Funding Hate - Foundations and the Radical Hispanic Lobby - Part III

Articles

by Joseph Fallon; Fall 2000; published in The Social Contract

Enter the ford foundation

While they promote similar views on "Hispanic identity" and "Hispanic history," the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF), the Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlan (MEChA), and the National Council of La Raza (La Raza) have separate corporate identities and histories. What is unique about both MALDEF and La Raza is that they are the creations of the ford foundation, which remains one of their principal sources of funding.

The League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), the nation's oldest and largest "Hispanic" organization, was established on February 17, 1929 in Corpus Christi, Texas by the merger of three rival, and often feuding, Mexican-Texan organizations — The Order Sons of America, The Knights of America, and League of Latin American Citizens.

From 1929 through the 1950s, LULAC was a middle-class, patriotic organization of U.S. citizens of Mexican descent whose activities centered primarily on education. Its agenda was traditional "Americanism" — Mexican-Americans must assimilate to the "Anglo" culture of the United States and acquire proficiency in the English language. It stressed "Mexican-Americans" were "Americans," not "Mexicans." An integral part of its activities was the promotion of U.S. citizenship and loyalty to the United States. LULAC rejected the idea the U.S. Southwest should be returned to Mexico and opposed establishment of Spanish-language enclaves in the United States. Because illegal aliens from Mexico were violating U.S. laws and posing an economic burden on Mexican-Americans by lowering wages, LULAC endorsed immigration control and supported President Eisenhower's "Operation Wetback" which deported a million illegal aliens back to Mexico.

By the 1950s, LULAC had expanded its activities to include litigation. In 1954, LULAC succeeded in having the U.S. Supreme Court hear Hernandez v. Texas, the first "Hispanic" civil rights case. LULAC asked the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn the murder conviction of a Mexican-American in Jackson County, Texas on grounds that the composition of the jury was unconstitutional. Although Mexicans comprised 14 percent of the population of Jackson County, none had served on a jury for the previous 25 years. LULAC argued that by not having any Mexicans on his jury, the convicted murderer's constitutional rights guaranteed by the 14th Amendment had been violated. The Court agreed with Chief Justice Earl Warren affirming "that persons of Mexican descent were a distinct class" — not "white" but not "black" either.

This legal victory spelled the beginning of the end for the original LULAC. Although the formal trappings remain — the official colors of LULAC are still red, white, and blue; the official logo is still a shield emblazoned with the stars and stripes and bearing the name "LULAC"; "Washington's prayer" remains the official prayer of LULAC; "America" is still the official hymn; and the Pledge of Allegiance continues to be recited at the start of meetings — the LULAC which so vigorously championed traditional "Americanism" is gone. Today, LULAC is a "Hispanic" supremacist group advocating actions that are diametrically opposed to those championed by its founders.

The original LULAC declared "Mexican-Americans" to be "white," a part of the same race as European-Americans, and successfully lobbied both the federal and Texas governments to officially classify them as such. Nearly a quarter of a century later, LULAC's position changed. Beginning with Hernandez v. Texas in 1954 and finalized in OMB Directive No. 15 in 1977, LULAC succeeded in having the federal government recognize "Mexicans," and all "Hispanics," as separate from European-Americans and essentially "non-white" so as to be eligible for affirmative action programs.

While the original LULAC emphasized "Mexican-Americans" were "Americans" sharing the same national interests as other "Americans," today LULAC's goals center on "group entitlements" as can be seen in The 1998 LULAC Legislative Platform available on its website (www.lulac.org).

Among its objectives expansion of American empowerment and enterprise zones along the U.S.-Mexican border; incentives for "Hispanic" small businesses; retention of affirmative action hiring policies "to ensure diversity in all workplaces"; preventing California Proposition 209 from being enforced; increasing the number of "Hispanic Serving Institutions" and according them "as many of the same benefits provided to Historically Black Colleges and Universities"; increasing the number of "Hispanics" at all levels of the federal government and in the civil service, especially at "key positions in the State Department, the Foreign Service and the United Nations"; confirmation of 60 "Hispanic" judges; appointing a "Hispanic" as the next Supreme Court justice; employing sampling for the 2000 census; having the Census Bureau include the population on the island of Puerto Rico in the total "Hispanic" population for the United States; increasing the number of "Hispanic oriented programming in TV and print" as well as having the major media companies increase the number of "Hispanics" employed in "creative positions."

U.S. citizenship is no longer important. Membership in LULAC is not restricted to U.S. citizens. "Residents of the United States" are now eligible to become members (Article III of the Constitution of the League of United Latin American Citizens). Interestingly, it does not specify that they be legal residents. U.S. Citizenship is also apparently not a qualification for National, State, and District Officers, whether elected or appointed. (Article VIII, Section 4).

LULAC's apparent attempt to denigrate the meaning and value of U.S. citizenship extends to the franchise. In The 1998 LULAC Legislative Platform, the organization appears to condone, if not actually promote, the violation of this country's election laws. According to the section entitled "Voter Registration and Citizenship" "LULAC actively encourages eligible Hispanics to fully participate in the democratic process and register to vote. We also encourage those who are eligible to become citizens" (italics added). Since the law states one must be a U.S. citizen in order to be eligible to vote, the wording of this LULAC platform encourages voter fraud.

In 1954, LULAC supported immigration control and mass deportation of illegal aliens. Today, LULAC opposes both measures. Convicted criminal José Velez, the head of LULAC from 1990 to 1994, typifies this reorientation. Using his "special status with the INS as director of LULAC," Velez submitted false documentation for 6,000 illegal aliens seeking amnesty that netted him millions of dollars. Velez had previously declared that the U.S. Border Patrol is "the enemy of my people and always will be."

• ULAC sought amendments to the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigration Responsibility Act of 1996 to increase the cap on suspensions of deportations from 4,000 to "at least 75,000 per year."
• LULAC lobbied for full restoration of benefits cut by the Welfare Reform Act of 1996 to legal immigrants.
• LULAC was one of the primary opponents of California Proposition 187 — the proposition to deny illegal aliens free social and welfare services.
• LULAC "reject[s] attempts to dramatically cut legal immigration" insisting that current levels of nearly one million a year "serve[s] the U.S. national interest."
• LULAC opposes any deployment of the military to defend U.S. borders — not even to interdict drug smugglers — because "military personnel are not trained for border patrolling and might easily violate the civil rights of those they intervene with."

Prior to the 1960s, LULAC recognized English as the official language of the United States. Today, LULAC vigorously opposes any official recognition of English as the language of this country.

For example, in 1996, when U.S. House of Representatives passed the "English Language Empowerment Act" declaring English the official language of the United States in the "Bilingual Voting Rights Act," LULAC responded with an "Action Alert" to members and supporters. Full of disinformation, smears, and the threat of violence, this "Action Alert" claimed

English Only is incredibly divisive because it sends the message that the culture of language minorities is inferior and illegal. With a dramatic increase in hate crimes and right wing terrorist attacks in the United States, the last thing we need is a frivolous bill to fuel the fires of racism. …English Only is unnecessary because over 97 percent of Americans already speak English and those who don't are eagerly trying to learn. English language classes have three year waiting lists in Los Angles and New York and current immigrants are learning English at a faster rate than their predecessors.

LULAC offered no evidence to support any of these claims. If what LULAC claimed was true, however, then why was LULAC — a) opposed to legally recognizing this fact by legally recognizing English as the official language of the United States and b) demanding that the U.S. government provide bilingual voting ballots, bilingual welfare forms, bilingual motor vehicle examinations, bilingual education, bilingual translators, etc.

The "Action Alert" then contradicted its claim that virtually all Americans already speak English by declaring "If Congress was serious about increasing English fluency in the United States it would pass English Plus legislation that would promote English speaking and encourage Americans to become bilingual."

By bilingual, LULAC means fluency in Spanish, not Arabic, Chinese, German, Greek, Italian, Polish, or any one of several more languages.

But if bilingualism is as beneficial and enriching as LULAC implies, then where is the reciprocity? If English-speaking Americans should be legally encouraged to learn to speak Spanish here, then, logically, Spanish-speaking "Latin" Americans should be legally encouraged to learn to speak English there. Where are the comparable bills in each of the 18 Spanish-speaking dominated countries of the Western Hemisphere to encourage Spanish-speaking Mexicans, Colombians, Cubans, Dominicans, Ecuadorians, Guatemalans, Nicaraguans, Salvadorans, etc., to learn to speak English in their respective countries? Why isn't LULAC demanding that? Because LULAC is pursuing power not principle, is engaged in rhetoric not logic, and is motivated by hatred not tolerance.

This official attack on the English language continued later that year during the "Latino March on Washington." Belen Robles, National President of LULAC, told the audience "We must say no to politicians who vote for English only, the unwelfare bill and anti-affirmative action. Vote those in Congress who violate our rights out! Viva La Raza!"

Funding for LULAC's activities are derived from corporations such as AT&T, and, unlike the other "Hispanic" groups, membership dues. For the period 1994-1997, funding from "contributions, gifts, grants" totaled $380,929. "Membership dues and assessments" for that period amounted to $503,524. For those four years, total "compensation of officers, directors, etc." was zero. But "other salaries and wages" amounted to $336,988.

The post Hernandez v. Texas metamorphosis of LULAC from a patriotic, middle class organization of U.S. citizens of Mexican descent into today's "Hispanic" supremacist organization was due in large part to LULAC's need to compete with the more radical Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF) and National Council of La Raza (La Raza) for influence and money.

MALDEF — The Mexican-American Legal Defense and Education Fund

Perhaps the most important book to examine the origin, activities, and source of funds of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF) is Importing Revolution Open Borders And The Radical Agenda by William R. Hawkins. (The American Immigration and Control Foundation, Monterey, Virginia and United States Industrial Council Educational Foundation, Washington, D.C., 1994). The following paragraphs while based principally on the findings of Hawkins also include data from the MALDEF website at www.maldef.org.

Ironically for LULAC, the founder of the rival Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF) was Peter Tijerina, State Civil Rights Chairman for the LULAC chapter in San Antonio. Tijerina felt LULAC had failed to use its victory in Hernandez v. Texas to pursue legal activism. He wanted LULAC to imitate the actions of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People Legal Defense Fund (NAACP-LDF). In 1966, Tijerina sent a LULAC member to the Chicago convention of the NAACP-LDF. As a result of the contacts established at the convention, the next year, Jack Greenberg, president of the NAACP-LDF, arranged for Tijerina to meet Bill Pincus, head of the ford foundation. Pincus agreed to advance Tijerina "seed money" to create a five-state "Mexican-American" organization modeled after the NAACP-LDF. This new organization would pursue civil rights litigation on behalf of "Mexicans" as the NAACP-LDF was doing on behalf of blacks. Tijerina became MALDEF's first executive director, and, in 1970, Mario Obledo, former Texas Attorney General, became General Counsel. After MALDEF was established by "seed money," the ford foundation then awarded the organization a five-year grant in excess of $2 million.

MALDEF was a creation of the ford foundation in more ways than just funding. The ford foundation soon took control of virtually all important matters from where the headquarters should be located, to the appointment of its executive director, and the type of legal cases it should pursue.

Initially, MALDEF addressed a variety of issues ranging from education to school desegregation, voting rights to job discrimination, composition of draft boards to legal advice for anti-Vietnam war protesters. The ford foundation found this tactic unsatisfactory. The cases MALDEF was litigating were not radical enough. The ford foundation wanted precedent-setting cases to go before the U.S. Supreme Court whose rulings would effect the entire country. MALDEF was duly restructured to achieve those goals.

Since then MALDEF has redirected much of its effort to bilingual and bicultural education — i.e., promotion of the Spanish language and "Hispanic" propaganda — and immigration — i.e., promotion of massive "Hispanic" immigration in opposition to the wishes of the majority of U.S. citizens. Among some of its actions

• MALDEF supported the plaintiffs in "Lau v. Nichols." The ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court requiring non-English speaking students to be taught in English or "other adequate instructional procedures" was successfully misinterpreted by MALDEF to mean education in languages other than English.
• MALDEF sought to amend the "Bilingual Education Act" so general instruction could be conducted in languages other than English and bicultural programs could be included in the education.
• MALDEF filed charges alleging textbooks in California were biased against minorities.
• MALDEF litigated for free public education for the children of illegal aliens that successfully culminated in the 1982 U.S. Supreme Court decision in "Plyer v. Doe."
• MALDEF opposed California Proposition 187 that denied illegal aliens free social and welfare services and filed a class action lawsuit "challenging its every provision."
• Some individuals associated with MALDEF have demanded that U.S. citizenship be eliminated as a requirement to vote.
• MALDEF sought and received legal status to naturalize immigrants.
• MALDEF successfully lobbied for passage of the "motor-voter" bill of 1993 that allows voter registration at welfare offices or when applying for a drivers' license; mandates mail-in voter registration and discourages States from verifying the applicant's eligibility or citizenship.
• MALDEF filed suit in 1997 to abolish the state requirement that students pass the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TASS), a three-part standardized test, for a high school diploma claiming among other things that the "test contributes to the high drop out rates among Mexican Americans and African Americans."
• MALDEF is defending "affirmative action" enrollment at the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor.
• MALDEF opposes immigration reform.
• MALDEF opposes securing the Mexican border even to stop the flow of illegal drugs into the U.S. When the Federal government launched "Joint Task Force Six" to combat drug smuggling along the border, MALDEF filed suit to halt the project arguing in court that "it would cause irreparable damage to the human and physical environment in the area." What of the irreparable damage being done to the human and environment due to illegal aliens and drug smugglers? On that question, MALDEF is silent.

What is MALDEF's goal? According to Mario Obeldo, former head of MALDEF, "California is going to be a Hispanic state. Anyone who does not like it should leave." In 1998, Obledo was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by Clinton.

MALDEF obtains the funding to support its activities primarily from corporations in particular AT&T and IBM, and philanthropic foundations. For the period 1991-1995, the total amount of "gifts, grants and contributions" to MALDEF was over $17 million. Between 1996 and 1998, MALDEF received over nine million dollars from just three foundations the vast majority, over six million dollars from the ford foundation, $1,200,000 from Carnegie Corporation, and another $1,525,000 from the Rockefeller Foundation.

For the two-year period, 1995-1996, MALDEF paid a total of $720,992 in "compensation of officers, directors, etc.." But paid $4,021,363 in "other salaries and wages."

La Raza — The Race

The National Council of La Raza was established in 1968 with support from the ford foundation and was originally called the Southwest Council of La Raza. According to a 1984 ford foundation report "Hispanic Challenges and Opportunities," its funding of La Raza "provides Mexican American communities and organizations with technical assistance and … has also become an effective voice for Mexican Americans and other Hispanics." La Raza operates a Policy Analysis Center, which it claims is "the pre-eminent Hispanic ‘think tank"' and uses its "findings" to lobby for, among other policies, affirmative action, bilingual education, mass immigration, and more "hate crimes" laws.

For example, La Raza demands an expansion of "hate crimes" laws claiming "Traditional hate crimes against Hispanics have increased in number during the 1990s." What La Raza does not say is that such an increase is due to the flawed methodology employed by the U.S. government for reporting "hate crimes." When "Hispanics" are victims of "hate crimes" they are classified as "Hispanics," but when they are perpetrators they are classified as "white." Any bias incident between a "Hispanic" perpetrator and a "Hispanic" victim, therefore, will be reported as a white on "Hispanic" "hate crime." The number of "hate crimes" against "Hispanics" is naturally increased by such definitions.

La Raza condemns the "step-up [in] immigration law enforcement significantly along the U.S./Mexico border and in the interior of the country" claiming such activities violate the civil rights of "Hispanics."

La Raza has called upon the Congress to rescind the immigration and welfare reform acts of 1996 calling them "a disgrace to American values." In addition, it has demanded another amnesty for illegal aliens from Central America coupled with this threat "Our elected officials should not be surprised if their failure to act on reforms of these terribly unjust laws is met with a firm response at the ballot box." And U.S. citizens should not be surprised that those going to the ballot box for La Raza include illegal aliens and non-citizens.

On its website, www.nclr.org, La Raza claims to be "the largest constituency-based national Hispanic organization, serving all Hispanic nationality groups in all regions of the country…[with] over 200 formal affiliates who together serve 37 States, Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia…and a broader network of more than 20,000 groups and individuals nationwide — reaching more than two million Hispanics annually."

Where does La Raza get the funding to support its many activities? According to its website, "the organization receives two-thirds of its funding from corporations and foundations, and the rest from the government." For the period 1992-1996, the total amount of "gifts, grants and contributions" to La Raza was more than $38 million. This does not include revenues from "government fees and contracts." Over three years, 1996-1998, La Raza received over five million dollars from just three foundations the majority, nearly four million dollars, from the ford foundation, $850,000 from the Carnegie Corporation, and another $850,000 from the Rockefeller Foundation.

For the period 1993-1996, La Raza paid $983,522 in "compensation of officers, directors, etc.." But paid $9,842,560 in "other salaries and wages."

MEChA

Founded in 1969, Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlan (MEChA) is the youngest of the four "Hispanic" organizations. It is also the most unabashedly racist and its pronouncements the most incendiary. Reconquista The Takeover of America, prepared and published by the California Coalition for Immigration Reform in 1997, documents the truth about MEChA by quoting what the founders and supporters of this organization have said.

The first chapter of MEChA, called "El Plan de AZTLAN," was established at the University of California at Santa Barbara in 1969. Other chapters eventually were formed at other colleges and even at high schools. "According to Miguel Carillo, a Chula Vista High School teacher, there are MEChA chapters at over 90% of the high schools in San Diego and Los Angeles."

Money facilitated this rapid growth. Where did the money come from? As unbelievable as it sounds, according to Jacqueline Carrasco of UCLA, "Most chapters get their budget from the (tax-funded) schools and sometimes from the associated students. Funds range from $100 to $8000 for larger schools such as Cal State Northrop."

Among the demands MEChA has made are rescinding California Proposition 187 (ending welfare benefits to illegal aliens); rescinding all "English Only laws; abolishing the Immigration and Naturalization Service and the Border Patrol; and open borders.

The goal of MEChA, however, is an independent "Aztlan," the collective name this organization gives to the seven States of the U.S. Southwest — Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas, and Utah. According Miguel Perez of MEChA, at Cal State Northridge "When asked his preference of government, he replied, ‘Communism would be closest. Non-Chicanos would have to be expelled…opposition groups would be quashed because you have to keep the power."'

As one of MEChA's mission statements declares "This is revolution at its basic level, moving the people ["Hispanics"] to confrontational politics…" At the November 1996 MEChA statewide conference, one thousand supporters assembled to condemn California Proposition 187 and Proposition 209 (ending bilingual education). According to Reconquista, California State University Professor, and MEChA advisor, Rodolfo Acuña — who previously stated "the (demise) of the Soviet Union was a tragedy for us" and "Chicanos have to get a lot more militant about defending our rights" — proclaimed "anyone who's supporting 209 is a racist and anybody who supports 187 is a racist… you are living in Nazi U.S. We can't let them take us to those intellectual ovens." Not surprisingly four months after those and other incendiary statements were uttered, a MEChA representative during a rally in front of Los Angeles City Hall publicly declared; "When the people in this building don't listen to the demands of our community, it's time to burn it down!"

This was not an empty threat. In 1993, in order to advance their demand for full department status for Chicano Studies at UCLA, MEChA spearheaded a riot that destroyed half a million dollars worth of campus property.

MEChA spreads its message of hate through campus newspapers such as El Popo, Aztlan News, Chispas, Gente de Aztlan (UCLA), Voz Fronteriza (UC at San Diego), La Voz Mestiza (UC at Irvine), and La Voz Berkeley. MEChA's hatred extends to any "Hispanic"-American who is loyal to the United States. For example, the front page of the May 1995 issue of Voz Fronteriza carried a picture of Luis A. Santiago and the story of how this INS agent was killed in the line of duty defending the U.S.-Mexican border. The headlines read "Luis A. Santiago Death Of A Migra Pig."

In April 1997, MEChA held its national conference at Michigan State University and decided, in an apparent attempt to be more indigenous, to change the spelling of its name replacing the "ch" with "x." "MEChA" became "MEXA" and "Chicano" became "Xicano."

Unlike MALDEF, and La Raza, MEChA apparently does not receive funding from the ford foundation, the Carnegie Corporation or the Rockefeller Foundation.

Unlike LULAC, MALDEF, and La Raza, MEChA does not have a national headquarters. Instead, it has regional centers.

Conclusion

So with the encouragement of the U.S. government and with the financial support of major U.S. corporations and foundations, LULAC, MALDEF, MEChA/MEXA, and La Raza, pillars of the radical "Hispanic" lobby, successfully and aggressively promote hatred of the history, identity, culture, language, and laws of the United States.

For LULAC, MALDEF, MEChA/MEXA, AND La Raza, "Hispanics" are the new "Herrenvolk," European-Americans their "Undermench" and the United States their rightful "Lebensraum." As Art Torres, Chairman of the California Democratic Party declared at the January 1995 Latino Summit Response to Prop 187 at UC- Riverside "Remember Prop 187 is the last gasp of White America in California!"

Joseph Fallon is a frequent contributor to The Social Contract. He is a published researcher and author on topics of immigration and American demography.

Reprinted with permission.