|
For the past 20 years, The Filipino Express has provided the Filipino American community the best news, arts and entertainment coverage from around the United States and the Philippines.
|
|
This website includes selected articles from this week's edition of the Filipino Express. Not all the stories published in the printed version appear on this site.
|
|
|
|
To tell us what you think about Filipino Express Online or to comment on the stories published here, E-mail us at Filexpress@aol.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AFTER almost two months of taking to the streets, it is clear that immigrant communities, can be a relevant force in influencing the immigration debate. Unfortunately, the proposals currently being considered in Congress and the policy positions discussed by the President contain almost none of the reforms that immigrant groups have called for. There is a need to change the course of the debate, but how does the immigrant community do that?
First, it must respond to the current proposals in Congress. It must say “No Deal!” to Hagel-Martinez, the leading legislation currently being considered in the Senate, and any other bill like it, because it does not meet demands for fair and just comprehensive immigration reform. Under Hagel-Martinez, more than half of the undocumented immigrant population, and possibly many more, would not even be eligible for adjustment to legal status.
Second, immigrant groups must formulate their own serious platform for comprehensive immigration reform. Broadly, this must include the following ten principles:
Adjustment to legal status for undocumented immigrants; Clearing of the immigration backlog; Expansion of legal immigration opportunities to account for both family-based immigration and the needs of our economy; Provisions that keep families together; Stronger protections for workers, including repeal of employer sanctions and path to citizenship for future workers; Ending of all detention for mere civil immigration violations and repeal of mandatory deportation; Stronger civil rights standards for enforcement efforts, including ending of racial and ethnic profiling and selective targeting of communities; Full due process rights and judicial review for individuals in removal proceedings; No state and local enforcement of immigration laws; Reasonable, just, and humane enforcement and border policies.
Third and lastly, to change the course of the immigration debate, immigrant rights advocates must take the movement and proposals not only to the streets, but also to elected leaders and to all of America, immigrants and non-immigrants alike.
The development of a detailed plan for reform will, of course, begin with conversations from within our communities. But then, advocates must bring these ideas to the country and explain to them why the immigrants’ cause is right. It’s a difficult task, but it’s also the only way that we will see a new immigration law that is fair and just.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Of emissaries and the gospel truth
|
|
|
|
PHNOM PENH, Cambodia --- Only a month ago, three emissaries from President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s administration visited New York to brief us about the current business climate in our homeland. Last week, two more high-profile visitors were scheduled to arrive in New York as I was preparing a trip to this capital city of Cambodia.
Manila Mayor Lito Atienza, who came to New York three years ago to address the United Nations, was invited as a speaker at a community forum slated for Wednesday, May 10 at the Kalayaan Hall of the Philippine Center.
He was supposed to brief us on the current political condition. I was told that he might also shed some light regarding the apparent rift he has had with some members of the Liberal Party, which he and Senate President Franklin Drilon belong to. Perhaps he was to inform us also of his political plans for the future after his final term as mayor ends. It is speculated that he may run as a senator.
The following day, May 11, the newly installed Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the Philippines, Artemio Panganiban, was likewise scheduled to address the local media and community leaders about “Philippine Action on Judicial Reform and his philosophy of Liberty and Prosperity.”
At this time, one may entertain some notions on why key people are coming to New York and elsewhere in California. But for me, a townhall meeting is an encouraging event to put faces into the names of politicians or people in government we only read about in newspapers.
It is also an opportunity to listen to them talk about issues that may interest us. At least, it gives us the chance to know their views that may be of concern to us.
The last time I saw a large delegation of legislators coming to New York was when the twin bills on absentee voting and dual citizenship were being introduced and explained to us by a number of senators and congressmen who supported both proposals.
After these bills were passed in Congress and signed into law by the president, visits by government dignitaries came in trickles.
I missed attending the visits of Mayor Atienza and Chief Justice Panganiban. But even though I wasn’t present when they met with the community, I have a hunch that they did their best in informing us about Arroyo’s performance in office in the aftermath of the alleged vote rigging during the last elections and an overview of what to expect in our country.
Come to think of it. What else can one ask for with these recent visitations by politicians and officials of different state agencies? In California, former President Fidel V. Ramos is to meet Filipinos there on May 20 and later, some other politicians and officials will be visiting too in time for the commemoration of Philippine independence.
From a well-hype presentation of a former public relations man to key economic forecast to political to legal viewpoints, isn’t this an agenda designed to inform overseas Filipinos about our homeland in a different light?
Whatever is the message behind these visits, the choice is still entirely up to us: to accept or not what is offered by these emissaries. They may not be saying the same message but one may find a general theme about what they say to us.
And believe it or not, Bloomberg News reports economic gains thus far. It says that Philippine exports rose in March at the fastest pace in more than six years as companies shipped more electronics. It goes on to report that the overseas sales increased 25.8 percent from a year earlier to $4.1 billion with exports picking up 14.8 percent in February.
According to the same report, sales of computer parts and other electronics, which account for about two-thirds of exports, rose 25 percent to $2.7 billion after climbing 10.3 percent in February.
The report adds that shipments to the U.S., the biggest buyer of Philippine goods, rose 33 percent to $702 million after gaining 20 percent in the same month. Agricultural product expanded at its fastest pace in 18 months as farmers planted more crops in the second half of 2005. Farm and fishery production also rose 3.9 percent in the three months ended March from a year earlier.
ccording to Agriculture Secretary Domingo Panganiban, that’s the fastest pace since a 7 percent growth in the third quarter of 2004. Production of rice, the nation’s leading grain export, climbed to 6.9 percent, Panganiban also said. Last year, the Philippines was also the world’s biggest importer of the grain. As a result, the report continues, the government expects growth to double to 8 percent this year, accelerating expansion to as much as 6.2 percent. In a nation, where the World Bank estimates about half the population of 85 million people lives on less than $2 a day, the expected growth will help create jobs.
When one translates these seeming positive results in almost all sectors, which does not even mention dollar remittances by overseas Filipinos to the tune of about $10 billion a year, one wonders where all these monies go.
And why does our country remain second to Bangladesh at the bottom among Asian countries? And why is it that unemployment rate is still high? Why are some doctors going back to school to become a nurse? And why are teachers going to America instead of staying in our country to practice their profession? Why are our graduates being told they should study harder so they could also go abroad?
These are hard questions, which may only put emissaries in a difficult spot. There are no easy answers, I believe. Emissaries may be winging their way through in their responses but in reality, no matter what their message is, it is up to us to accept it or not as the gospel truth.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Do the Math: Choose the lesser evil!
|
|
|
|
CHICAGO, Illinois --- In front of the now famous EDSA’s Camp Crame, the Constabulary headquarters headed by then PC Chief Fidel V. Ramos, is a huge marker inscribed with a motto: “Always March Forward. Never Mark Time.”
I’m sure, the General-turned-President must have used this motto as his guide, compelling him to move on, instead of stalling, en route to the loftiest position bestowed on him by the Filipino people.
That’s why when there were coups and demonstrations last year that nearly toppled President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo following the decision of the Philippine Congress to dismiss the impeachment complaint against her for stealing her elections based on the “Hello, Garci” tapes, the Filipino people listened to the words of Mr. Ramos.
Mercifully for Mrs. Arroyo, Mr. Ramos, who still commands the respect of military and the civilian population, sided with Mrs. Arroyo but with a catch -- Mrs. Arroyo should take a graceful exit by way of Charter Change (Cha-Cha).
No second-guesing
At first, Mrs. Arroyo did not like being second-guessed. But after realizing that Ramos’ proposal would work in her interest, she seized the moment.
Mrs. Arroyo felt that either way -- the status quo (presidential form of government) will keep her in power until 2010 while Cha-Cha (parliamentary system) could even keep her in power longer.
So, she openly campaigned for everybody to hitch on her “Cha-Cha” train through the legally challenged “peoples initiative.”
When Mr. Ramos and the opposition realized that they played into the hands of Mrs. Arroyo who serendipitously converted their condition into a “win-win” situation, they now appear to be regretting in making the offer. Why?
It is a very simple math. If the opposition agrees to “Cha Cha,” there is a likelihood that Mrs. Arroyo can run for a parliamentary seat and she can still become a Prime Minister by using her clout among the incoming “Parliamentary Members,” who are likely going to be made up mostly of senators and congressmen allied to her.
If Cha-Cha won’t let her run for the Parliament, which is very unlikely, Mrs. Arroyo can still act as caretaker of the Philippine government as a transition president until 2010, when her current term of office as president will expire.
Judging by the events, even if the opposition files its second impeachment against her in July by reviving the “Hello Garci” tape case and adding human rights abuses by Mrs. Arroyo, among others, her losses in the Supreme Court on the implementation of the “Calibrated Preemptive Response (CPR)” and Proclamation 1017, Mrs. Arroyo, still has the votes in Congress to reject her impeachment bid.
Ramos back-pedalling
As Mr. Ramos hinted in his appearance before the Filipino American community members in Washington, DC, last week, with the Philippine economy picking up under her watch, it is likely that Mrs. Arroyo can still grudgingly count support from the Filipino people.
With Ramos back-pedalling or marking time in driving away Mrs. Arroyo from office with the “Arroyonomics” working, everybody is back to square one.
In shelving “Cha Cha,” the Filipino people should be guided by Mrs. Arroyo’s own logic. When she breezed through Chicago, Illinois several years ago, Mrs. Arroyo told the Economic Club: “If there is a shooting incident, blame should not be laid on the gun, but the gun holder.”
In the same manner, if we compare the gun to the Constitution as instrument in running the government, and if something goes wrong with the government, blame should not be pinned on the Constitution but on the President or Prime Minister running the affairs of the government. So, Mrs. Arroyo was saying that it really does not matter if the Constitution is presidential or parliamentary form. What matters is the leader running the affairs of the state.
So, if the framers will tinker with the current Philippine Constitution, which may only need amendments, not complete revision, they should not disturb Arroyo’s fixed term until 2010 because the current Constitution prohibits her from seeking re-election.
GMA no word of honor
On the other hand, if Arroyo’s “peoples initiative” gains ground, knowing that Mrs. Arroyo has no word of honor (on Rizal Day 2002, Mrs. Arroyo pledged not to run for president only to take it back), there is a likelihood that not only can Mrs. Arroyo extend her term of office as Prime Minister beyond 2010, she could even outlast Marcos’ 17 years in power.
As Filipinos would say, “ang naghahangad ng kagitna, isang salop ang mawawala,” (Sometimes, those who aspire to take the half of something usually lose everything.), I think an old American proverb will be more appropriate -- “a bird in hand is better than two in a bush.”
So, why not let Mrs. Arroyo stay until 2010? Whereas, if the opposition will let Mrs. Arroyo dance the “Cha-Cha,” there is the probability that she can stay in power for life. Do the math.
(lariosa_jos@sbcglobal.net)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
IT’S ONLY 76 days before --- no, not Christmas. It’s two-and-a-half months before Speaker Jose de Venecia’s “prophecy” is to be fulfilled.
By end of July, De Venecia predicted either a bulldozed constituent assembly or “people’s initiative” will have: (a) scrapped the 1987 Constitution; (b) abolished the Senate; (c) run a nationwide plebiscite overseen by an incorrigible Commission on Elections; and (d) strapped us into a still-to-be-defined parliamentary system. “A land of milk and honey” will then be around the corner, we’re told.
Could this be what former Singapore Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew called, in his memoirs on the Philippines, the “missing gel”? It’d enable a talented, diligent but fractious people to finally get their act together.
Then, why are many passengers scrambling off the Charter-change express before it careens into the terminal, even as President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo leans on the throttle?
The Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP), for one, has yanked the “stop” cord. “The bishops were alarmed at the continuing and deceptive campaign to gather signatures, under a people’s initiative,” the CBCP president, Archbishop Angel Lagdameo, said.
Catholic social action centers nationwide reported the “pirma” [signature] campaign lacked adequate information and discussion, added the low-key CBCP vice president, Archbishop Antonio Ledesma, SJ. It certainly was “not initiated by the people.”
Most congressmen and assorted officials couldn’t care less. They’re staying on board. After all, one of its transitory provisions would scupper the next elections -- and stretch their terms for three hassle-free years.
Thus, De Venecia’s salivating legion won’t enact the needed enabling law for a people’s initiative. Nor will they wait for the Supreme Court to rule if the two houses of Congress must vote separately on constitutional changes. If 195 representatives sign on, the time is ripe.
“It’s ‘hinog sa pilit’ [forced to ripen],” says lecturer Evelyn Miranda-Feliciano. “Anything forced to ripen before its time -- pineapple or politics -- turns distasteful and bitter.”
A frenzied administration, using government machinery and funds, seeks to make “hinog sa pilit” through people’s initiative. “(This) shows the move is not from the people but from government ... (and) kills creative initiatives people may have,” Feliciano writes.
“I hate being manipulated by my own government,” she adds. “I cannot find any valid reason that changing the Constitution now will make life better. What needs changing is the people holding power at present.”
A “real people’s initiative” would be one of sustained civil disobedience, Feliciano says. Not paying your taxes, overseas Filipino workers withholding their remittances, mass absences, etc. “I greatly wonder how it would be.”
What’s needed is not Charter change but a new culture frame, writes the Institute for Studies in Asian Church and Culture’s Melba Padilla Maggay. Otherwise, constitutional tinkering will only end up with “just a piece of paper that can be thrown aside when found to be technically inconvenient by those in power.”
Fr. Leonardo Mercado, SVD, agrees in his new book, “Political and Legal Philosophies: Western, Eastern and Filipino.” He writes: “We must change the paradigm of our government from the rule of law to the rule of virtue, which in Filipino is called of ‘pamahalaan’ [government].”
Rule of law is a major factor in growth and stability, Maggay notes. It emerged from centuries of struggle against despotic monarchies. It built systems, buttressed by culture, which kept faith with social contracts and sustained a just system of reward and punishment, enabling a society to flourish.
Blind copying of Western models results in gridlock. “In Asian political and legal philosophies -- be it law as dharma, as li, as torah or as shariah -- political agenda rests upon self-discipline and strives toward solidarity,” Mercado writes.
Instead of constitutional tinkering for the political survival of elites, Maggay and Mercado stress the greater need for a common frame for what Filipinos stand for. Constitutions only put down on paper the moral consensus that a community has arrived at.
The next 76 days will show whether this was a bogus prophecy. Or will the end of July see a nightmare: a force-fed constitution would install, in a sham parliament, unelected representatives who, for the next three years, would further impoverish a nation sedated by entertainment.
What a measly epitaph that’d make for us: “They saw it coming. But they neither had the wit nor grit to resist the plunder of their children’s futures.”
E-mail: juan_mercado@paci-fic.net.ph
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AFTER writing last week about the “disconnect” between the recent news on the “soaring” Manila stock market and lowering inflation rate on one hand and the Social Weather Stations survey results about the new record high of the incidence of hunger among the poor on the other, we were delighted to note confirmation of our observations two or three days later from other sources.
Interviewed on the radio, Senator Mar Roxas, an economist and former Trade Secretary, said “We can say that the stock market is good but this does not mean that our economy is also strong. Our economy is OK but it’s not as good as the stock market figures. There really is a disconnect between what we call the financial market and the real economy as reflected in the everyday life of Juan de la Cruz.”
Roxas said some 60 to 70 percent of the investors in the stock market were foreigners who were only looking for markets to park their money. (We called their money “hot money”, very volatile ready to move out in an instant at the slightest bad sign - GT).
Roxas continued, “These are all foreign funds and it just so happened that the Philippines is the flavor of the month.” Ideally, he said, investments should redound to the benefit of the people through the construction of new factories and the establishment of businesses that would create jobs. We have not come to that”.
Roxas said even local businessmen were feeling the economic crunch.
Everytime we return to the Philippines, we observed that in the Legaspi Village area, shut down stores and dining places seem to multiply. Entire buildings appear tenantless.
In last week’s column and in another piece we sent to the Express in a previous visit three months ago, we cited the growing propensity of manufacturers to package their products in small plastic sachets. This is how they meet the problem of diminishing purchasing power of consumers.
Ambassador and former Senator Ernesto Maceda echoes the same observation in his column last week in “The Daily Tribune”.
“Even the acts of GMA (Gloria Macapagal Arroyo) are sachet solutions such as Tindahan ni Gloria Labandera, food coupons, one-year Philhealth cards, Price Smart stores in government offices, measly minimum wage increases, and part-time and temporary jobs such as cleaning roadsides (GMA’s Pangalagaan ang Kalsada program}. Palliatives, temporary jobs, small-time approaches from the sachet President.”
Maceda has expanded the meaning of sachet. To him, sachet thinking is thinking small. “The sachet thinking has infected Malacanang chief of staff Michael Defensor and Justice Secretary Raul Gonzalez. (They) announced plans to charge President Erap, Senator Lacson and other recipients of e-mail from confessed FBI spy Leandro Aragoncillo, with rebellion or treason.
“They will have to charge hundreds as Sen. Jinggoy Estrada, San Juan Mayor JV Ejercito...Rep. Rodito Albano and many others including GMA (herself), recipients of copies of the classified US Embassy reports that depicted GMA’s precarious situation.
“Gonzalez’s ‘sachet’ mind has been amply demonstrated by the slaps by the Supreme Court on three executive actions which he cleared and favorably recommended. It is further proved by the several cases thrown out by trial courts, the last being the dismissal of the amended rebellion charges he filed against the Batasan 5 and 42 others which were thrown out by Makati RTC Judge Lenny Lind Delorino.
“To cap it all, Gonzalez’s sachet thinking is immortalized by his statement, “They should go back to the mountains. That’s where they belong.” This latest Gonzalez outburst puts a definitive end to any further peace talks or reconciliation with NPA rebels. This is a confirmation of the GMA administration’s total state of war with all opposition sectors.”
GMA’s latest political achievement is securing pardons for some 170 Filipino overseas workers imprisoned in Saudi Arabia from the Saudi monarch. We recall a story about a Christian who ran over a chicken owned by a Muslim in Mindanao. The outraged owner of the dead chicken tried to collect not only the value of one chicken but the chickens he would have produced for several generations. He reasoned if the driver had not visited Mindanao, his chicken would still be alive, producing more chickens.
Someone remarked if GMA had only done her work and there are jobs aplenty in the country, our OFWs should not have gone to Saudi to work, they would not have committed their crimes, and they would not have to be pardoned. We admit that maybe this is a stretch. But that’s GMA’s problem. No credibility.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
How immigration security check works
|
|
|
|
MUCH has been written about proposals in Congress that seek to provide a path to legalization for millions of undocumented aliens in the United States. Among the measures being considered is a temporary guest worker program that would not only give visas to workers but could lead to possible green cards, and eventually to citizenship.
Understandably, there is great anticipation among the close to 12 million illegal immigrants. As in previous proposals that have been submitted to Congress, the anxiety and confusion have resulted in some unscrupulous immigration consultants already looking for ways to make fast bucks. In fact, some consultants have been luring people by already advertising that a guest worker program or amnesty is already here, and that aliens should start applying for these benefits right now.
In response, the US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) recently issued a public notice, advising people that, as of now, no temporary workers program exists for aliens unlawfully present in the US. USCIS reminded people that although Congress has been debating immigration reform legislation, which includes a temporary guest worker program, such a program has not yet been approved or passed by Congress.
The USCIS said there are no benefits currently available under this proposed program, and people should, therefore, not pay any fees or other money to “any person or organization claiming they can help apply for or receive benefits for a temporary worker program.”
In their over-eagerness to finally solve their immigration problems, people become susceptible to fraudulent schemes by unscrupulous individuals who will make promises they cannot fulfill, and then disappear with the hapless clients’ money. Over the years, thousands of individuals have fallen prey to these immigration consultants, whether it be for asylum, fake marriages, fake jobs, etc. But these consultants never seem to run out of ideas and opportunities to fleece people out of their hard-earned money.
Although we all hope that some kind of legalization program for the millions of illegal immigrants will pass in Congress and signed into law, these measures are still just proposals. Unless and until a proposal is passed by both the Senate and the House, and is signed by the president, it is not a “law.” It is only a “proposal.”
I suggest that people be aware of, and read the news on the current debate on immigration reform, so that they would not be victimized by fraudulent schemes. If you should hear that a guest worker law was passed,
I suggest you consult with a reputable attorney, to be sure, rather than rely on rumor, gossip, or advice from these consultants. We will continue to monitor and inform you of new developments on these proposals. In the meantime, be cautious of immigration fraud.
Michael J. Gurfinkel has been an attorney for over 25 years, and is an active member of the State Bar of California and New York, as well as the American Immigration Lawyers Association and the Immigration Section of the Los Angeles County Bar Association.He has always excelled in school:Valedictorian in High School; Cum Laude at UCLA; and Law Degree Honors and academic scholar at Loyola Law School, which is one of the top law schools in California.
WEBSITE: www.gurfinkel.com
Four offices to serve you:
LOS ANGELES: 219 North Brand Boulevard, Glendale, California 91203 Telephone: (818) 543-5800
SAN FRANCISCO: 966 Mission Street, San Francisco, California 94103 Telephone: (415) 538-7800
NEW YORK: 60 East 42nd Street, Suite 2101, New York, NY 10165 Telephone: (212) 808-0300
PHILIPPINES: Heart Tower, Unit 701, 108 Valero Street, Salcedo Village, Makati, Philippines 1227 Telephone: 894-0258 or 894-0239
(This is for informational purposes only, and reflects the firm’s opinions and views on general issues. Each case is different and results may depend on the facts of a particular case. All immigration services are provided by an active member of the State Bar of California and/or by a person under the supervision of an active member of the State Bar. No prediction, warranty or guarantee can be made about the results of any case.Should you need or want legal advice, you should consult with and retain counsel of your own choice.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
