Welcome to the fight over net neutrality, a battle that has been brewing for years.

At a time when more and more broadband users are frequently using sites like Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, and other innovations, Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and Congress are deciding the future of the Internet; whether the Internet will continue to be an explosion of creativity, or become a decentralized, participatory and democratic communications.

As someone who observed the rise of the broadband market, it is troubling to learn 73 Democrats are willing to sell out their constituents and their president by siding with the greedy phone and cable companies. They have joined with 37 Senate Republicans, who signed an industry-written letter demanding the Federal Communications Commission to halt all efforts to protect Internet users. So it came as a surprise to learn all three of San Antonio’s lawmakers – Rep Charlie Gonzalez (TX-20), Rep Ciro Rodriguez (TX-23), and Rep Henry Cuellar (TX-28) – were included in the Democrat group that has decided to oppose the Obama Administration’s telecom agenda for better broadband and Net Neutrality.

Net Neutrality: What is it?
Before I get to the heart of this debate, I feel it is important to explain the meaning of “net neutrality” because even a simple Google search can get confusing. In the simplest terms, net neutrality can best be defined as the principle that allows an Internet user access to the Internet without fear of their Internet Service Provider (AT&T, Comcast, Time Warner, and Verizon) blocking or limiting their access to it. This principle has prevented ISPs from censoring content for any reason or favoring a specific website, service, or application based on its content, message, or ownership. The “non-discrimination” concept has been the guiding principle for the Internet since its inception, and at one time it was the law.

Starting with the basics, at the time the Internet was considered a novelty, gaining access to it was done through the telephone network. The telephone companies had nothing to do with the content the users accessed. As the cable industry entered the market in the late ’90s, they too followed, these rules.

From 1996-2002, Internet users had no problem choosing an Internet provider because small Internet service providers in the era of dial-up service had equal access to home users because their services were provided over the telephone network which were regulated as common carriers. By 2001, more than half of all U.S. homes were connected to the Internet through “dial-up.” As Americans became familiar with the Internet’s capabilities, the demand for better service also increased. Both the telephone and cable companies responded in kind by improving their networks by increasing their speeds; the arrival of broadband.

However, all of this changed starting in 2002 as the Bush-era FCC began stripping away these protections. As the chairman of the FCC, Michael Powell believed that regulation stifled innovation, which he then led the charge for deregulation. Powell believed that internet access was a luxury than a necessity, thereby dismissing the idea of a digital divide. During a press conference, Powell mocked the idea by comparing it to a Mercedes divide in which he stated “I think there is a Mercedes divide. I would like to have one, but I can’t afford one.”

As the cable industry started to provide high speed access, smaller ISPs like wanted to use their cables in the same manner like common carriers. Since these cables were privately owned by the cable companies, in March 2002, the FCC classified cable Internet service as an “information service” rather than a “telecommunications service.” Hoping to reverse the FCC’s decision, Brand X, a small Internet service provider based in California, took the FCC to court.

In 2005, the Supreme Court evaluated the FCC’s decision to classify broadband Internet access service as an information service. In a 6-to-3 decision, the court ruled in favor of the Powell Commission’s decision to classify cable modem service as an “information service” and not a “telecommunications service.” Under the 1996 Telecommunications Act, information service providers are not subject to the open access regulations that are applied to telecommunications providers, such as DSL companies. The Court’s ruling gave the new FCC Chairman, Kevin Martin, the legal grounds to reclassify broadband delivery to the phone companies as an “information service.”

Since then, some Internet providers have already started discriminating against certain applications. In 2007, two incidents exposed the telcos’ gatekeeper ambitions. In September 2007, the New York Times revealed that Verizon Wireless had prevented NARAL Pro-Choice America from sending text messages to its own members. A month earlier, AT&T had censored the live Webcast of the rock group Pearl Jam, when singer Eddie Vedder’s began criticizing President Bush. These episodes showed that when given the option, phone companies willing to discriminate content they don’t like.

The Issue: Access vs. Openness
Why the battle over the Internet?

The battle lines began to form when the Bush-era FCC adopted a set of principles in 2005 saying “consumers are entitled to run applications and use services of their choice;” however, the principles provided vague guidance by permitting providers’ “reasonable network management.”

Shortly after the FCC adopted a set of principles, Internet users were rope-a-doped into believing that the broadband service providers would not “[block] access to video or P2P services.”

It was not until an investigation by Associated Press that relieved that Comcast was degrading and blocking traffic from BitTorrent, a peer-to-peer file sharing protocol used for transferring large files, from it’s service network. The results from the Associated Press’ investigation confirmed tests done by the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

However, BitTorrent was not the only application Comcast was blocking.

As a former Comcast customer, I immediately experienced connectivity issues while downloading the online game, World of Warcraft. While downloading, my internet connection would suddenly slow to a crawl to the point it would suddenly die because my router was forced to renew my IP address. Before Comcast was exposed, I had heard rumors that Comcast was interference with BitTorrent traffic. After doing a little digging, I was not the only experiencing this problem. I have found that Comcast is being overzealous in throttling every file sharing application, such as Shareaza. This would include World of Warcraft because Blizzard relies on BitTorrent to download the game and all it’s patches. The result, it took over a day and half to complete before I could start playing. It certainly was not for the faint of heart.

My experience also confirms other reports about sudden decreases in download speeds. Kevin Kanarski has reported that Lotus Notes (a suite of software that many businesses use for email, calendaring and file sharing) is also being interfered with.

Comcast justified their actions by citing “reasonable network management” as their legitimate excuse to degrade an application’s performance. However, the FCC rejected their reasoning and ordered Comcast to stop slowing down BitTorrent users before the end of the year. In addition, the company has to disclose all “network managing” practices. Comcast sued, saying that the FCC didn’t have the authority to enforce net neutrality.

In early April, the FCC was dealt a blow when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled that the FCC lacks the authority to protect Internet users against network operators. The ruling effectively gave corporate gatekeepers control over Internet users’ online experience, and it called into question the FCC’s ability to act as a public interest watchdog over our country’s communications media.

Technical Information:
The common question consumers asked in search of high speed Internet access for their homes, which is better, DSL Internet vs Cable Internet. It is in this area that broadband providers view consumer ignorance on Internet protocol profitable.

The broadband providers had help when the FCC decided that anything that is faster than dial up would now be an “information service” and no longer a “telecommunications service.” It also allowed the “connection to the Internet”, as well as the network used for higher speed to now be considered one thing – “broadband services.”

Without getting to technical, broadband services means the way a person connects to the Internet whenever your computer is turned on. Cable modems and residential DSL are two of several high-speed Internet technologies grouped under the term “broadband services.”

When I enrolled in an eCommerce certification program, cable internet was starting to be introduced. While cable internet was considered faster than DSL, there was a down side, with cable, each household had to share available bandwidth with other broadband subscribers, which could comprised of 500-2,000 home networks. A fact, that cable companies continue to downplay.

Cable providers providers downplay this information by providing half-truths. A common complaint among cable subscribers are slow speeds.

DSL does not have that problem since broadband access to Internet services is provide through existing phone lines. In other words, DSL services connect the subscriber’s home directly to the local telephone company’s Central Office.

Ignorance is bliss
When it comes to the Internet. people don’t really care how they are connected so long as they are connected. As long as they feel that it is fast and consistent, they have no dog in this fight. The reason, opinion about issues they are not familiar with made by the experts. This belief was echoed by FCC Commissioner McDowell in his Washington Post editorial, “[t]he Internet has … operated under the principle that engineers … solve engineering problems.” In other words, leave the engineering to the engineers.

This is not the first time this logic has been applied in a policy debate. The mantra of leave certain professions to the experts was also used during the health care debate.

This is the reason people are perplexed by this issue, coverage of this issue in the media is nowhere near the extent needed. Recently, FCC commissioned Abt/SRBI and Princeton Survey Research Associates International to gauge the Internet speeds users are getting in their homes and mobile devices, such as smartphones and tablet computers. They found that 80 percent of broadband users in the U.S. do not know the speed of their broadband connection.

The current power grab involves lobbyists, unscrupulous legislators, phony front groups and the most powerful telecommunications companies in the world. Instead of sticking to the core issue, all sorts of irrelevancies and misinformation is used to undermine trust and scare off the public.

Soon after FCC Chair Genachowski’s decided to reclassify broadband and protect net neutrality, Wall Street Journal reported net neutral proponents were going to fight to the end by conducting a massive lobbying campaign to stop broadband reform. .

National Broadband Plan would help more than 93 million people get online. Chairman Genachowski has laid out the right plan to restore the Commission’s authority over broadband networks and provide a stable legal foundation for our nation’s most critical communications infrastructure.

In an era of free market capitalism, any industry that can gain the wealth and prestige necessary to enter the halls of power are able to sway the opinions of the political establishment to influence policies that will help them double their wealth. The telecommuncication industry continues to fly below the radar as one of America’s newest oligarchy — a group that gains political power because of its economic power, and then uses that political power for its own benefit. The FCC’s rule changes has allow them the increase their earnings by creating new revenue steams that have transmuted into political power through campaign contributions and the lure of the revolving door.

I have been troubled that several groups have seemed to accept the arguments made by the telecom companies, and are now either opposing or are skeptical about Net Neutrality protections. In rural West Texas, Rep. Ciro Rodriguez’s Congressional District, some still lack connectivity that allows them to get online without the hassles of dial-up. The question isn’t just who’s connected to the Internet, but why is supporting big cable and phone companies who are forcing poor communities choose between fair representation and access?

As a fellow social worker, I am troubled by the disregard of the social work code of ethics “to enhance human well­being and help meet the basic human needs of all people, with particular attention to the needs and empowerment of people who are vulnerable, oppressed, and living in poverty.”

As for my own Representative, Charlie Gonzalez is certainly not following in his father’s footsteps. Where was Henry B was known for not taking political contributions from special interests. More importantly, at a time when Democrats are facing increasingly heavy public skepticism and criticism for the lack of courage to stand up to the special interest, the absence of Henry B Gonzalez is missed for the courage he demonstrated in opposing powerful interest groups and so ably serving the people of his district and the nation.” It was his acceptance speech for John F. Kennedy Profile in Courage Award father that inspire me to get involve in politics.

In my time I have had the honor to be vilified for standing up against segregation. I have had the privilege of being a thorn in the side of unprincipled privilege, and the great joy of being demonized by entrenched special interests. I have had the special pride of seeing hard jobs completed: the great civil rights laws; the cleanup of corruption in the savings and loan industry; the enactment of Federal laws that help educate the poor, care for the sick, eradicate disease, and house the people. And I have endured the impatience and humiliation that comes along with sometimes falling short of the goal.

While I may be disappointed they their recent actions, I still hold out hope they will come around and support Net Neutrality. If not, don’t be surprised if their next primary election is their last.

One UK economist warned that the world is now close to a 1930s-like Great Depression, while New York traders said they had never experienced such fear. The Fed’s emergency funding procedure was first used in the Depression and has rarely been used since.

A Goldman Sachs trader in New York said: “Everyone is in a total state of shock, aghast at what is happening. No one wants to talk, let alone deal …”

While we are being told this isn’t a time for fear or panic, what exactly is being done to put a stop this culture of greed and over indulgence. Through out this election we have heard terms such was Wall Street vs Main Street, Hockey Moms vs Soccer Moms. We must remember these are just words to classify us and pigeonhole into a meaningless category.

At this moment, the only difference is the rich vs the rest. McCain talks about ending pork barrels, yet, he is willing accept $3,941,422 in campaign contributions from same investment banks that pleaded for federal help to prevent an Enron-type implosion while former executives who virtually destroyed the financial industry were receiving fat bonuses and were “wining and dining” at one of the most exclusive resorts, St. Regis Resort, in the nation. While all of this was taking place, none of them cared if we were the ones to continue to suffer economically. Or were concerned whether that many us remained unemployed or were a constant risk being laid off, uninsured, and homeless. Why should they, they were already living the good life.

As I sat in front of the television it is infuriating to see these greedy Ken Lay-type CEO have to gall to claim they have been affected too. The reality is, their losses are nowhere near as the common person. Losing a seasonal home does not come close to losing the only home in your position. Moreover, rarely are we given a golden parachute when we get fired for getting the company in trouble. People are getting tired of getting the short end of stick. Just ask CEO Richard Fuld who just got knocked out at the gym on a Sunday following the bankruptcy.

Everything these Enron type of companies were doing is basically the same thing that occurred prior to the Great Depression in the 30’s. This election, this is a chance we can hit the reset button by not voting for more of the same Bush-Cheney policies. We must do whatever it takes to turn our situation around.

GO VOTE!!!

Rage Against the Machine guitarist Tom Morello, alter ego, The Nightwatchman, released another solo album, The Fabled City. The new album has features appearances by System Of A Down’s Serj Tankian and Shooter Jennings.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Like clockwork, they roll out the red carpet and wine and dine every Hispanic leader from California to Texas, Miami to New York, and throughout the Midwest. While they do this, they will gather up all the little people and throw out a few Spanish catch phrases, such as “Si Se Puede,” to win their vote; but after the election, in the blink of an eye, they disappear and forget about the Latino community for three years, until the cycle begins again.

I am not going to kid anybody but some Latina/o bloggers are beginning to feel that the Obama campaign is taking the Latino vote for granted, since the xenophobic wing of the GOP has virtually chased away their Latino electorate with their nativist stance on immigration. If the Obama campaign continues to go down this path, history will likely repeat itself.

In the early 1970s, Chicanos/as throughout the Southwest began flexing their political muscle by forming a political third party, La Raza Unida Party (RUP), because of the unresponsiveness to the needs of the Mexican-American community by the two controlling parties. Although the RUP does not exist anymore, there were history-making years because thousands of Mexican-Americans repudiated the Democratic Party’s dictatorship. During those four years, the RUP accomplished more what many third parties never achieved – enough political clout to shake up the power structure of the Democratic Party in Texas.

That was then and this is now. Although often considered to be homogeneous, the Latino community contains many culturally diverse groups than it did in the 1970s. However, there is still a hunger, a starvation, for our community to begin asserting ourselves again at the polls and dispel the old stereotype that we do not vote. When it comes to politics, you will always find those who will be loyal to there party no matter how unresponsive they are to the Latino community, however, make no mistake, if the Latino vote continues to feel that the Obama campaign taking their vote for granted, he could lose the more moderate Latino vote to John McCain. This is exactly what McCain is trying to capitalize during his recent secret meeting with Hispanic leaders.

Recently, many of us within the Latino/a blogosphere have decided to grade the bull by the horns and start to flex our own political muscle. This all started during Obama’s conference call about McCain’s closed-door meeting. During that conference call, three Latina bloggers – Liza Sabater of culturekitchen.com and The Daily Gotham, Marisa Treviño of Latina Lista, and Kety Esquivel of CrossLeft.org – took the Obama campaign to the woodshed over their poor efforts to reach out to the Latino community.

Soon after the conference call, a group of us Latino/a bloggers (CrossLeft, Culture Kitchen, Citizen Orange,Latino Politico, The Unapologetic Mexican, Migra Matters, Para Justicia y Libertad, Mamita Mala and Zuky) from The Sanctuary, a web base grassroots community of pro-migrant, human-rights, and civil-rights bloggers and online activists dedicated to the enactment of meaningful immigration reform, decided to draft a no holds barred survey on specific immigration issues for the presidential candidates to fill out.

I must admit it was very exciting to take part in this group project. I really learned a lot. However, I feel most of the credit should go to Kety for taking the lead and carrying the project through. None of this would have occurred if she had not shared her idea of developing a candidate survey with us. Considering we all spread throughout the US, she made sure nobody was excluded from this project.

As one of the founding members of The Sanctuary, my hope is that this site will not only address immigration issues, but can be a virtual settlement house similar to Jane Addams’ Hull House. In 1889, Jane Addams along with Ellen Gates Starr founded the social settlement Hull-House in Chicago, IL. Addams created a community center where people – of any age, race, gender, and ethnicity – not only contributed to the community as a whole, but also were allowed to develop and share their skills with anybody who was willing to learn.

During the 1920s, Hull House had expanded to expanded to include thirteen buildings to provide “kindergarten and day care facilities for the children of working mothers; an employment bureau; an art gallery; libraries; English and citizenship classes; and theater, music and art classes.” Hull-House also provided activities such as a Labor Museum, the Jane Club for single working girls, meeting places for trade union groups, and a wide array of cultural events. While The Sanctuary is not be able to provide direct social services like Addams’ Hull-House, however, we can function as a networking hub in order to connect people to these services in their area.

What made Hull-House special, the settlement house also advocated for legislative reforms at the municipal, state and federal levels, addressing issues such as child labor, women’s suffrage, and immigration policy. Hull House influenced legislation on child labor laws, occupational safety and health provisions, compulsory education, immigrant rights, and pension laws. My vision for The Sanctuary is that this site can also function as an advocacy center.

Jane Addams was a true visionary and one of the main reasons I became a social worker. Ms. Addams promoted the idea that access to opportunity was the key to successful participation in a democratic, self-governing society. She foresaw a compassionate, interdependent world revolving around the principles of social justice, fairness, tolerance, respect, equal opportunity, civic responsibility and hope for every individual, family and community. It is these principles I try to emulate as an activist.

But I digress. The survey we created to get real answer to the tough questions surrounding immigration, such as free trade, foreign policy, abuse of power by ICE and among other political issues not covered by the media or the candidates. It is time these politicians stop the rhetoric, worrying if their answer will be spun as proof of flip-flopping. We are in a crisis and it is time they provide us with a straight answer. This is why the survey was developed.

It has been about three weeks since we sent out our survey to John McCain and Barack Obama, only one candidate has acknowledge our survey, but has yet filled it out. According to Maegan at VivirLatino, “the Obama camp says a response is forthcoming.” However, we had no choice but to take extreme measures to force them to respond. We published the survey on a list-serv which includes influential people within the Hispanic community. While some saw this move unnecessary, we were able to get a reply from Vince Casillas, Obama’s Hispanic Outreach Coordinator:

Just so you know we haven’t forgot this survey. As you can imagine we recieve hundreds and hundreds of these which is no excuse just a reality. I’ll follow up with the status and hopefully have an update this afternoon. Thanks.

Vince Casillas

In Casillas’ attempt to reassure us that our survey is not being ignored; still leaves us to wonder if they are taking us seriously. Senor Casillas, what happened to our update? I know you mentioned that you are a one man team, but if I recall, you said that the higher ups were going to allocate some people to help you. If so, couldn’t you have gotten someone to assist you by sending us a quick message to let us know what transpired when you followed-up? Do we need to advocate for you so that your higher up provide you with the resources to make sure you are not overwhelmed? Talk to us. Communication is a two way street.

As for McCain, not a single word. I wouldn’t be surprised if our survey fell into the hands of some nativist or so corporatist elite.

This is my message to Barack Obama and John McCain. I am not surprised we have not heard from you. In fact, it wouldn’t shock me if you thought our survey was probably a bit complex, which means you would have to assign some flunky from your campaign or some Congressional aide to do some heavy research. But I doubt that is the reason. The obvious reason for either the delay or refusal to acknowledge our existence, the survey was purposely controversial, while at the same not leaving you a way out. There is a reason why we left out a “no comment” option.

We no longer want to take part in this viscous political “Christopher Columbus Syndrome” ploy. We are tired of getting the short end of the stick once the elections are over. Unlike other organizations who prefer to be force-fed the collective illusions on the wall of Plato’s Cave. Some of us are learning how to filter out the rhetoric. Our eyes are opening up. And in the spirit of competition, we don’t have to limit ourselves because there are other options to choice from. See, some people have been brain washed to think people are only allowed to run as a Republican or a Democrat. It is this reason people pick the unthinkable third option by not voting. But what if they were given a 3rd or a 4th, shouldn’t they have the right know? Shouldn’t they have the right to choose who will represent them?

Thomas Jefferson once said, “When governments fear the people there is liberty. When the people fear the government there is tyranny.”

This is why we chose to send our survey to the Green Party candidate Cynthia McKinney and from what I have seen, I am sure she and her running mate Rosa Clemente are more likely to fill it out without giving us the run around. While I may not have the luxury to vote for her this November here in Texas, I am sure Ms. McKinney will be able to pick up a good number of Latino voters in other states with the right outreach coordinator by her side.

While she may not be on the November ballot in Texas, I am pretty sure if former Georgia congresswoman Cynthia McKinney and Rosa Clemente had an effective Latino outreach coordinator who understood the complexity of the Latina/o community, she could give both McCain and Obama a run for their money.

It is time to stop the rhetoric and step up to the political plate. You may think you can give us the round around and hope we will go away quietly, think again. As Marisa Treviño pointed out, given that both candidates are appearing at the National Council of La Raza conference this weekend, it would be wise if they get back to use quickly before this story gets national attention now that some members of the news media, such as Alicia Stewart with CNN, caught wind of it. Momentum is already picking up around the blogosphere.

The ball is in your court and we are waiting for your reply.

Other Sanctuary Members’ Writing in Solidarity:
The Sanctuary
Latina Lista
Zuky
Latino Politico
Problem Chylde
Vivir Latino
The Unapologetic Mexican
CrossLeft
Citizen Orange

Read the entire questionnaire

CANDIDATE QUESTIONNAIRE

Name:
Party Affiliation:
Address:
Home Phone:
Campaign Phone Office:
Office Sought/Opponents in:
If you are a State candidate, please indicate your State Registration Number:

The Sanctuary is a multi-issue organization working in the service of human rights, human reasoning and progressive discussion. Therefore it is critical for us to understand your position on the following issues. Please give specific answers to the questions and answer them as thoroughly as possible. Please type your answers. Use additional sheets as necessary.

1. Could you please articulate what you think are the most pressing issues for the U.S. immigrant community, at home AND abroad, and how you would hope to address those issues as President?

2. Do you support comprehensive immigration reform?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

3. What policy conditions would comprehensive immigration reform have to meet in order for you to support it? Please be specific?

4. Do you support the establishment of an expanded guest worker program?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

5. Do you support the expansion and construction of a virtual border along the U.S./Mexico border?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

6. Do you support the switch from family based immigration standards to the merit based system put forth in the last round of Senate CIR?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

7. Do you support the “touchback” requirements of previous comprehensive immigration reform (CIR) legislation that would require undocumented immigrants to return to their countries of origin in order to normalize their status?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

8. Would you support the addition of funding for stricter enforcement of general labor standards such as wage and hour or safety regulations as
part of CIR legislation?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

9. Would you support an increase in the cap of low-skilled
employment-based green cards issued each year from it’s current level of
5000?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

10. Would you favor raising the 65,000 cap on high-skilled H-1B temporary work visas, in light of the fact that in the last two years, H-1B visas were quickly filled in a matter of days?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

11a. If so, would you also favor limiting the number of H-1B professionals a company can hire?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

11b. If so, would you also favor limiting the number of H-1B professionals employment brokers are allowed to recruit?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

11 c. If so, would you favor including meaningful prevailing wage requirements keyed to the Service Contract Act and Davis-Bacon Act?

Yes No

Please explain

12. Do you have a position on providing materials concerning health care and public benefits programs in languages other than English?
Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

13. Do you support lifetime eligibility for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) for disabled and/or elderly refugees and asylees who are eligible for SSI except for a lack of U.S. citizenship?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position

14. What are your feelings on immigrant detention?

15. Do you support family detention centers?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

16. Do you support private companies profiting of of immigrant detention?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

17. Do you support the Detainee Basic Medical Care Act, the bill that would require the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to develop procedures to ensure adequate medical care for all detainees held by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

18. Do you support the United American Families Act, the bill that would amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to allow permanent partners of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents, including same-sex partners, to obtain permanent residency?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

19. Do you support the community service requirement of previous DREAM Act legislation that would grant provisional (conditional) legal residency to immigrant graduates who perform 910 hours of volunteer community service?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

20. Would you support an immediate moratorium on community and work site raids by ICE?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

21. Do you approve of ICE’s use of excessive force to conduct immigration raids as seen recently in Postiville, Iowa?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

22. Do you support the Families First Immigration Enforcement Act, the bill that would provide for safe and humane policies and procedures pertaining to the arrest, detention, and processing of aliens in immigration enforcement operations?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

23. Would you support the incorporation of requirements that would tie both future economic aid and trade agreements to substantive benchmarks in sender nations that would alleviate some of the economic and humanitarian conditions that foster continued migration?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

24. Would you renegotiate the NAFTA last phase that just went into effect that lifts restrictions on more US agricultural products, particularly poultry, imported into Mexico?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

25. Do you support cancelling or renegotiating NAFTA?”

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

26. Do you support providing subsidies for corn-based ethanol?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

27. Do you support the farm bill, more specifically the agricultural subsidies it contains?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

28. Do you support a restructuring of trade-distorting US farm subsidies?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

29. Do you support a significant shift in subsidies to help farmers adopt conservation and renewable energy practices on farms?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

30. Do you support Plan Colombia (the Plan that was meant to combat the principal threat to the nation’s political and economic elite: the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC)) even though after closer examination of Plan Colombia, it has been revealed that the Plan states that public companies and banks are to be privatized leading to massive layoffs and further increasing unemployment at a time when cutbacks in government spending has removed any vestiges of providing a social safety net for those affected?
Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

31. Do you support Plan Mexico, which has been considered to be a duplicated of Plan Colombia, which has entrenched violence and corruption in Colombia while failing to reduce drug flow?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

32.Do you support canceling or renegotiating Plan Mexico?

Yes No

Please explain.

How long have you held this position?

33. What would you do to address the racist and nativist rhetoric that is becoming mainstreamed and that is tied to a rising crime wave fueled by the same sentiment?

34. What are you going to do to take a more global approach to the
issue of migration?

35. What would you do to provide opportunities in the countries that
migrants are fleeing from?

36. How do you address the overwhelming amount of money the U.S. federal government spends on defense and military expenditures, at home and abroad, and would you see to it that less money is spent on
militarization and more money is spent on social programs?

37. What leadership have you taken on immigration issues, including but not limited to the issues addressed in this questionnaire?

38. On what immigration issues will you take leadership?