Mexican Labor News & Analysis

AMLO: Defend your Vote, the Election, and Mexico’s Future

By Dan La Botz

Andrés Manuel López Obrador, candidate of the Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD), has called for a campaign of civil disobedience to pressure the election authorities to carry out a vote-by-vote recount. He has summoned the Mexican people to defend their votes, their elections, and the institution of democracy itself. What is at stake, he says, is not only his election but the very future of the country.

Speaking on July 30 before a crowd estimated at perhaps as many as two million people—the largest demonstration in Mexican history—López Obrador launched the civil disobedience campaign by declaring a permanent sit-in in the Zócalo, the national plaza, and in dozens of locations throughout the Mexican capital. He himself took command of the movement from a tent in the Zócalo where, seated at a small table with the Mexican flag behind him, he appeared to be simultaneously the Mexican shadow president and the leader of the greatest social movement in Mexican history in almost a hundred years.

“We are here,” he said, “to keep our promise to history. We are living through moments that are crucial for Mexico. What is at stake is the destiny of our people. It is not only the presidency that is in question, but also the right of citizens to freely and democratically elect their leaders. In these days what is being decided is if in Mexico we will definitively establish a true democracy or if instead a regime of phony democracy will be imposed on us, a regime where, when all is said and done, the same old privileged groups will continue deciding the fate of the nation.”

Having fought throughout his campaign to win the election and to change the political direction of the country to the left, López Obrador has decided that he will not let the election be stolen from him as it was from Cuauhtémoc Cárdenas in 1988. Claiming that votes were stolen by everything from stuffing ballot boxes to manipulating computer programs, López Obrador has demanded that the Mexican election authorities do right. To do right means to count the votes, each and every one of them, a process he is sure, and his followers are sure, will make him the next president of Mexico.

The Mexican Federal Election Institute (IFE) declared Felipe Calderon of the National Action Party (PAN) to be the winner on July 6, but López Obrador and his supporters have argued that the election was stolen and have demanded a recount “polling-place-by-polling-place and vote-by-vote.” López Obrador has pursued both a legal strategy, filing appeals with the election authorities demanding that the votes be recounted, and a political strategy, attempting to set in motion a civil disobedience campaign that will pressure the authorities to insure a fair election. The campaign of civil disobedience, peaceful but forceful action, is centered in Mexico City, the heart and brain of Mexico.

In calling for civil disobedience, López Obrador reminded his followers of the special importance of democracy for the majority of Mexico, its poor. “In a country like ours, with so much inequality, democracy acquires a fundamental social dimension, it becomes a matter of survival. Democracy is the only option, the only hope for millions of poor people, for the majority of the people, to improve their conditions of life and labor.

“If the democratic path is closed, there will only remain submission or violence. That is why we have to defend democracy and make it count.”

Raising the Stakes

Over the last month López Obrador has raised the stakes, challenging the Mexican government of Vicente Fox with ever larger demonstrations of his supporters: half a million on July 8, a million on July 16, and then what may have been two million on July 30. The demonstrations and speeches have now become a massive movement, a confrontation between an aggrieved people, many of them the poorest people, and their government. Following his speech, López Obrador’s supporters blocked major intersections in Mexico City paralyzing the financial district and causing traffic stoppages and long delays throughout the capital. As the PRD candidate’s supporters went into action snarling up the capital, President Vicente Fox reminded the Mexican Army of its responsibility to protect the institutions of the republic. Various voices in Mexican society have cautioned that the election crisis could lead to an authoritarian solution, perhaps a military solution, something unknown in Mexico since the Revolution of 1910-1920. Two days later, Carlos Abascal Carranza, the head of the Ministry of the Interior (Gobernación) declared the sit-ins illegal and insisted that Alejandro Encinas, PRD governor of Mexico City remove them. Encinas refused to act on Abascal’s request. The church also weighed in on the controversy, Bishop Carlos Aguiar Retes, speaking on behalf of the Conference of Mexican Bishops (CEM), accused López Obrador of violating the citizens’ right to free movement about the city. The Roman Catholic Church of Mexico has been allied with the National Action Party since its founding and Interior Minister Carlos Abascal has close ties to the church. Bishop Aguiar Retes asked López Obrador “not to ignite Mexico.” Many left-of-center critics of Fox and the PAN argue that they have helped el Yunque (the Anvil), a secret, Catholic, ultra-right wing organization obtain high positions within the PAN and within the Mexican government. They see Fox, Abascal and Calderón as working closely with the Yunque, the Church and possibly the Army to launch a rightwing repressive action against López Obrador and the PRD. Over the past six months Fox and his government unleashed massive police power, including murderous assaults by hundreds of police officers, against striking steelworkers in Lazaro Cárdenas and activists in Atenco. However, the numbers now are much larger and the election itself revealed deep divisions within the country. It remains to be seen whether the current government is willing to risk what could turn into a virtual bloodbath, with serious implications for the stability of the country.

The Stolen Election of 1988

López Obrador, a history teacher from the state of Tabasco, is determined that he will not be bamboozled and bullied and cheated of his victory as Cuauhtémoc Cárdenas was in 1988. In the election of 1988 Cuauhtémoc Cárdenas, the son of Mexico’s most famous and popular president Lázaro Cárdenas (1934-1940), ran for election as the head of a coalition which later became the Party of the Democratic Revolution. Cuauhtémoc Cárdenas had massive popular support among the peasants and workers as well as much of the middle class of Mexico, and most observers agree that he actually won the election of July 6, 1988.

That year the election was being recorded on computers and the results broadcast by television to the Mexican people. But, in the middle of the count, with Cárdenas leading, the computers went down. When later the computers came back on-line and the count resumed, Carlos Salinas de Gortari, candidate of the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI), was in the lead and went on to win the election. The fraud was transparent. The actual ballots were later burned.

At that moment, Cárdenas, an enormously popular candidate whose election had clearly been stolen, might have called upon the Mexican people to fight to defend their election and his victory. But he hesitated and then backed down, saying that he did not want to plunge Mexico into a bloodbath.

Having become convinced by the 1988 and 1994 elections that they would not be permitted to end the rule of the PRI by voting for Cárdenas, the candidate of the left, in 2000 the majority of the voters cast their votes for the candidate of the right, Vicente Fox. The Mexican people hoped that their votes for democracy and a change in the political culture would be respected by a man of the right. But Fox failed them, putting the agenda of the right above the popular clamor for democracy.

Twice fooled and frustrated, the Mexican left and the popular classes are now disputing Calderón’s claim and themselves claiming in this election the victory they clearly won in 1988. The question is whether they have waited too long, 18 years too long, to claim payment of their long-due debt. In any case, López Obrador does not intend to give up without a fight.

A Question of Strategy, Size and Stamina

The fight will demand a sophisticated strategy as well as a movement of enormous size and stamina.

The struggle is partly one of geographical position. So far López Obrador, the former mayor of Mexico City, has focused all his forces on the capital city that is controlled by his party and filled with millions of his supporters. Mexico City with its ten million inhabitants, and another ten million in the metropolitan area—one fifth of Mexico’s population—constitutes the core of López Obrador’s support. In addition he has the support of the densely populated and poorer states of southern Mexico where he carried the election.

The question is how to mobilize that support. While it is true that Mexico City has often dominated the nation’s history, it is also true that Mexico is a huge nation both geographically and in terms of population, and that the great political struggles in the past—most important the Mexican Revolution—have often been fought and decided in the North. So, while peacefully fighting his battle in la capital, López Obrador must be careful not to lose the support of las provincias, especially the provinces of the North.

Mexico stands on the verge of a democratic future and simultaneously on the brink of political disaster. The Mexican people have their future in their hands.

Back to July , 2006 Table of Contents

And The Winner of The Mexican Election is....

Robin Alexander

President Bush was quick to congratulate Felipe Calderón, presidential candidate of Mexico’s right wing National Action Party (PAN) and self-declared winner of Mexico’s recent election. But it may have been wishful thinking, and certainly hasn’t happened yet.

Andrés Manuel López Obrador, candidate of the center-left Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD) has challenged the conclusion by Mexico's electoral commission (IFE) that of 41 million ballots cast, Calderón had won by fewer than 244,000 votes— or a margin of just 0.58%. In support, López Obrador submitted an 800-page petition and nine boxes of evidence of alleged fraud and election law violations. The presidential election is now in the hands of the seven judge Federal Electoral Tribunal which has until August 30th to reach a decision. It must name the winner on September 6th, and the new president takes office on December 1st.

The credibility of the election would have been an important issue under any circumstances. Elections do not make a country a democracy, as the history of Mexico demonstrates: the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) had “won” every election up until the year 2000, governing Mexico for 71 years straight, until it was finally forced to concede victory to the PAN. And it is generally recognized now that the PRI had stolen the 1988 election from the PRD when the computers “went down,” subsequently going back on line to thwart a PRD victory.

The election process has been cleaned up considerably since that time, a new election tribunal has actually annulled two gubernatorial elections and invalidated results in various districts because of electoral improprieties, and the PAN defeated the PRI in 2000 in what was viewed as Mexico’s first democratic election. But an important question remained to be answered: would the electoral system remain impartial if the winner were a candidate of the left rather than the right?

López Obrador campaigned on a platform calling for putting the poor first, increasing jobs, and re-negotiating the agricultural provisions of NAFTA, which have devastated the countryside, forcing tens of thousands of small farmers to migrate to cities and often the United States, so it is hardly surprising that the election reflected a strong class divide. He had also gained extraordinary credibility as Mayor of Mexico City for providing stipends to the elderly and working with industrialists to refurbish the central section of the city.

Early on, it was clear that the PAN viewed López Obrador as its primary threat to its 2006 presidential aspirations, and sought to disqualify him from running by filing minor criminal charges. However, in April 2005 when over a million Mexican citizens gathered in protest, charges mysteriously evaporated, leaving the PAN embarrassed and Lopez Obrador far more popular.

Although López Obrador had been ahead by double digits since that time, a few months before the election his margin began to erode, and shortly before the election he was reported to be a few points behind Calderón with Roberto Madrazo, candidate of the PRI, a distant third.

This was due in part to errors he committed, but is attributed largely to a vicious attack campaign waged by the PAN upon the advice of consultants, including Dick Morris, former advisor to President Bill Clinton and more recently consultant to President Fox and the National Action Party. (For a full discussion of this view see: Al Giordano, “U.S. Political Consultants Dick Morris and Rob Allyn Are the Virtual Rapists of Atenco,” The Narco News Bulletin, May 16, 2006.

In addition to rhetoric linking López Obrador and Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez, many believe that the recent violent attacks on steel workers, flower venders and their supporters were a carefully orchestrated means through which the government in power drove home its message that López Obrador was a radical, and a vote for him was a vote for instability.

The Frente Auténtico del Trabajo (FAT) has informed us that business leaders illegally ran a major campaign of TV spots attacking López Obrador and that this message was also conveyed to workers by their supervisors and through captive audience meetings where they were instructed how they should vote and often told that a vote for the PRD would mean that their plant would close.

Yet, in spite of the barrage of negative propaganda, López Obrador did well in the last debate and polls showed him ahead going into the election. Then, strangely, the official preliminary results showed Calderón with a consistent lead, although the sampled returns from 130,488 polling places were so close that the IFE went on national television and declined to declare a winner until it had counted all of the votes.

And during the period of limbo as the election dragged on, questions about the results began to circulate. One major issue had to do with inconsistencies between the numbers in local polling places and those reported by IFE In the local polls, after votes are tallied they are written on a chart which is posted on the wall and reported to the IFE Note 1. Uneasiness increased after allegations by the PRD of up to three million missing votes resulted in the IFE’s acknowledgment that some 2.5 million votes had not been counted. Their inclusion put López Obrador ahead. He was still ahead the evening of July 5th. However, in the early hours of the morning Calderón pulled ahead in the count, and was declared the winner.

The National Association of Democratic Lawyers vigorously protested that the IFE lacked the authority to make such a pronouncement: “Article 99 of the Constitution provides … that until the resolution of the Superior Court issues, the candidates are considered to be contenders.” Nonetheless, Calderon announced his victory, began assembling a cabinet and took congratulatory phone calls from world leaders including U.S. President George W. Bush and the leaders of Canada, Spain and Colombia, among others.

As Fred Ross observed, “The U.S. embassy has a track record of intervening in Mexico's presidential selection - Ronald Reagan recognized Carlos Salinas as the winner of the stolen 1988 election within 96 hours of the larceny. In 1911, U.S. Ambassador Henry Lane Wilson signed off on the assassination of Mexico's first democratically elected president Francisco Madero, to whom Lopez Obrador has often compared himself.”

However, unlike recent U.S. elections where the candidates conceded, López Obrador moved decisively to challenge the IFE’s conclusion as seriously tainted by improprieties and fraud. Among the election challenges filed are both specific claims regarding the vote count, including that a high percentage (2.16% of the votes cast) had been voided, as well as general claims that the PAN had used money from social programs to impact the outcome of the election and that the electoral commission has failed to halt major violations of the election laws, such as television ads paid for by third parties which are illegal under Mexican law.

In the post election material circulated by the PRD and civil society organizations, and presumably also reflected in the challenges filed on July 9th, a variety of questions are also raised regarding practices throughout the country. These include allegations that the software program used by the IFE to obtain initial vote-count reports decreased votes for López Obrador while increasing them for Calderón; as well as a variety of computer generated results which are allegedly only statistically possible where there has been computer manipulation. Note 2

Additional evidence of improprieties include that in some places more votes were cast for senate races than for the far more important presidential race and that the PRD lost the presidential race in places where it won other races; and that some polling places reported more votes than registered voters.

These allegations appear even more serious in the face of what appears to be a major conflicts of interest: Diego Zavala, Calderon’s brother in law is reported to be one of the owners of the company which designed the software used for the IFE’s preliminary reports (PREP) and most of software used by IFE. During the June 6th debate, Obrador accused Calderón of channeling $230 million in government contracts to this same brother-in-law, who then failed to pay taxes. Zavala first denied that such contracts existed and threatened to sue Lopez Obrador, but just days before the election was forced to admit their existence.

If this weren’t enough to call the IFE’s credibility into question, it recently surfaced that when Luis Carlos Ugalde, head of the IFE, married a panista militant, none other than Felipe Calderon was the padrino at their wedding.

Meanwhile, Greg Palast who has made a compelling case for election fraud in Florida and Ohio, has written a number of extremely disturbing columns. He revealed that the U.S. Justice Department had obtained the Mexican voting lists under a “counterterrorism’ contract with ChoicePoint, Inc. the data firm responsible for “scrubbing” the Florida voting lists. Note 3 ChoicePoint claims that it did not know that it was illegal to collect such information from Mexico and that it returned or destroyed the files. When Mexican prosecutors visited ChoicePoint’s Georgia office to witness the erasure of the files, Palast reports that the company first requested a statement exonerating its employees of any wrongdoing. Maria de los Angeles Fromow declined, stating “Because of the simple fact that (the list) has left the electoral arena and has been used in a commercial form, for other ends, there is a presumption that a crime has been committed.” Even if true that the company destroyed the information, Palast points out, “It is, of course, impossible to know if the FBI destroyed its own copy of the files of Mexico’s votor rolls obtained by ChoicePoint or if these were then used to assist the Calderón candidacy.”

It is reported that irregularities may have occurred in almost half of the polling places, and the PRD and many civil society organizations are calling for a vote by vote recount. López Obrador backed up his legal challenge by calling upon supporters across Mexico to converge upon the capital. Three major mobilizations have taken place since the election, each larger than the last. The march on July 30th was described as the largest in Mexico’s history, with over two million people filling the zócalo. Benedicto Martínez, a national leader of the FAT observed: “The problems we confront as a country require a president who is seen as legitimate by the Mexican people. There were many irregularities during this election, as well as a lot of intimidation of workers. This means that we are engaged in a historic struggle for transparency -- to make sure that each vote is counted.”

For those analyzing the July 2nd Mexican election, one thing is clear – the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) lost. The party’s presidential candidate, Roberto Madrazo, failed to win even a single state in the presidential race Note 4, and its old guard won congressional races in only four of 32 states Note 5, and nothing in Mexico City, where the PRD won 14 of the 16 borough elections.

What was startlingly clear from the election results was that the country literally split in half, with the 16 more industrialized states in the North (with the exception of Baja California) voting for conservative National Action Party (PAN), and the 16 poorer and more indigenous states in the center and South voting for the center-left Party of the democratic Revolution (PRD).

The Electoral Tribunal has another month and a half before it must issue a decision regarding the challenges. It could order a re-count of some or perhaps even all of the ballots cast. The rumors circulating in Mexico City are that a second election may be ordered. But one thing is undoubtedly true: that as the days pass the political pressure is increasing for a credible outcome, and that as the days turn into weeks, a movement is building to prevent the election in 2006 from being stolen as was the election in 1988.

Notes

1.The initial, or “rapid count” system, is called PREP, based on its Spanish acronym. IFE uses returns from a sample of the 130,488 polling places numbers to generate projections which it sends to the IFE’s “macro newsroom,” state by state. Various power point shows circulating after the election showed clear discrepancies -- benefiting Calderón -- between the actual numbers in polling places and those reported out by the IFE.

2.polling places and those reported out by the IFE.

2. Luis Mochan of UNAM, in a statistical study of the voting results, found four anomalies in the votes as reported:

a. In the first part of the vote count, while Caldarón's percentage lead dropped considerably, the differential between his count and AMLO's remained constant. If the boxes arrived randomly the differential between his count and AMLO's should have widened, as it did with the PRI candidate.

b. The count was only released after the first 10,000 boxes were processed. If these 10,000 boxes had contents like the latter boxes, extrapolating backwards should make each vote tally come to zero. However, while backwards extrapolation comes out to zero for Calderón, the same process puts AMLO at -126,000 votes.

c. Near the end of the count, there were gross anomalies in the number of votes counted. More votes began coming in per five minute intervals than was normal before. At the very end, PREP reset the box count, and the records for 223 boxes disappeared. Thirty three minutes then passed with no updates. When the results resumed, there were updates with absurd results, including more than 6,000 per box at 13:57, and large negative votes per box at 13:57 and 14:03.

d. The last 40,000 boxes counted saw AMLO votes drop off considerably and Caldarón votes rise. Statistically, the huge margins that Caldaron won on the last ballot boxes counted appear to be very abmormal.

From Mochan's study, James K Galbraith, a writer for the Guardian, concludes that Caldarón appeared to have started the night with a gift of 126,000 votes from authorities, the count was continually mis-reported to make it seem like he was always ahead, and toward the end of the night, further adjustments were made to support the appearance of a victory.

3. “ChoicePoint is the database company that created a list for Governor Jeb Bush of Florida of voters to scrub from voter rolls before the 2000 election. ChoicePoint’s list (94,000 names in all) contained few felons. Most of those on the list were guilty of no crime except Voting While Black. The disenfranchisement of these voters cost Al Gore the presidency.” See Stealing Mexico

4. The PRI came in a poor third, dispelling any hopes that it would stage a return. It had governed for 71 years until it lost the presidency to Vicente Fox of the PAN in July, 2000. Other election results showed that 206 seats in the 500-member houseof deputies will go to the PAN, 127 seats will go to the PRD and its allies, and 103 seats will go to the PRI. Minor parties have the 64 remaining seats. The PRD and its allies doubled their presence in both houses of Congress, giving it the numbers to form an effective legislative coalition with another party and thus a major legislative player. Although many had feared that at the last moment the PAN and PRI would cut a deal consolidating a two party system similar to that in the U.S., in the end the PAN remained relatively stable with many from the PRI defecting to the PRD. One observer ironically noted the tendency of “those activists and functionaries dedicated only to political power” to go with the party that they believed would be the winner.

5. In response, Elba Ester Gordillo, who recently left to form her own party, is now calling for a rebuilding of the party under her guidance.

Back to July , 2006 Table of Contents

Presidential Election Dynamics

This article is reprinted from MEXICO SOLIDARITY NETWORK WEEKLY NEWS AND ANALYSIS JULY 10-30, 2006

For the first week following the July 2 presidential elections, PAN candidate Felipe Calderon held all the cards. A Federal Electoral Institute (IFE) heavily stacked in his favor delivered a narrow, though tentative, victory with a margin of about 240,000 votes from nearly 42 million cast. But the election was rigged from the start. Of the nine IFE members, four were appointed by the PAN and five by Elba Esther Gordillo when she was head of the PRI bank in the lower House. The PRD has no representation. Gordillo, a former PRI president and head of the powerful teachers union, broke with her party's presidential candidate, Roberto Madrazo, early in the primary process, forming a separate party that fielded a full slate of candidates in an effort to draw support away from Madrazo. Despite the formation of her own party, she supported Calderon during most of the campaign, and her IFE appointees were practically part of the PAN campaign team. The IFE permitted serious ca mpaign violations that, under a strict interpretation of the law, may have resulted in the loss of the PAN's party registration. President Fox spent six months openly campaigning for Calderon (despite his personal reservations toward the hard right candidate), something that is strictly prohibited under Mexican law. Millions of pesos in federal programs were spent in an apparently successful effort to secure votes. For example, more than 40% of Oportunidades recipients voted for Calderon, often under threat of losing their benefits. Five million women, mostly single heads of households, receive Oportunidades. This is not a group that would generally have an affinity for the business oriented Calderon. The private sector spent millions on television and radio ads in support of the PAN, and the party itself exceeded campaign spending limits, both serious violations of election law. By election day, the deck was stacked.

The election mechanics in Mexico are supposed to be fool proof. Polling station representatives are chosen at random, somewhat like jury selection in the US. Parties can send an observer to each polling station as well, though the PRD only covered about 70% of the stations nationally, and due to serious internal divisions within the party, it's unclear if many of the representatives provided any genuine oversight. The Mexican political class is accustomed to negotiations, and it’s very possible that the election process itself was negotiated during the vote-counting. There are all kinds of opportunities for fraud. Many polling site managers are poorly trained, and hundreds were reportedly replaced with party hacks during the final days leading up to the election. The PRD documented at least 50,000 mathematical errors at polling stations, from a total of about 130,000 sites, including more votes than ballots and more votes than registered voters. Despite increasing reports of errors and outright fraud, the IFE proceeded to count votes in the week following the election, but not without serious problems that tarnished their reputation as an impartial institution. First, they “lost” about 3 million votes, which re-appeared 24 hours later. Luis Carlos Ugalde, IFE president, managed the press, highlighting every positive turn for Calderon and downplaying every advantage for PRD candidate Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador. Although the IFE is only responsible for managing the election mechanics, Ugalde took the liberty to announce a “winner” four days after the election, then spent the following weeks spinning information via press conferences and paid television ads.

Despite nearly daily reports of irregularities, for the first two weeks it looked as though Calderon was solidifying a political, if not necessarily a legally binding, victory, but the dynamics changed radically on July 16 when over a million people turned out in Mexico City’s Zocalo in support of Lopez Obrador. The PRD candidate demanded a full recount and claimed victory in the election. He solidified his support on July 30 when perhaps 1.2 million people came to the Zocalo, almost certainly the largest demonstration in the history of Mexico. During the demonstration he announced a permanent non-violent mobilization in all 31 states until the Federal Electoral Tribunal (TRIFE) agrees to a full recount.

Meanwhile, despite his bold initial announcements, Calderon has been surprisingly on the defensive for much of the past two weeks. Calderon was always somewhat of a pariah in his own party. He tried to distance himself politically from Fox during the campaign and he has a running battle with PAN president Manuel Espino. Nevertheless, the response of his party has been surprising. Officials closed his campaign headquarters within days of the election, denying him a logistical center from which to defend his position. Most leading PAN officials virtually disappeared from public view, with the Espino taking a highly public vacation in Spain. Searching for allies, Calderon scheduled a highly publicized press event claiming union support, but only a retired electrical worker with no official union post and two largely discredited union bosses formerly aligned with the PRI bothered to show up. Televisa and TV Azteca, both strong supporters of Calderon, breathlessly reported
his labor support.

There is plenty of evidence to justify a recount, or even to annul the election and start over. IFE officials opened hundreds of sealed ballot boxes in the weeks following the election, apparently in an effort to square the numbers. PRD activists caught local election officials burning ballots in Guerrero. In Tabasco, election officials removed sealed documents under army protection at 2:00 am, then defended the action as “routine.” PRD representatives presented a box full of ballots found in the garbage to embarrassed IFE officials during a public hearing. Despite increasing reports of anomalies, Lopez Obrador insists that he wants a full recount but not an annulment.

Meanwhile, the PRD is anything but unified. Despite the mobilizing capacity of Lopez Obrador, many PRD officials are quietly encouraging moderation. In December, the PRD will become the second force in the lower House and barely trails the PRI to form the third force in the Senate. Newly elected Deputies and Senators are interested in protecting their prerogatives rather than risking their institutionality in street demonstrations. So far, Lopez Obrador has been able to maintain a united public front, but no one knows how long this might last. Many high-ranking PRD officials are former members of the PRI, accustomed to backroom negotiations rather than popular mobilization. In the context of militant striking miners, a labor movement that opposes six more years of the PAN, an increasingly powerful movement in Oaxaca that may succeed in replacing the governor with a popular tribunal, and a national movement built around the Other Campaign, Lopez Obrador may not be able to control popular dissent like a water faucet. The TRIFE has until September 6 to announce a decision. Until then, and perhaps long afterward, expect an increasingly restless and empowered public to take to the streets.

Back to July , 2006 Table of Contents

The Labor Movement and the Election

Mexico’s so-called “official” labor, that is those unions once completely tied to the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) but which have subsequently become corrupt machines linked as well to the employer association and the National Action Party (PAN), movement played a nasty and nefarious role in the national elections.

Elba Esther Gordillo, the “moral guide” or unofficial head of the Mexican Teachers Union (SNTE) and a former leader of the PRI who has also cooperated with President Vicente Fox and his National Action Party (PAN), worked to support Calderón by running a candidate who would draw votes away from Andrés Manuel López Obrador, candidate of the Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD). She ran Roberto Campa Cifrián of her newly founded New Alliance Party for president. He won 401,804 votes or more than enough to have swung an election which was decided by less than 250,000 votes.

Victor Flores Morales, head of the Mexican Railroad Workers Union (SFRM), who also serves as head of the Congress of Labor -- the umbrella organization of Mexico’s “official” unions -- rushed to recognize Felipe Calderón immediately upon the declaration of the Mexican Electoral Institute (IFE) that he had won the election. Flores, who has worked closely with both the PRI and the PAN and with the Mexican railroad corporations, called upon López Obrador to respect the will of the Mexican people and recognize Calderón’s victory.

The “independent” labor movement proved in some cases to be not so independent. The Mexican Electrical Workers Union (SME), the most significant leader of the Mexican Union Front (FSM) coalition but also a member of the Congress of Labor, sent a union ambassador to Calderón’s headquarters to congratulate him. Gastón Saenz, an advisor to SME’s leadership, told Calderón, the press and the public that the election had been clean, honest and democratic. The FSM has claimed to be an anti-capitalist coalition of labor and popular movements fighting for a democratic and socialist Mexico.

The Authentic Labor Front (FAT) and the National Union of Workers (UNT), on the other hand, have both strongly criticized the Mexican election process and have called upon the Mexican government and its election authorities to give Mexican voters the free and fair elections they deserve. [See their statements below.]

Back to July , 2006 Table of Contents

Declaration of the National Association of Democratic Attorneys (ANAD) on the Presidential Election of July 2, 2006.

The Constitutional Character of the Highest Court of the TEPJF

The decision naming the winner in the election of the President of the Republic is an act of enormous legal, political and historic transcendence for the nation and for the appropriate functioning of democratic institutions.

With the goal of giving that process greater levels of certitude and objectivity, in 1996 the Permanent Constituent [Congress], decided to substitute the old model of decision making by the Electoral College with a unique procedure under the jurisdiction of a Supreme Court which was given the responsibility of handling cases involving disputed election issues.

That fundamental political decision, was established in Article 99 of the Constitution, which provides: 1. Challenges to the election of the President of the Republic will be resolved at the highest level by the Highest Court of the Electoral Tribunal of the Judicial Power of the Federation (TEPJF), 2. This body will carry out the final count of the election of the President of the Republic and, once the challenges have been filed, will proceed to formulate a declaration of the validity of the election and the declaration of the President Elect with respect to the candidate who has obtained the greatest number of votes.

By virtue of this, the Highest Court of the TEPJF is a true Constitutional Tribunal whose decisions must satisfy the high levels of judiciousness and legitimacy which are inherent in the supreme declarations in this juridical realm, for which reason they must be based upon democratic theory and constitutional interpretation, applying the law in a way that guarantees the full exercise of electoral liberties and rights within a regime strictly adhering to the values of a social and democratic state with the rule of law.

The Jurisdictional Organ manifests an undeniably constitutional character due to the following: 1. Its charge corresponds with the direct and immediate exercise of a function represented in the Constitution, 2. The substance of its area of responsibility deals with the constitution of the Executive Power, one of the three Powers of the Federation, 3. Its decisions have a definitive and unassailable character.

Constitutional Framework of the Declaration of the Validity of the Presidentcial Election

Among the powers stipulated in Article 99 of the Constitution, one stand out for its extreme importance with regard to the formulation of the declaration of the validity of the Presidential election. It represents a juridical control of an exceptional nature that the legislature decided to implement in order to guarantee to the citizens that the election of the Federal Executive would satisfy the conditions inherent in all democratic elections, in order to assure that election of the President of the Republic is invested with complete legitimacy and authority in order to carry out the powers consistent with a democratic government.

This constitutional function is above all qualitative and has its own authority, and should be exercised independent of the numerical result of the final vote count. In itself, because it involves a great question of public order and social interest, it can be exercised even in cases in which there is no complaint or when the objection is limited to the numerical aspects of the election count.

The authority with which we are concerned cannot and should not be exercised in a discretional or subjective way, but rather should strictly adhere to the principles of Constitutional Articles 39 and 41: a) national sovereignty resides essentially and originally in the people and all Public Powers derive from this and should be instituted for their benefit; b) the people exercise their sovereignty by means of the Powers of the Union and the Powers of the States, according to their respective areas of competency, c) the renovation of the Legislative and Executive Powers is carried out by way of free, authentic and periodic elections, d) the electoral processes are subject to the criteria of certitude, legality, independence, impartiality, and objectivity.

So then, we are dealing with a juridical act that has to do with the quality and certainty of the electoral process, which indubitably presupposes the declaration, beyond all reasonable doubt, of the fact that the election conforms to these constitutional principles.

Consequently, the High Court of the TEPFJ, should act in accordance with its complete powers, carrying out investigations and other official activities with all the means necessary to prove the facts which form the basis of its decision, with no limitations other than those provided by the Constitution.

If a presidential election is not free, not authentic—or if it has taken place in violation of the guiding principles of certitude, legality, independence, impartiality, and objectivity—it cannot and should not be declared valid. In addition to violating constitutional norms, the anointing of a spurious or illegitimate Executive would also involve an affront to the people’s sovereignty, contributing to the open subversion of the constitutional order, and, finally, would represent the undermining of democratic institutions.

The Presidencial Election of July 2

The election of July 2 was carried out in a profoundly irregular context characterized by, among other things, the following problems:

· The Federal Executive [i.e., President Vicente Fox] intervened decisively in the contest supporting the National Action Party (PAN) candidate and public discrediting the candidate of the Coalition for the Well-Being of All [i.e., Andrés Manuel López Obrador, the Party of the Democratic Revolution and their allies].
· The foregoing was accomplished by putting in motion an advertising campaign intended to manipulate public opinion by means of approximately half a million radio and television announcements whose total cost would be in the order of two billion pesos, spreading the message that continuity was better than change for Mexico.
· The Federal Government used public resources destined for social programs in an abusive and partisan way. Symbolic of this were the illicit maneuvers of the Rural Housing program.
· The office of the President of the Republic [i.e., Vicente Fox] organized an unheard of and inappropriate psychological war based on the propaganda techniques of low intensity wars whose objective was the creation of a climate of fear that would favor Felipe Calderón, who himself went beyond the economic limits permitted by the IFE [Mexican Electoral Institute].
· The great majority of the media adopted an attitude of hostility toward the candidate of the Coalition for the Well-Being of All.
· During the final phase of the campaign many television advertising announcements appeared, paid for by employer organizations and intended to discredit López Obrador.
· The day of the election, President Fox and the President of the General Council of the Mexican Electoral Institute (IFE), produced separate television messages only a few seconds apart, suggesting a synchronized action.
· Contrary to what had been said beforehand, the President of the General Council of the IFE did not reveal the results of the Program for Preliminary Election Results, which were instead released bit-by-bit in such a manner as to reinforce the collective perception of the supposed triumph of the PAN candidate. Within that preliminary count, some three million votes were not included.
· Various sorts of oversight carried out at polling place such as those in the Federal District were manipulated.
· Prestigious physicists and mathematicians have carried out studies of the behavior of the computerized results of the election statistics, coming to the conclusion that a basis exists for suspicion of a strategic plan of fraud and the manipulation of votes contrary to the popular will.
· Usurping the exclusive authority of the Highest Court of the TEPJF, the President of the General Council of the IFE declared Felipe Calderón to be the winner.
· Under the instructions of the General Council of the IFE, many packets of ballots were opened before having sent them to the Highest Court of the TEPJF.

Declaration:

Considering the material presented above, and in strict adherance to the law, the lawyers of the National Association of Democratic Attorneys conclude:

a) Before, during and after the presidential election of July 2, general and systematic attacks on the guiding principles embodied in Constitutional Articles 39 and 41 were perpetrated, significantly altering the process of the free formation of the will of the citizens.
b) Given the grave and subtle irregularities, it is clear that the presidential election was not free, not authentic, because it lacked the constitutional requirements of certitude, legality, independence, impartiality and objectivity.
c) [The authorities should] proceed to open the electoral packets for the final computation [of votes] for the election of the President of the Republic, as provided for in Constitutional Article 99.
d) In that case, and once that has been done, then, acting as a Constitutional Tribunal with the full jurisdiction and in order to carry out the mandates of Articles 39, 41 and 99 of our Magna Carta, the Highest Court of the TEPJF should abstain from validating the determination of the IFE regarding the validity of the presidential election.

“Rights are Defended by Exercising Them”

The National Association of Democratic Attorneys (ANAD)

Responsible for the publication: José Luis Contreras, Estela Ríos, Raúl Jiménez y Jesús Campos Linas.

Back to July , 2006 Table of Contents

The FAT’s Position on the Election: The Electoral Process in Mexico 2006

By Jorge Robles

On July 2 about 40 million citizens went out to vote to elect the president of the republic, senators, representatives, some governors and municipal presidents.

And we went out to vote hoping that the advertising blitz would end and that each of our votes would count.

We have been tremendously disillusioned. The only winners in this process were the television stations, as they pocketed some seven billion pesos to keep airing election advertisements, in greater numbers than ever due largely to the employers’ organizations which came out in support of the ultra-right candidate Felipe Calderón [of the National Action Party or PAN].

The future of the workers appears more complicated at every step. The dirty war succeeded in making the National Action Party the party with the largest number of representatives and senators in the congress.

The decline of the Institutional Revolutionary Party, far from converting it into a party on the way to extinction, now has greater importance, for if it decides to create an alliance with the PAN, something which has frequently happened in the past, this will give them a majority in both houses not only to establish the legislative agenda but also to push forward and to approve the laws they desire. Beyond that, if they succeed in seducing the minor parties with sinecures, they will have enough votes to change the Constitution itself without having to negotiate with the Party of the Democratic Revolution; they could govern as if the PRD did not exist.

A grave situation, and even worse if the electoral process, particularly with regard to the presidential election, is not made to be transparent, removing any doubt as to its being clean. This seems to be an every more difficult situation as every day more and more irregularities, most of them committed by the PAN, come to light: extortion of votes, threats of firing or plant closings if workers did not vote for the PAN, more ballots cast than those available in each polling place, votes by dead people, presidential intervention in the campaign, a strategy of political terror to inhibit a free vote, gross errors in the polling place counts, alteration of the records, cybernetic manipulation of the counting program, and many other improprieties.

The resolution lies with the electoral court, which, it should be noted, is the last court of appeal without any other higher authority to which to appeal if the decision should be objectionable to any of the parties involved.

For the Authentic Labor Front (FAT), which has always fought to push forward transparency and democracy in the unions, utilizing a vote-by-vote count as often as necessary so that all the parties involved are satisfied, we cannot demand less rigor in the electoral process of our country: Vote by vote, polling place by polling place, whoever may win.

These are difficult times and we are certain that irrespective of who becomes the President of the Republic, the fundamental problems of the country will continue to get worse. Whomever shall govern will not count on the minimal guarantee of acceptability by the majority of the population.

We have to avoid an authoritarian outcome of the current political crisis and begin a process of construction of consensus with all of the political and social forces that will permit the development of a social agenda for the democratic transformation of the country.

A government that does not take into account the position of those who will be directly affected by public policies is a government that will steer a course through social chaos and come in the end to authoritarian solutions.

We await the decision of the electoral court and we hope that it will take the route of deciding to carefully count the citizens’s votes and that whomever wins will take the path toward the democratization of the country and in particular the labor arena. Unfortunately a change in political parties did not take us any further down that path, since the PAN as the governing party allied it self with the darkest and most corrupt sort of Mexican unions: pederasts, multimillionaires who live off union does and the sale of protection contracts, extortion of businesses, the lack of job security, and the absolute subordination of workers [to bosses] in their workplaces.

Back to July , 2006 Table of Contents

Manifesto to the Nation: Regarding the Problems with the Election and the Solution to Labor Union and Social Conflicts from the National Union of Workers (UNT)

The Mexican citizens, men and women, who went to the polls in large numbers to vote on July 2, 2006 demonstrated their faith in democracy and their desire to solve the country’s problems through peaceful channels, with pluralism and tolerance.

Apart from the question of who becomes president, we are sure that the problems at the root of our society, which continue to become more serious and which we must resolve, can generate serious conflicts.

To begin with we demand from the current government a common solution to the on-going labor union conflicts: the illegal intervention of the Secretary of Labor in affairs of the Congress of Labor, of the Social Security Workers Union, and of the Miners Union; the investigation into the killings at the Las Truchas steel mill in Lazaro Cardenas, Michoacan; the criminal industrial accident in the Pasta de Conchos mine in Coahuila; the violation of human rights in San Salvador Atenco and the legitimate demands of the workers at the Colegio de Bachilleres and of the Oaxaca teachers, both of which have been denied. We also demand the release of funds being held back from the National Agreement on the Countryside which affects millions of peasants.

This would be the first sign of a reduction of tensions, the importance of which would grow, if we take into account that the root, at least of the miners’ conflict, is in the relations between social organizations and the government.

For the UNT, respect for the will of the people as expressed at the ballot box is absolutely essential, which is why we demand that the electoral authorities and the federal government take an impartial position, following the law which guarantees that all the votes of all voters should count, and that the authorities and government promptly address all of the complaints and observations of the parties involved.

The electoral process must be re-channeled and put beyond all doubt, conducting it under conditions of transparency, certitude and legitimacy. But for that to happen, there is a lack of the political will to ensure the correlation between the votes cast and those counted; in order for the Federal Electoral Institute to accredit its institutional character, its credibility, and to give unobjectionable accounts to the entire citizenry and so that the candidates of both the Coalition for the Good of All [AMLO and the PRD] as well as the National Action Party accept the resolution of that body. Neither uncertainty nor total collapse serve democracy, nor much less the progress of the nation.

Once the electoral process has concluded the new government will govern with only 35 percent of the votes, but will have to work with the rest—as well as with the 30 million Mexicans who did not go to the polls to vote, and with those who do not agree with its proposals. Democratic governance cannot be built upon such a narrow base.

To encourage the decrease in political tensions and stability, it is necessary that society take the political initiative in order to avoid an authoritarian outcome to the present political situation and to initiate a process of construction of consensus with all of the political and social forces in order to develop a social agenda for the democratic transformation of the country.

In order to strengthen democratic governance, there is an urgent need for the construction of links between government and society—based on the satisfaction of social demands and the recognition of the autonomy, the independence and the plurality of union, peasant and citizen’s organizations, as well as strict adherence to the law.

Autonomy, independence, transparency, democracy and plurality are the foundation to strengthen the unity of action that we have built in recent years and which today are expressed in groups such as the UNT, through which we will encourage actions and proposals to solve the problems of the nation.

The task of the UNT and of civil organizations and of citizens is to confont this situation, promoting dialogue between all the political and social actors, in order to achieve the democratization of the nation and of the World of labor, by means of a social and democratic reform of the state and a new inclusive and democratic social contract.

Only in this way will it be possible to overcome the risks that surround the electoral process underway and to lay the foundations for a national Project based on the values of democracy, justice and equity.

“For the democratization of the Workers”

Back to July , 2006 Table of Contents

Mexican Government and Employers Beat Back Miners Union

The Mexican government and the mining companies have continued to beat down and beat back the Miners and Metal Workers Union (SNMMRN), using indictments against its national and local leaders, plant closings and layoffs, and other forms of coercion and intimidation.

Miners have been on strike continuously or intermittently for several months, demanding that the government recognize Napoleón Gómez Urrutia as their general secretary. The government had removed him, replacing him with Elías Morales, a man close to Grupo México, the country’s most important mining company, and to the National Action Party (PAN). Now, almost six months since the struggle began, workers have been starved out and the movement seems to be breaking up, if not yet completely collapsing.

New Charges Against Napoleón Gómez Urrutia

Mexico’s Secretary of Finance turned over to the Assistant Attorney General for Organized Crime new documents which it claimed confirmed the illegal transfer of more than 22 million dollars to international bank accounts in Sweden, Switzerland, Spain and the United States. Mexican authorities formally petitioned the Canadian government to extradite Gómez Urrutia, but a mutual extradition treaty which excludes political charges may make his extradition from Vancouver, Canada more difficult.

In some good news for the union, Mittal, a Netherlands-based steel company, reached an agreement with Napoleón Gomez Urrutia’s wing of the union, for a contract at its Mexican plants granting workers an 8 percent wage increase.

However, Grupo México, with the permission of the Mexican labor authorities, closed the La Caridad mine, terminating its relationship with the local union and its contract. The company announced it would hire new workers and rehire former workers.

Workers at the Cananea mine, historic birthplace of the Mexican labor movement, agreed to end their strike at that mine. At SICARTSA where steelworker members of the union have been on strike for four months, they now seem prepared to go back to work, though no agreement has been reached.

Back to July , 2006 Table of Contents

Update From Oaxaca: A Letter to MLNA

The following letter from Jennifer Ciancio was reprinted with her permission

Hello Dan,

Oaxaca has been a very exciting place to be this week, and my husband and I both feel like we are lucky to witness such an enormous political movement, and to be able to talk to some of the people involved. Right now, the Oaxaca teachers, students, farmers unions, and other political activists from groups like the Zapatistas are still camping out in the zócaclo, which is one of the largest public gathering places in the city. Every bit of open space is occupied by groups like C.O.D.E.D.I., the A.P.P.O.-Asamblea Popular Oaxaqueña, the F.A.L.P.-Frente Anpleo de Lucha Popular and many, many teachers. The atmosphere has been tense as Oaxaca is very busy with tourists (the majority are Mexicanos) who come every year to watch the Guelaguetza ceremony-- a seventy four year tradition in Oaxaca that celebrates the diverse cultures of the indigenous people of the region. (the original celebration dates back to the 1700's) This is one of Oaxaca´s most famous dancing and musical festivals, attracting thousands of tourists from Mexico and around the world. (David and I have only met two Americans here).

The striking teachers and other political groups who support them are still fighting for the "immediate resignation of Ulises Ruiz Ortiz from Oaxaca for being a killer and an oppressor" (From a flyer printed in English from the S.N.T.E.- Sindicato Nacional de Trabajadores de la Educacion, Oaxaca).

Graffiti and posters cover every wall in the zócolo with phrases like "turistas go home," and "Guelaguetza libertad y popular" which refers to the current direction the movement is heading-a full boycott and shut down of Guelaguetza and the accompanying events. Other phrases as well as huge banners suggest that Ulises is a killer, a rat, and an oppressor. Banners featuring photos of the murdered child and the disappeared teachers from June 14th also hang in every corner. Guelaguetza just this year has, under the direction of Ulises, become an event that is sponsored by the government. This means that tickets are now sold for the best seats in the stadium, the government profits, and according to the S.N.T.E., "only benefits the hotels, travel agencies, the government, and the rich." The groups want the festival to be open to all people, and for the indigenous communities that are featured in the celebration to benefit from the event.

On Sunday, my husband and I went to the zócolo and discovered that most of the striking groups were gone. Only vendors and tourists walked amongst the hanging banners and tarps that cover the park. Later that night, we discovered that the teachers had moved to the steps on "the hill" and were blocking the entrance to the Guelaguetza stadium. The teachers’ peaceful protest was successful, Guelaguetza was cancelled. They are now planning an official "free and popular" Guelaguetza next week with no ticket sales.

I was able to purchase three discs from a teachers’ group that has footage (evidence) of the attack on the protestors by the police and tells the complete history of the movement here. Although my Spanish is not as good as it needs to be here, I have managed to communicate with many people and have been able to express our support. My husband and I have experienced history in the making, and we plan on returning someday. Oaxaca is a beautiful place with an amazing history and people who are committed to change.

I also wanted to tell you that the day before we left Oaxaca, someone broke out windows and spray painted graffiti on the walls of the shops a block away from our Hotel. Posters were pasted next to the broken windows that called for a boycott of all shops that sell to Americans, and shops that sell products made in the United States. Other posters proclaimed that President Bush was a murderer and a creator of terrorism, and that his support of Israeli bombing in Lebanon was a criminal act. (all written in Spanish) There were other posters advertising a massive march and protest against President Bush and Israel to take place the next day. We left early in the morning the next day and saw many more Federales and Oaxaca city police roaming the square in front of the cathedral. We had not seen any police all week until then.

One last note, Hierve el Agua, a beautiful natural wonder in the mountains, has been closed to tourists by the indigenous groups who own the land because they are not "getting a piece of the pie" from local tour agencies. More evidence of the strength and commitment to justice by the people, for the people of Oaxaca.

Hope to talk to you when we get back,
Jennifer

Back to July , 2006 Table of Contents

Resources

David Bacon Show in Mexico City

The Secretary of Culture of the Municipal Government of Mexico City and the Museum of Mexico City announce the exhibition Todos Somos Migrantes/We Are All Migrants "I didn't cross the border. The border crossed me" at the Museum of Mexico City, Pino Suarez 30, Centro Historico, Mexico City. The exhibit feature photos from "Communities Without Borders" by David Bacon and his photos from the huge Los Angeles and San Francisco demonstrations for immigrant rights. For more information, see http://dbacon.igc.org

New Immigration Resource from Rethinking Schools

The Line Between Us: Teaching About the Border and Mexican Immigration is now available. The NAFTA role play is especially useful in high schools and especially in adult education around the impact of neo-liberalism in Mexico. The book is highlighted at: www.rethinkingschools.org/publication/mx, and is available from the Resource Center of the Americas http://www.americas.org/bookstore/product_11122 as well as from Rethinking Schools. For more information, contact Bill Bigelow

Back to July , 2006 Table of Contents

On Saturday, August 5th, the Mexican Electoral Tribunal ordered a recount of 11,839 ballot boxes or 9.07% of the 130,477 voting places, the majority from Panista states where major irregularities were alleged to have occurred: Aguascalientes, Colima, Jalisco and Baja California. Two other states -- Sonora and Tamaulipas -- which have been traditional strongholds of the PRI, but identified with the party's former president, Elba Esther Gordillo, who was expelled for working too closely with the Fox government, are also coming under increased scrutiny. The count will be concluded on Sunday. Meanwhile, the Mexican electoral tribunal has yet to rule on major allegations of election law violations: that the Fox government intervened in the election, using funds for social programs for electoral purposes; bias on the part of the Federal Electoral Commission; and excessive and improper financing of advertisements for the PAN among other issues.

At the same time, demonstrations in the capitol have been increasing in size (many estimates put the last one at over 2 million people), and just yesterday supporters of Lopez Obrador took over the four principal toll roads leading to Mexico City, providing free passage for two hours. Although the polarization of the country has been intense and the media attacks on Lopez Obrador unceasing, a festive spirit has accompanied the major mobilizations and encampments. Last Sunday alone, there were some 3000 different cultural acts which took place in Mexico City!

Lopez Obrador has issued letter to the people of Mexico in which calls for an "extraordinary assembly" at 11:00 a.m. on Sunday in the Zocalo. After explaining how the PAN and then the Electoral commission refused to make the election truly transparent by counting all of the votes, that "we cannot remain with our arms crossed; we have the obligation to defend democracy and all which that implies.... To permit the imposition (of a candidate who was not elected) means accepting that democracy is a farce, and that the few with continue to make decisions, in accordance with their interests and at their convenience, regarding the destiny of the majority of Mexicans. At bottom, they want us to accept without a word the inequality, the poverty, the unemployment, the immigration, the wages of hunger, the elimination of places for students in public universities, the approval of taxes on food and medicine, the privatization of health and pensions (seguro social), of the electrical power and oil industries, and to permit and to give the definitive blow to millions of producers by freely importing corn and beans from outside the country. In other words, with the imposition there will be no remedy for the ills faced by many Mexicans...."

Sunday, August 13 will no doubt be an important day in Mexican history.

Back to July , 2006 Table of Contents

Back to Table of Contents of Mexican Labor News & Analysis articles.

Archived MLNA issues.