March 3, 2003
ET
TU...ANTONIA!
By Fernando Oaxaca
Parroting the fake concerns of Senators
Schumer, Leahy, Reid and Kennedy about
Miguel Estrada's qualifications to sit on
the District of Columbia Circuit Court of
Appeals, Antonia Hernandez inspires only
disbelief among some of her past
admirers. The President of MALDEF has
penned a new assault (February 28) on the
reputation and credentials of the
brilliant Latino lawyer. Her third
written media derogation of Mr. Estrada
violates a principle honored by Latino
professionals and best said in the movie,
The Godfather, "Never take
sides against your family in
public." Que triste.
Ms. Hernandez calls her latest public
article "A Grave Concern",
pandering to the current Democrat Senate
filibuster, specifically designed to
force the Executive branch to breach the
concept of separation of powers.
She supports giving the Senate the
private legal position papers created by
Mr. Estrada for use by his superiors when
he served in the Office of U.S. Solicitor
General (SG)...for political use by
anti-Bush Democrats on the Senate
Judiciary Committee. She cites
Estrada's lack of experience as a judge.
Is she unaware that 5 of the 8
current judges on the D.C. Circuit Court
were inexperienced when appointed,
including the last two, both Clintonappointees?
Where was her outrage then?
Even if personally loyal to Senator Ted
Kennedy, her early employer in D.C., does
this excuse her demand for turnover of
Estradašs SG privileged papers to her
Senate pals? This is, amazingly, an
attorney, Hernandez, urging refutation of
the attorney-client privilege!
Hired by then Chairman Kennedy of the
Senate Judiciary committee in 1978 and
joining his failed 1980 campaign for
President, perhaps she begrudges
Republicans since Ronald Reagan's big win
in 1980 unseated Kennedy and got her laid
off.....even if it forced her fortuitous
decision to take a job at MALDEF!
Ms. Hernandez has the same specious
position as the Senate Democrats about
the distinguished Mr. Estrada; that
during his Senate hearing "he hid
his views from the Senate and the
public." Interesting words.
Couldnšt Ms. Hernandez be accused
of "hiding" from the public the
identity of her own Board of Directors,
missing from the MALDEF website?
Ms. Hernandez also
"hides" the names and dollar
totals of the current donors to MALDEF
(Just like Jesse!). Why is this
information not easily available to the
community MALDEF serves?
The Mexican-American Legal Defense and
Education Fund (MALDEF) began in Texas
30+ years ago with noble purpose and a
true calling to serve Mexican-Americans.
For years MALDEF delivered
invaluable services...at a time when
pioneering was needed...assuring voting
rights, fighting police brutality,
fighting discrimination, expanding
educational opportunity...the old MALDEF
was always there. Launched by Ford
Foundation funds, Ford has stayed with
MALDEF.
But as protection of the rights of
"minorities" became law, and as
society embraced those laws, the original
MALDEF mission now seems distant from
much of the current activity under
Hernandez' leadership. Growth and
"mission creep" required
more funds than foundations were willing
to give, forcing a look at corporate
funding. Meanwhile MALDEF has moved more
into arguably political areas like
Congressional and local redistricting and
aiding politicians by
"checking" political appointees
for the "proper" kind of
ideology.
For example, who authorized Ms. Hernandez
to write that Mr. Estrada "has proven
himself not just to be a conservative but
rather a rigid ideologue?" Her
Board? How is it "proven"
if she insists that his views are hidden!
Does the MALDEF Board approve of
self-appointed watchdog Ms. Hernandez
declaring, "Finding that Estrada is
an ideologue who hides his views, we had
little choice but to oppose the
nomination."?
Ignoring her Board would not be new to
Ms. Hernandez. She was fired by the
Executive Board members of MALDEF in 1986
for defying them and supporting the
acquisition of the nation's major Spanish
language television network by
non-Hispanic Hallmark (Cards)
Incorporated. She apparently wrote
on MALDEF stationery to the FCC
station-licensing authority supporting
Hallmark but opposing Hispanic
entrepreneurs who wanted to keep the
venture in Latino hands. It seems
that her legal skills got a Texas judge
to review her firing and a reconstituted
Board voted 18-14 to reinstate her.
Based on press clips and the recollection
of then deposed Directors, it appears
that the "18" votes were almost
all from non-Hispanics and the
"14" were all Latinos.
Details of this vote and her
behavior remain confidential. For
sure, though, U.S. Spanish network TV has
no chance now of Latino ownership.
Whether Hallmark (which sold the TV
network later at a profit) ever rewarded
MALDEF is unknown. Ms. Hernandez
accuses Miguel Estrada of concealing his
views on issues important to her.
Isn't it then proper for her to
lift the veil and tell the public how
many millions of dollars have poured into
MALDEF over the years from Hallmark,
Phillip Morris (its name now sanitized
into "Altria"), Anheuser-Busch
(Budweiser Beer), unions like CTA and
NEA, large banks, First Chicago Bank
(Hallmark partner on the TV caper) etc.?
After all, money facilitates
influence.
How much has Southern California Edison
given MALDEF beyond the $280,000 for
MALDEF's LA building? (And PGE, another
energy crisis player?) SCE, a
player in the California energy/budget
crisis, benefited from a weird LA Times
Op-Ed piece (February, 2001) written by
Ms. Hernandez but joined by a black and
an Asian "community" leader in
defending SCE. At the time, SCE was
on the verge of going under and someone
prevailed on these non-profit,
"impeccably" credentialed
"community" executives to plead
with the public to bail out SCE.
The added cost to poor Hispanics from
higher electricity rates if SCE had been
bailed out by taxpayers and power users
seemed lost on Ms. Hernandez as she
praised SCE in the LA Times. How
MALDEF's constituency benefited from this
unusual effort by Ms. Hernandez was never
made clear.
One could go on and ask why MALDEF has
given Governor Gray Davis a free ride by
silence for his big cuts in higher
education and K-12 school budgets as he
tries to "fix" his incredible
deficit. Ms. Hernandez does have a
Gray Davis higher education board
appointment good until 2007.
One could also ask about the $8.5 million
MALDEF 12-story building on Spring Street
in Los Angeles. The City of Los
Angeles was a sizable tenant in 1996,
providing significant revenue to MALDEF,
making the building financing viable.
MALDEF only uses 2 floors of the
12. Didnšt anyone see a possible
conflict of interest if MALDEF should
pursue protecting abused citizens or
immigrants by the LAPD or anybody
employed by the City....like in the early
days of taking on authority by a then
unfettered MALDEF?
And is it right for MALDEF to take money
from companies selling unhealthy products
like alcohol and tobacco to Latinos;
companies that then trumpet their
"community support?"
Anheuser-Busch has a 20+ page color
brochure saying, "Anheuser-Busch
underwrites programs through support of
the Mexican American Legal Defense and
Education Fund (MALDEF) and the Puerto
Rican Legal Defense and Education
Fund (PRLDEF)."
Why do these seeming slams on Ms.
Hernandez relate to her crusade against
Miguel Estrada? In the
interest of decency and fairness, when
Antonia Hernandez and by default, MALDEF,
publicly set out to derail the
confirmation of a distinguished American
like Miguel Estrada, they must have clean
hands, unquestioned probity in past
behavior and a demonstrable community
benefit should they prevail. Estradašs
detractors must be pristine to be
credible.
Is her judgment (or of MALDEF's Board, if
they agree) more credible than that of
the highly respected Hispanic National
Bar Association which supports Estrada?
Does Ms. Hernandez consider
Estrada-backers LULAC (League of United
Latin American Citizens) and the United
States Hispanic Chamber of Commerce to be
ignorant boobs, blind to what she deems
harmful to the community they all
"represent?" Does she
doubt the sincerity or intelligence of
the pro-Estrada Mexican American Grocers
Association (MAGA). Its founder,
Joe Sanchez, received MALDEF's highest
award only two years ago.
She is also ignoring the recent plea to
Latino leaders to "cool it" on
attacking Estrada by Raul Izaguirre.
Raul has been prominent on
the national Latino scene much longer
than Hernandez, as head of the National
Council of La Raza (NCLR). Does she
question his wisdom in keeping NCLR
neutral on Estrada?
Despite Ms. Hernandez' indefensible
sell-out to the filibusterers and the
other efforts of obstructionist Senate
Democrats; Mr. Estrada will be confirmed.
Yet, what we must fear is the
continuing character destruction of
highly credentialed professional Latinos
nominated by this President, George W.
Bush. Groups like MALDEF, publicly
using specious reasons and only
diaphanous "evidence" of
suspicion, innuendo and blatant political
purpose, are self-destructive. Such
behavior, rife with rhetoric but bereft
of substance or fairness, is already
hurting the overall image of Latino
organizations nationwide, as evidenced by
Izaguirre's cautionary comment.
Right-wing commentary is already
trashing the blatant support of crass
Democrat politicians by MALDEF and other
Latino groups. And the mud
splatters on all.
It is not too late for Ms. Hernandez to
recant and return to exclusively
non-political activity; her obvious
talent and aggressiveness can be put to
better use. MALDEF still has
battles to fight for our community and
unseemly activity as we have seen
degrades its own and overall community
credibility. And it endangers its
tax-exempt status and related funding
viability, especially from the corporate
sector, when it engages in neo-partisan
activity.
Finally, responsible Latinos must not
allow similar irrational behavior to
shadow the forthcoming confirmation
process for three more reputable and
distinguished Latino Circuit Court of
Appeals nominees, Ed Prado of Texas,
Consuelo Maria Callahan of California
and, not yet announced, Carlos Bea, also
of California. If past improper
behavior by any candidate emerges, he or
she should be rejected. But
negative campaigning against fellow
Latinos based on vague ideological
suspicions, as observed lately, is
reprehensible.
It is in the best interest of our total
community to reject flimsy arguments like
those of Antonia Hernandez against Latino
appointees by any President, of any
Party. We must tell such self-appointed
guardians of our welfare, in no uncertain
terms, that the funds received by them
are intended for legitimate community
benefit. Services and advocacy by
private non-profits are still sorely
needed for improving education, health,
equality of opportunity and equality
under the law for Latinos across our
nation.
Tax-exempt non-profit groups like MALDEF
benefit from all taxpayers, including
Latinos. Corporations deduct their
donations from profit, reducing federal
tax revenue. MALDEF has received the privilege
from our government of raising tax-free
funds and acting on behalf of all
Americans. Such a group cannot,
with piety and diffidence, pick and
choose for whose benefit they exist as an
organization.
If they disagree with the prevailing
choice of the electorate, they must
forego arrogance and either shut up or
run for office! That's the American
way.
Fernando Oaxaca is a community and
political activist. He can be reached at lamextex@ix.netcom.com
|
