Colombia and United States Free Trade Agreement

Since I have memory the Free Trade Agreement has been kind of a big deal for my country Colombia. When I was in college, I took a class about how to prepare for the Free Trade Agreement; this was probably ten years ago. I could not believe when the agreement was finally signed, and that it will start implementation as soon as next month. The Free Trade Agreement will open the door to a wide variety of goods to enter Colombia without paying import taxes. It is expected that 80% of the goods that are imported today from United States will be duty free. However, is Colombia ready to compete with the massive and high scale productions of goods in United States? local businesses, factories, and agriculture will have to compete in prices, quality, and quantity with this new influx of products. To compete in prices and quality these business must count with the technology and the resources necessaries to survive the big avalanche of goods coming from United States. Moreover, Many local supermarkets are already in panic mode when last month representatives of Wall-Mart were visiting Colombia to choose the locations for the new stores. However  Colombians know this is a necessary evil, something that sooner than later was going to happen, as part of a growing economy the challenges also become greater. The president of Colombia Juan Manuel Santos and the president of he United States Barack Obama talked about the agreement in the recent Summit of the Americas. Regardless of the scandals and the various diplomatic incidents and absentees, the Summit of the Americas showed the new generation of leaders of the Americas, people that care deeply about the economic future of their countries instead of their own personal gain and power. I also want to mention Shakira's Speech in front of hundreds of the most powerful business people of America. For those of you that don't know about Shakira, she is not only a very successful singer and a song writer, but also since the beginning of her career she has worked with the community in Colombia helping children to get education and nutrition. Shakira and her foundation "Pies Descalzos" have built schools for children with limited resources in Colombia. Her speech in the Summit of the Americas talked about the importance of education to strengthen the future economyof countries in South America and around the world, she said " education is the most valuable asset in a nation" for every dollar spend in the education of a child the return will be seventeen dollars. Her words completely blew me away. In countries like Colombia and many others in South America there is a high percentage of children that don't have the resources to attend school and don't have any other choice than being part of rebel groups or organized crime. It is very sad to see children at the stop lights begging for money to help to support their families instead of being in school. Education is the only way someone can brake the path of generations of poverty. Anyway here is part of her speech.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/15/world/americas/summit-of-the-americas/index.html

" Latino Foreign Policy"??

This article was recently posted in CNN; it strongly suggests certain changes to the current US foreign policy to focus more in the neighbor countries specially the Latin America countries and also to make use of the many Hispanics working for the US government to aid the country to strengthen the diplomacy between United States and these countries. It is not unknown to everyone that the economy is changing around the world and Countries like Brazil, Argentina and Colombia that used to be considered in disadvantage economically speaking are turning into economics growing rapidly and robustly. The US foreign policy should be redirected to capture these markets in South America and reactivate the economy in America, instead of looking in other continents for the resources that are so close to us. I don't no much about foreign policy, however I know that Venezuela, Bolivia and Cuba are encouraging the other countries in South America to be independent from United States. This is the time for United States to strengthen diplomatic relationships with the countries that have not yet joined the Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro movement. It is time for this country to take advantage of the many well educated and successful Hispanics working in the different government agencies for the purpose to better the actual foreign policy.

http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2012/04/12/is-there-a-latino-foreign-policy/?hpt=wo_r1

President Obama's Secret Service Agent Having Way too Much Fun in Cartagena Colombia

President Barack Obama, his Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, and other leaders around the globe are gathered in Cartagena Colombia in what is called the Summit of theAmericas. This event has been the highlight of the week in Colombia, not only because this is the first time president Obama visits Colombia but also because he was to focus on trade, energy and regional security. In April 2012 the 34 Heads of State and Government will address the Sixth Summit central theme, “Connecting the Americas: Partners for Prosperity", which focuses on the role of physical integration and regional cooperation as a means to achieve greater levels of development and to overcome the Hemisphere’s challenges in several key areas including poverty and inequalities, citizen security, disasters and access to technologies. The Summit, which occurs every three years, offers the opportunity for countries to jointly define a hemispheric agenda at the highest level to address urgent challenges and propel positive change.  This is the longest a president of the United States is going to stay in Colombia. The president's Secret Service has been working for weeks previously to the event  with the heads of security of Colombia to make sure no violent event obscure this diplomatic meeting. However the summit is being overshadow by an scandal that had 12 United States secret service agents released from duty and replaced with other secret service agents. A source has confirmed that the agents have engaged in misconduct related with prostitution. The agents visited prostitutes in Cartagena and now they are in trouble. Just when I was going around telling everybody how proud I was that president Omaba was in my country this happens. Anyway it does not surprise me though Cartagena is well known for its beautiful women sometimes with not so much of a good reputation; and yes I know that you may be wondering if I'm from Cartagena, no I'm not ...

http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/14/world/americas/colombia-summit-secret-service/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

Hello !!!! please check the criminal record before granting a pardon...

A man involved in a crash three months ago (Harry Bostick), that resulted in the death of a 17 year-old, is one of the felons chose by the ex-governor of Mississippi to grant a pardon. He was being charged with his third DUI when he received his pardon. Communications gathered by CNN between attorneys representing Bostick and the Governor's chief advisor and this secretary of state show that they knew about that Bostick, about to get his pardon, was involved in a car accident in which he was driving under the influence and that ended the life of  17 year- old and injured another. This is just outrageous and makes me sick to my stomache, this person obviously has a drinking problem it was a matter of time for him to get into a tragic accident while driving, however after he proved again that he was still a danger to the society he got his pardon. What made the Governor of Mississippi think that a person like this was rehabilitated and deserved a pardon?? this just proves that he did not do his due diligence and granted pardon upon request.

 http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/13/justice/mississippi-pardons-dui-emails/index.html?hpt=ju_c2

George Zimmerman's First Apperance

Today, April 12 2012, George Zimmerman had his first appearance in front of a judge in Florida. First appearances are brief; basically the judge goes over the charges against the defendant, and  prosecutors file affidavits to establish enough probable cause to continue with the process.( read affidavit) http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/Sections/NEWS/120412_Zimmerman_CauseAffidavit.pdf. Zimmerman is scheduled to appear in court in a few weeks for his arraignment hearing in which the judge will formally read the charges against him. For those of you who are not following this cases, George Zimmerman was charged with the murder of Trayvon Martin on February 26 of the present year in the state of Florida. Zimmerman was a neighborhood watcher in a suburban area of  Seminole County when he ignored police orders and went to pursue Martin, pursue that ended with the death of Martin by a gun shoot on his stomach. This case is considered highly controversial not only because there is racial profiling involved, but also because thanks to a law in Florida called "Stand your Ground" Zimmerman might be found immune from prosecution. "Stand your Ground" is a controversial law in Florida which allows, in some cases, the use of deadly force in self defense when there is reasonable belief of a threat without an obligation to retreat first. This is certainly a very sad case in which many people have been affected. On one side Martin's family is mourning the death of their 17 year-old son, and on the other side Zimmerman is facing charges of second degree murder and a possibility of a sentence to life in prison. Defense experts are already speculating that Zimmerman might take the stand at the evidentiary hearing to explain why killing Martin was an act of self defense. The standard of proof in this type of hearings is preponderance of evidence, which is a lower standard than beyond the reasonable doubt. I will keep following this case very close...
http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/12/11166967-george-zimmerman-expected-to-take-the-stand-in-trayvon-martin-murder-case-legal-observers-say?lite

Does the Privacy Act's "actual damages" provision cover mental and emotional distress?

In 2006, pilot Stanmore Cooper disclosed that he was HIV-positive to Social Security officials in order to receive medical benefits but withheld his status from the Federal Aviation Administration. But the Social Security Administration then turned over his medical records to the FAA, which revoked his license. Cooper filed suit against the agency for emotional distress for mishandling his medical records. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that the exchange of records was improper and that Cooper has standing to sue. This place was argued before the U.S Supreme Court last year. The Supreme Court ruled that the authorization of suits against the government for “actual damages” in the Privacy Act of 1974 is not sufficiently clear to constitute a waiver of sovereign immunity from suits for mental and emotional distress. I'm not very familiar with the Privacy act, however it is only logical to ask for a person's authorization before to disclose medical records, specially to your employer.

Am I under Custody?

We all have seen it on TV, the police detective reading the Miranda rights to a suspect before he proceeds to take his/her confession. Well, let me give you an advise; before you answer to any police interrogation make sure you are under custody. This was the issue presented to the U.S Supreme Court in Bobby v. Dixon. Dixon buried a man alive and stole his identity in order sell the victims car and write checks on his behalf. The police took him into custody and started questioning him after gave him his Miranda rights, Dixon told police he did not know anything about the victims whereabouts. However he was brought for interrogation for forgery charges in the same case, this time police started interrogating Dixon and procrastinated to read the Miranda rights seeking to get a murder confession which they did. During the interrogation the defendant asked for an attorney to be present but police disregarded his request. The issue before the Supreme Court was whether the police violated Dixon’s constitutional rights by failing to read his Miranda rights during the forgery questioning.The Supreme Court ruled that the police did not violated defendant constitutional rights because when he asked for an attorney he was not in custody. The Supreme Court also found Defendant's confession to be valid because it was voluntary. Apparently Miranda rights are only applicable when suspects are under costudy, but police can still question suspects even if they are not in custody. I think this situation gives police a little room to be sneaky and get confessions from suspects without reading the Miranda warnings.

" Armed Forces Tea Party".

Sgt. Gary Stein, who has been a Marine for nine years in facing suspension for creating a facebook page called " Armed Forces Tea Party". His attempt to exercise his freedom of speech is threaten to end his career. His attorney and Freedom of Speech Activist on one side are fighting to defend his constitutional rights and to keep his job; on the other side however, there is a pentagon policy barring troops from political activities. The consequences that carries the violation of this policy is the immediate discharge from the Armed Forces. We all know that the Armed Forces are sometimes ruled by more stringent rules and that they are held to a higher standard; it makes make wonder if he did not know about this rule when he enlisted the troops or he simply decided to ignore it and use facebook to express his political views.

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/04/11021399-free-speech-groups-line-up-to-back-tea-party-marine?lite

Strip Searches for Minor Violations

I've always thought that strip searches were to be performed in places such as prisons, and to people that were considered dangearous criminals. However this is not even close to reality, in a case discussed on Monday the Supreme Court approved strip searches for people entering the jails after arrest for even the most minor violations. Minor violations can include driving above the speed limit or walking your dog without a leash; it seems to me that the Supreme Court failed to protect the privacy of individuals, and left us - citizens - in the hands of officers and prison guards to perform an extremely invasive, intrusive and undignified search. I understand the need to protect officers and prison guards from being hurt or even other inmates from being potentially hurt by a dangerous prisoner. However, what if you just happen to be very unlucky and end up in jail for a speeding ticket ? would you receive the same treatment as if you were a dangerous criminal? so think it twice if your going to walk your dog without a leash, you may end up with your clothes off and taking a shower with  20 other inmates.

Affirmative Action case reaching the Supreme Court

Affirmative action refers to policies that take factors including "race, color, religion, gender, sexual orientation or national origin"into consideration in order to benefit an underrepresented group, usually justified as countering the effects of a history of discrimination. It is a practice that has been used in areas such as employment and Universities' admission practices. However it benefits minorities, its constitutionality has been questioned in the past by applicants that don't belong to these groups. Groups against Affirmative Actions state that it contradicts its purpose creating more discrimination. On the other hand supporters see it as a big opportunity for minorities to have access to the schools that were once predominantly white. The first case decided by the Supreme Court deciding this issue was back in 1979, California v. Bakke. In this case an applicant to medical school was denied admission because of a special program that secured 16  of the 100 seats to the entering class. The majority of the justices agreed that he shouldn't have been denied admission. Thurgood Marshall the only black justice in the panel wrote a very powerful dissenting opinion. History is trying to repete itself this time with justice Sotomayor in the Supreme Court; Fisher v. Texas is schedule to be heard in fall by the Supreme Court. Sotomayor has expressed her positive views about Affirmative Action, however it is expected that the majority of the justice will rule against this practice. Either writing the majority , concurring or discenting opinion; justice Sotomayor is expecting to bring some controversy to this case. I really hope she makes history like Justice Thurgood Marshall... I'm a big fan of her !!!!


http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/07/opinion/navarrette-affirmative-action/index.html

"Marriage is an institution between a man and a woman", that is the definition of a marriage that opponents to the same-sex marriage are willing to defend until the end. Recently a California Court of Appeals declared Proposition Eight, banning same-sex marriage, to be unconstitutional; last Thursday the Maryland Senate voted to legalize same sex marriage making part of the list of states that already issue marriage licence to same sex couples. It seems that there has been a progressive change in mentality and people are more receptive to changes in society. Unfortunately for some and fortunately for others the definition of marriage that we have known for centuries has to be restated so it does not discriminate on the basis of gender.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/23/us/maryland-same-sex-marriage/index.html?hpt=ju_c2

Search at a School Unconstitutional ???

The Fourth Amendment of the Constitution guarantees the right of people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable search and seizures. It is very clear that this Amendment protects citizens from potentially being harassed and abused by law enforcement and investigative agencies, however it is not clear if it also protects us for unreasonable search a seizures carry on by regular citizens. This is a case that will be heard in the Supreme Court in North Carolina, after a student filed a lawsuit against her school for inducing her to participate in a bra search based on a tip that pills were being bought to class.  The North Carolina Court of Appeals ruled last year that the searches were unconstitutional as well as demeaning and highly intrusive. Schools need to find other ways to conduct searches on students, in my opinion the school took it too far. However the issue is whether the search was unconstitutional. It will be very interesting to know how the courts address this issue.

An American citizen, a father, and a husband was killed in Ciudad Juarez Mexico in front of his two year old son and his wife, when in an attempt to keep his family together moved to ciudad Juarez to ask the U.S embassy to give his wife permission to return to the U.S. They had been married for two years when they decided to begin the naturalization process. His wife was brought into the United States ilegally by his parents when she was a child. Ciudad Juarez is one of the most dangerous cities in the world; 3000 people were murdered in 2010. The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) prevent immigrants from returning to the United States for several years if they have entered into its territory unlawfully. This law applies whether the USCIS knows that you were in the country illegally or not. The law has to be amended in my opinion, so tragedies like this may be prevented.

Freedom of Speech

Freedom of Speech is probably one of the most invoked Constitutional Rights. I invoked it just this morning in a little domestic disagreement. But how far this right protecting the free expression of our ideas can go? Demonstrators in a national park in Washington were surprised by the decision of a district court judge stating that their protest is considered a matter of public policy and not Constitutional Law. However they were protesting peacefully and quietly, and their actions did not endanger anyone, soon they will be ask to remove their camping gear from the park. I think we will hear more about this case...

Felony Disenfranchisement

What does the term disenfranchisement mean? According to the Black's Law Dictionary, disenfranchisement means taking away the right to vote in public elections from citizens or class of citizens in this case citizens that have been charged with felonies ( Felony Disenfranchisement). With the primaries and presidential elections around the corner Felony Disenfranchisement has become a hot subject to talk about during the political debates. Some candidates are in favor of allowing felons to vote, right that was taken away by the founders. It is not a mystery that a great percentage of people incarcerated are black, and this is the population that is being affected the most by this law. The Fourteenth Amendment prohibits the Government from denying the right to vote on the basis of race, color or previous condition of servitude, however it does not prohibit the Government from taking away the right to vote from people that have committed felonies.