Thread: La Raza talks about ALIPAC and the Miller Boycott

La Raza
Publicado el 10-06-2006

The Wall of Discord

President George Bush approved funding for starting construction of the Mexican border wall without listening to Mexican complaints, while Cook County was considering plans to become a sanctuary for immigrants, and the suburb of Carpentersville (north of Chicago) could penalize whoever hires or rents apartments to undocumented immigrants.

Editorial Staff
La Raza


The Carpentersville Village Board decided to postpone voting on an ordinance which would fine landlords $1,000 for renting living space to illegal immigrants and deny business permits to whoever hires undocumented workers.

The measure would also declare English as the official language for all village documents and forms.

According to Board President Bill Sarto, in two weeks there will be a special community meeting which will deal with this issue alone. It will be held in a place with space for more people.

Around 212 people managed to get into the Village Hall on Tuesday evening, but it was estimated that there were over 1,000 who were left outside. As explained by Sarto and Village Attorney James Rhodes, the Open Meetings Act of the State of Illinois requires that all people who go to council meetings have the right to hear and debate the issues.

A group lead by Elgin’s Mexican Cultural Civic Society and the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights formed part of the demonstrators grouped outside in a peaceful protest.

Board members supporting the ordinance, among them Paul Humpfer and Judy Sigwalt, connect undocumented immigrants to all the problems in the area, like gangs. They complain that these immigrants pay no taxes, making American citizens finance pro-immigrant programs with their taxes.

Others assure that these immigrants do not belong in Carpentersville because they refuse to learn English and assimilate into the American culture.

According to the Census 2000, some 40% of the suburban population is Hispanic. Those who defend these immigrants’ presence feel they contribute more than they take. They believe also that the ordinance would violate federal law and is unenforceable.

President Juan Silva of Elgin’s Mexican Cultural Civic Society said the people of Carpentersville had made a difference, as they were able to postpone discussion of the proposed ordinance, which he called “racist.”

He mentioned also that the community turned out for the demonstration, “knowing full well that they were not destroying but building.”

“Elgin and Carpentersville are sister towns. What affects the one affects the other, and so we are here to help insofar as we can. Today we have shown we are here to get ahead. Together we can keep this kind of thing from happening. We are on the right path and will stay on it,” Silva said.

This is the first time something like this has happened in the Chicago metropolitan area. In contrast, Cook County will submit to its Board of Commissioners a resolution to prohibit official agencies and departments, including the Sheriff’s Office, from asking for the legal status of whoever needs or is presently utilizing any public service.

The wall, in spite of everything

Meanwhile, President George W. Bush has approved initial funding to start building the 700 mile (1,125 kilometer) wall, which is intended to restrain undocumented immigration.

In ceremony in Arizona, the President signed the document in spite of pleas from the Mexican government against it.

And so construction of the wall has become the only aspect of immigration reform to be passed by the Legislative Branch, after almost a year of debates on how to control the flows of migration. Originally, regularization of status was being considered but, in the end, came to nothing.

The approval signifies a triumph for anti-immigrant groups and a majority of Republican lawmakers. It reduced the broader issue to a simple focus on undocumented immigrants presenting “a threat to national security.”

On this, the Mexican government said it respects the right of any nation to implement, within its territory, whatever measures it deems proper “for its own security.”

Through spokesman Rubén Aguilar, the Office of the Presidency reiterated that “proper attention” to the matter of immigration between Mexico and the United States calls for “a comprehensive focus, based on the principle of shared responsibility.”

The official noted that halfway measures, concentrating exclusively upon domestic security, “deny reality and, in the present context, represent more of a political response than a viable solution to this problem.”

However, he objected to the legislation because it provokes tension, damages bilateral relations and goes against the principle of reciprocal collaboration.

Hit from both sides


Another sign of the tense atmosphere brought on by this issue is what the Miller Brewing Company is going through. First it had to contend with a boycott by Latin consumers because of its financial support for controversial Congressman James Sensenbrenner, but rage comes from anti-immigrant groups now.

These groups maintain that the drop in the price of Miller’s shares in the stock market, 6.02¢ since September 5, is because the company is being boycotted for its alleged support of the March 10 Movement.

The initials of the anti-immigrant groups are ALIPAC. The first three letters stand for “Americans for Legal Immigration,” the others for “Political Action Committee.”

In a press release, they claim that the boycott was decided upon when they discovered that Miller Brewing Company provided money to the March 10 Movement, the organization which lit the fuse of the mass demonstrations in support of comprehensive immigration reform.

According to ALIPAC, which has a well-designed and costly website, the boycott is in Phase II and covers 26 products of this beer company, which has its headquarters in the city of Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

In Phase III, which will be put into practice after the November elections, there will be protests in front of Miller’s plants and offices across the entire country.

ALIPAC is based in Raleigh, North Carolina, and is affiliated with the organization FIRE (Federal Immigration Reform and Enforcement), which projects an image of rabid antagonism toward the undocumented population.

On September 1, the Chicago Tribune newspaper published information detailing how the Miller Brewing Company had donated $30,000 to the March 10 Movement for carrying out activities in support of the undocumented population.

Anti-immigrant organizations, with FIRE in the lead, decided right away upon the boycott and immediately created a website (the ALIPAC one) for this purpose.

The brewing company had to use the pages of the Milwaukee Business Journal to declare, “Miller did not sponsor the Labor Day march in Chicago.”

Jorge Mújica, one of the directors of the March 10 Movement, declared to La Raza, “Miller did not provide financial backing for the march.”

But he said that Miller provided some funding for holding a convention in Chicago which drew 700 people and representatives from 39 states “to establish a common basis and a coordinated strategy to help the undocumented population attain permanent status in this country and to keep their jobs.”

However, if Miller helped the convention held last August 11, there are other companies and business which have helped the March 10 Movement much more; “Why didn’t the Minutemen take action against ‘Los Comales’ or ‘El Güero’ supermarkets?” Mújica declared.

Martín Unzueta also rejected the claims by anti-immigrant groups, saying that the boycott launched in the March 10 actions against the brewing company had an impact because it represented a social cause.

“The reason for the boycott was that it had been discovered that the company had provided financial support to the election campaign of Sensenbrenner, the author of the bill which would criminalize undocumented workers. The consuming public saw this boycott as a logical thing to do, under the circumstances,” he said.

Unzueta also referred to the anti-immigrant groups as “Minutemen,” saying their boycott was ridiculous. “Its effect will for sure be miniscule, if they even accomplish anything at all.”

He remembered, “The same thing happened when we marched to Batavia to protest against Republican Congressman Dennis Hastert. The anti-immigrant people were promoting the view that there would be conflict and possibly even a physical confrontation between us and neighbors in the suburbs we would be going through. But in the end the Minutemen who showed up there barely amounted to ten or twelve, and the residents of the cities we passed through never showed any hostility. On the contrary, they came out of their homes to cheer us on with placards showing their support.”

Attempts to reach Matt Romero, a high executive of the Miller Brewing Company, by telephone were unsuccessful. We were unable to get an official statement on the matter from the company.

There is no mention of the Minutemen in any of the websites operated by FIRE and ALIPAC. The latter has a list of over a hundred organizations which support it.

On the other hand, the FIRE website has a section in which financial contributions are solicited, as does the ALIPAC. They also urge “concerned citizens and the press in general” to go to website www.millerboycott.com. © La Raza

(Maribel Hastings, Francisco Robles Nava, Julio César Acosta Maltos, Julio C. Montoya and Miguel A. Arrieta contributed to this report.)

http://www.laraza.com/print.php?nid=37661&origen=1

Apparently this group is not the "National Council of LaRaza" based in Washington DC. They are a smaller organization who apparently is proud of being racists.

They also seem to be terminally confused. They say "Americans for Legal Immigration" are anti-immigrant?

However, if Miller helped the convention held last August 11, there are other companies and business which have helped the March 10 Movement much more; “Why didn’t the Minutemen take action against ‘Los Comales’ or ‘El Güero’ supermarkets?” Mújica declared.

Pleeeeeeese, give me a break. Now what good would it have done to boycott two Hispanic businesses that have a pro-illegal customer base? These folks don't even think logically.

Hey they did like the ALIPAC website design.

Miniscule effect on sales, I think not. Not to mention all the negative publicity they received thanks to our website American businesses have to be held accountable for their actions. Allowing illegal aliens into this country illegally and promoting their rights of which they have none in this country needs to be addressed as was shown clearly by this boycott.