.

"Mexican immigrants in the U.S. repatriate $20 billion annually to Mexico, a source of foreign dollars nearly as large as what the nation receives from petroleum sales. With that much economic clout over Mexico's economy, it's unclear how much influence the government can wield with immigrants in the U.S."

And every January first, THE U.S. Government should collect $20 billion from Mexico to PAY for their citizens exploiting our good economy here.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.