For more than a quarter-century, a lawsuit settlement from a case brought in Los Angeles federal court has dictated conditions for children held in immigration detention.
But now, the long-standing settlement — which set minimum standards for housing, education and medical care for migrant kids in federal custody, while strictly limiting how long they can remain there — hangs in the balance in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals after a challenge by the Trump administration.
At the same time, the federal judge in L.A. who presides over the agreement appears poised to appoint a powerful new enforcer to uphold it.
President Trump has long sought to scrap the Flores settlement, which dates back to the Clinton era. In recent months, the Trump administration has waged a legal battle to cancel the agreement, while also pleading with the district court not to order an independent monitor to boost its compliance.
“[Flores] is the only thing standing between them and indefinite detention of families,” said Leecia Welch, chief legal director at Children’s Rights, a plaintiff in the case.
Last month, Assistant Atty. Gen. Brett A. Shumate pressed the 9th Circuit court to give the administration “the thumbs-up or thumbs-down” on its bid to tear up the settlement and end what he called “judicial micromanagement” of federal immigration policy.
“The Flores consent decree is an agreement which goes well above the constitutional floor,” Shumate told the court during oral arguments in June. “We’re asking that [the Department of Homeland Security’s] compliance with the law be assessed based on the law, not a 30-year-old settlement agreement.”
The three-judge panel sharply questioned the Justice Department’s legal claims, saying little had changed since the government last petitioned the court to have the agreement dissolved in 2020 — a request that was rejected.
The judges also pressed Trump administration lawyers to respond to evidence from scores of declarations filed in district court since last summer, in which detainees describe struggling to sleep in freezing, brightly lit rooms, vomiting from eating spoiled food, and begging for diapers, baby formula and asthma inhalers.
“You’ve said a lot of the reason you’re doing this is to discourage families from coming in the first place, so you’re basically punishing children because their parents brought them here,” Judge Marsha S. Berzon said.
Berzon, a Clinton appointee who issued a fiery dissent last year in a case that challenged the administration’s use of armed troops in immigration enforcement operations, asked: “You’re saying there’s no constitutional problem there?”
“I understand the detention of children at the border is a controversial policy issue, but that’s a policy decision,” Shumate said.
Just a day earlier, Chief U.S. District Judge Dolly M. Gee scolded a pair of government attorneys from her bench in Los Angeles, signaling she would probably appoint a new special master to force compliance with the settlement agreement.
“We’re talking about 11 years of this,” Gee said during the June 1 status conference. “None of these issues are new to me. These are all issues on which I have issued orders. I am very displeased about the fact that my orders are being disregarded and are not being complied with, not in good faith.”
“Both sides seem to be operating in different planes of reality,” Gee said.
The disputed settlement emerged from a 1985 lawsuit over the fate of 15-year-old Jenny Flores, a Salvadoran refugee who was picked up by federal immigration enforcement and left to languish in detention in Pasadena. At the time, there was little awareness that children were among the tens of thousands of migrants fleeing civil war and state collapse in Central America — with virtually no U.S. government infrastructure to protect them.
“It was a surprise,” said Benjamin Roth, a professor at the University of South Carolina College of Social Work and an expert on the agreement. “There was no thought then that there were kids in this mix.”
The current court fight centers on an immigration detention center in Dilley, Texas, run by the private prison company CoreCivic, where the vast majority of children and families in immigration custody are held.
In court filings earlier this month, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement said it has “maintained core Flores-related services” at Dilley and argued its length-of-stay numbers were skewed by a small number of families it was forced to keep because they are considered “national security risks.” U.S. Customs and Border Protection likewise boasted its July 1 report “shows our highest level of compliance to date.”
Immigrant rights advocates called those claims “a fiction.”
“We see the same sorts of problems and concerns and misery that we’ve been seeing for the last 15 months,” said Welch, the Children’s Rights attorney.
In dozens of declarations collected as part of the court record, detainees recounted broccoli full of worms, diapers doled out one at a time, and staff tearing up children’s drawings.
One mother said medical staff laughed off her 8-year-old’s broken arm. Another said she was denied treatment for hepatitis B, even after doctors told her she could develop liver cancer and pass the infection on to her unborn daughter.
Still others described unexplained rashes, outbreaks of diarrhea and infestations of lice, among a host of other maladies for which many said they were offered only Tylenol or allergy medication. Even Christmas brought misery in the form of an ICE agent dressed up as Santa, who shoved away children trying to hug him, according to the detainee declarations submitted to the court.
“What happened on Christmas Day can only be described as an atrocity,” one mother recalled. Children “dropped everything, ran up to him, begged for candy and wanted to take pictures. Some children even cried and begged him for their freedom. Santa himself acted very indifferent.”
The Department of Justice argued that immigrant kids could still sue over poor conditions if the Flores settlement is unwound. But experts say existing protections would collapse without the legal architecture of the consent decree to support them.
“[Under the settlement], the federal government has built out a very efficient system to provide temporary care for kids,” Roth said. “If Flores is dissolved, it’s not going to be easy to stand up this same set of programs.”
If the Trump administration loses before the 9th Circuit, the fight over Flores could soon escalate to the Supreme Court.
“I’d be shocked if the 9th Circuit rules for the government, and I’d be shocked if the Trump administration doesn’t appeal,” said Eric J. Segall, a law professor at Georgia State University and an expert on the high court.
But consent decrees are legally and politically complicated, and the treatment of migrant children further tangles the situation. Given the legal and political complexity, the Supreme Court could rule to keep the settlement in place, or decline to take the case at all, experts said.
“It’s more likely than not the court would stay away from this,” Segall said.
For now, both the district judge and the 9th Circuit panel appear fed up.
“I think my patience has come to an end,” Gee said during the recent hearing in her Los Angeles courtroom.
In 2023, California regulators levied more than $100,000 in fines against the private operator of a federal immigration facility, kicking off a three-year battle over whether detainees who do work at the facilities should be considered employees.
The question went beyond semantics: If considered employees, the detainees would be subject to state worker protection laws.
A legal settlement announced this week now affirms that private immigrant detention facilities are subject to California’s workplace safety and health requirements.
“Every worker deserves a safe and healthy workplace and should be able to report workplace hazards without fear of retaliation,” said Denisse Gómez, spokesperson for the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health or Cal/OSHA.
“Individuals who perform work in these facilities are entitled to workplace safety protections, and this settlement reinforces Cal/OSHA’s commitment to enforcing those protections and safeguarding vulnerable workers,” she added.
Under the settlement between California and the GEO Group, a Florida-based private prison company, the company recently withdrew its legal challenges and agreed to pay more than $100,000 in the fines.
The GEO Group did not respond to requests for comment.
Back in 2023, Cal/OSHA issued $104,510 in fines against the GEO Group. The agency had found six violations of state code by the company after detainees complained about a lack of protective equipment and proper training while cleaning the facility for $1 per day.
Detainees alleged they routinely wiped black mold off shower walls at the facility, saw black dust spew from air vents and used cleaning solutions that lacked instructions during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The biggest fine levied against the GEO Group was for failure to establish and maintain “effective written procedures to reduce employee risk of exposure to aerosol transmissible disease.”
Advocates viewed Cal/OSHA’S recognition of the detainees as workers as a victory that could pave the way for future labor rights fights at other detention centers in the state.
But the GEO Group appealed, arguing that detainees participating in ICE’s voluntary work program make their own schedules and aren’t employees, so hazard exposure couldn’t be “as a result of assigned duties,” as California law states. Plus, the company argued, there wasn’t enough evidence that detainees were exposed to any hazard.
The GEO Group sued, but three days before a California Superior Court hearing in May, the company and Cal/OSHA reached the settlement.
Along with paying the fines, the GEO Group agreed to draft plans for avoiding aerosol transmissions at 12 secure and reentry facilities in California, including five detention centers that hold immigrants.
“GEO ensures detainees are afforded the necessary tools, equipment, and personal protective equipment … to safely and effectively perform any necessary tasks,” the settlement states.
Gómez said the settlement also leaves intact the appeals board’s ruling that civil immigration detainees who participate in work programs can participate in proceedings anonymously, “acknowledging the potential for retaliation when individuals raise workplace safety concerns.”
But the question of whether detainees are employees and deserve certain protections isn’t entirely resolved — at least not for the federal government.
Last month, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement released new standards for detention facilities across the country. The revised guidelines “emphasize that detainee volunteers participating in the voluntary work program are not considered facility and/or government employees” and thus not entitled to labor regulations.
Attorney Mariel Villarreal said the timing of the new detention standards made her question whether the GEO Group had asked ICE to specify in its standards that detainees are not workers in response to its battle with Cal/OSHA.
“To me, it’s a reaction to this very settlement,” she said. Villarreal works for the California Collaborative for Immigrant Justice, which filed the original complaint on behalf of detainees who said they worked in unsafe conditions.
Villarreal pointed to a Washington Post report that GEO Group executives privately asked ICE to specify that detainees are not employees of the facilities where they work. Two top Trump administration officials, border czar Tom Homan and acting ICE director David Venturella, previously worked for the GEO Group.
New versions of ICE detention standards take effect as contracts are established or modified, so this year’s rules won’t immediately apply to every facility.
An ICE spokesperson did not comment about the settlement. The spokesperson, who did not provide their name in an emailed statement Wednesday, said the agency has begun transitioning detention facilities to meet the 2026 standards, “building on its longstanding commitment to safe, secure, and professional detention operations.”
“ICE has consistently implemented many of these best practices independently, reinforcing its role as the leader in detention operations,” the spokesperson added.
The GEO Group and other immigrant detention center operators have faced other legal battles over workers’ rights, including lawsuits in Washington, Colorado and California over the $1-per-day payment.
Villarreal said she’s confident that the Cal/OSHA settlement would continue to hold even if California facilities incorporated the new standards. But she said she believes the statements are an attempt by the GEO Group to “sidestep responsibility” and avoid the possibility of being fined under similar circumstances in other states.
“These statements in the new standards are a way for them to try and preserve profits as much as possible,” she said. “GEO and ICE are so intertwined at this point that they have the same motives.”
Retirees have protested outside CANTV headquarters throughout the country. (Ronaldo Díaz)
Caracas, June 23, 2026 (venezuelanalysis.com) – Thousands of retired workers from Venezuelan state telecommunications company CANTV have staged protests in recent days to demand the restoration of a monthly “income complement” payment.
On Thursday, CANTV suspended the US $200 monthly payment with no prior notice. The measure prompted emergency rallies outside the firm’s headquarters in Caracas, Barquisimeto, Valencia, and several other Venezuelan cities on Friday.
Active workers received the bonus as scheduled, though many joined the protests in solidarity.
The cutback reportedly affected around 10,000 retirees for whom the bonus represents over 70 percent of their monthly income. Many told reporters that the unjustified cutback placed an immediate strain on day-to-day survival, especially for those suffering from chronic illnesses.
The swift grassroots response prompted the company to backtrack and pay the retired workers $150 over the weekend. The CANTV retired workers’ plight also drew support from the World Federation of Trade Unions.
“The company thought that we would be the weakest link in their bid to cut costs at the workforce’s expense,” retiree Arturo Morgado told Venezuelanalysis. “But the protests all over the country told a different story.”
Monday saw around 300 workers demonstrate again outside CANTV headquarters in Caracas. A commission from FETRAJUTEL, a trade union representing the firm’s retired workforce, met with the CANTV board but received no commitment that the remaining $50 will also be paid.
The announcement led protesters to temporarily block Libertador Avenue in central Caracas, vowing to maintain the pressure until the full bonus is restored.
“We are going to continue fighting, for the entire bonus and for other rights established in our collective bargaining agreement, including financial support for medical expenses and incomes that cover the cost-of-living,” Morgado added. “The company put these commitments in writing in a meeting with unions in late 2023.”
The former CANTV technician highlighted the “moral strength and honesty” of the retired workforce and warned that the present bonus-over-wage government policies leave workers vulnerable to discretionary cuts. Morgado’s social security pension is worth 570 bolívars per month, less than $1 at the present exchange rate.
With the Venezuelan economy heavily sanctioned by the US, the Nicolás Maduro government increasingly turned to non-wage bonuses while letting the minimum wage continuously devalue. Trade unions have criticized the policy for cheapening labor costs for employers and contravening the existing labor law.
Since taking over in January, after the US kidnapping of Maduro, Acting President Delcy Rodríguez has maintained the policy. On May 1, she increased the minimum monthly income for public sector workers to the official bolívar-equivalent of $240 a month, while pensioners received $70. Public sector retirees are entitled to $170 monthly, but in certain cases, like CANTV, they have secured improvements in direct negotiations with the company.
The labor dispute comes amid a controversial effort by the Rodríguez administration to “reengineer and restructure” the Venezuelan state, including public companies such as CANTV. The state telecoms provider was privatized in 1991 under the terms of IMF-imposed structural adjustment and partially acquired by a consortium headed by GTE, today Verizon. CANTV was re-nationalized by the Hugo Chávez government in 2007 and is currently under the purview of the Ministry of Science and Technology.
Education Minister Héctor Rodríguez, tasked by Miraflores with leading the state reform commission, recently sought to allay fears of massive public sector layoffs. He instead suggested that workers might be “strategically relocated and retrained” in order to improve the public sector efficiency.
The acting administration has likewise launched a process to determine the “strategic” value of state-owned assets. A commission, featuring government officials and private sector representatives, will recommend whether the state should retain ownership of firms, land estates, and other assets or open them for privatization.
Financial advisory group Orinoco Research identified CANTV as a prime candidate for privatization, while libertarian think tank CEDICE Libertad called the prior sale of the telecom company a “model to replicate.” The 1991 privatization was followed by a process of asset stripping that dismantled the firm’s regionally advanced technical base and institutionalized outsourcing and arbitrary firings.
A union worker holds a sign with the message “No more starvation wages” at a May Day rally in Caracas, Venezuela, on May 1, 2026. (Graphic by Truthdig; images by AP Photo, Adobe Stock)
More than 1,000 workers, union members and retirees marching toward downtown Caracas were blocked by riot police during a May Day demonstration. Chanting, “A bonus is not a salary,” they took to the streets in Caracas to protest the only-modest increase in the so-called comprehensive minimum wage, from the equivalent of $190 per month to $240. A short distance away, a small group of workers — convened by the Bolivarian Socialist Workers Federation of Venezuela — celebrated the raise. For the first time in over 20 years, the government had not organized a large rally. Instead, it provided a concert — a Festival for Peace — featuring dozens of international performers.
“People are really happy. They are dancing in the streets because there is a lot of money coming in through the big oil companies,” U.S. President Donald Trumpsaid a few days later. His administration is still managing a political transition process following U.S. military attacks and the abduction of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro earlier this year.
But even ultraright-wing polling firms such as Meganálisis suggest Trump is wrong about the mood in Venezuela. According to the firm, the proportion of Venezuelans who are “grateful” to the U.S. for its intervention has dropped from 92% in January to just 47% in April. Trump’s attempt to cast himself as the savior of Venezuela’s economy isn’t working — especially as Venezuelans say they haven’t seen any improvements since January, nor since the U.S. imposed economically devastating sanctions in 2015.
Venezuelan workers demanded better wages at a May 1 protest in Caracas. (Jessica Dos Santos Jardim)
Wages are too low
Rafael Venegas, Jacques Derose and Yrma Rivero have different work situations. Venegas works in the public sector, Derose is in the private sector and Rivero is self-employed. But all three have something in common: Their income is not enough to live on.
Venegas is 70 years old and has spent 14 years teaching undergraduate and graduate courses at the Central University of Venezuela, the country’s oldest and largest higher education institution. However, his latest proof-of-employment document, seen by Truthdig, shows his salary is the equivalent of $1.37 a month. Any benefits like severance pay, end-of-year bonus and holiday pay are calculated based on that amount.
At the same time, Venegas, who survived a stroke and who is looking after his 93-year-old mother, receives — as all public sector workers do — a monthly food bonus of $40, and what is called an “economic war bonus” worth $150. The explanation is as simple as it is complex: Venezuela’s legal minimum wage has been frozen at 130 bolivars (about 27 cents) a month for four years. To bring actual take-home income closer to a living wage, workers get monthly bonuses paid in bolivars at the official exchange rate. Together, these amounts are known as the “comprehensive wage” and are only for formal workers.
Thirty kilometers away, Derose, a 27-year-old who dropped out of the university to work at a hardware store in La Guaira, receives a comprehensive wage of $200 a month, which may sometimes go up to $230 or $260 if he takes on extra work loading or moving merchandise.
Jacques Derose, 27, earns around $200 a month working in a hardware store. (Jessica Dos Santos Jardim)
Derose, who does not have children, tells Truthdig that his income goes to food, transit and paying rent for a single room. The room costs $120, while an apartment in Caracas costs at least $250 a month.
“That’s why my other two brothers, though they’re older, are still living with our parents,” he says.
Meanwhile, Rivero travels around the city cleaning apartments to support herself, as well as her son’s university studies.
“He got into a public university, but we spend a lot on transportation and food, not to mention medical expenses. Right now, my son has severe sinusitis, and an MRI of his sinuses costs $300,” she says.
She charges $30 to $40 for each deep clean, depending on the size of the property. She tries to have at least four clients a week in order to earn around $400 a month. As the highest earner of the three, Rivero’s situation illustrates why many young people are choosing not to study but to work informally or in trades instead.
All three workers tell Truthdig they use the same strategy to get by: working multiple jobs. Venegas earns intermittent extra income by proofreading books or giving workshops, Derose works as a bricklayer some weekends and Rivero sometimes irons or cooks. They all say that no one can get by on less than $400 a month, and a family of five requires at least $1,500.
According to the Caracas-based, union-run research center Center for Documentation and Social Analysis, the basic food basket for a family of five, which includes 61 essential products, reached $703.11 in March, a 7.2% increase from February. Venezuelans must also pay for transportation or gasoline, utilities, rent or condominium fees, medicine, clothing and much more.
Thousands of workers, especially in sectors like education, healthcare and public services, share this sentiment and have been protesting in the streets of Caracas for weeks, demanding a living wage. But how would that be achieved?
“It would be difficult to have a salary — not bonuses, but a legal minimum wage — that covers basic needs. But there are no ethical or economic reasons to keep it at 27 cents,” Hermes Pérez, economist and former head of the Exchange Desk at the Central Bank of Venezuela, tells Truthdig.
He says the legal minimum wage should be at least $300, but that’s not feasible for either the public or private sector. “The resources simply aren’t there, and since wages are practically zero, raising them to that level would be very expensive. But at least $70 or $100 would be possible. Furthermore, it’s estimated that Venezuelan revenues will grow significantly in 2026 compared to last year. We received $18 billion in oil revenues alone in 2025, and that amount could rise to $33 billion,” Pérez says. Despite attempts at diversification, oil remains Venezuela’s primary source of foreign currency, and the country is dependent on oil revenue to finance public spending.
Pérez stresses that a key indicator must be addressed regardless of how much salaries increase: inflation. “According to the Central Bank, Venezuela ended 2025 with an annual inflation rate of 465%, and by March 2026 it was already at 650%. That’s enormous. In Colombia, for example, inflation is around 5%, and in Latin America, in general, it’s in the single digits,” he says.
“It’s not just the isolated [price] increase of one or two things; it’s the generalized increase across the board. Given this context, it’s very difficult for the average worker to actually perceive any economic improvement.”
Economist Asdrúbal Oliveros agrees. He believes the country will enter a phase of recovery in purchasing power this year, but a “notably slow” one, as Venezuela must first increase incomes, sustainably reduce inflation and stabilize the exchange rate.
Venezuelan government response
On April 8, acting President Delcy Rodríguez took a stance for the first time on low wages and precarious working conditions in the country. She acknowledged some of the problems and noted that there are more pensioners (5.7 million) than formally employed workers (5.3 million), a figure that reveals the extremely high rate of informality that now prevails in Venezuela.
On May 1, Rodríguez then announced a 26% income increase through the country’s bonus system. This raised the comprehensive minimum wage — which includes the official minimum wage and bonuses — from $190 to $240 per month by increasing the economic war bonus by $50. For pensioners, the war bonus increased from $58 to $70. She also announced a one-off “professional recognition” bonus for the education, health and security sectors of around $195, with the exact amount varying by job.
Organizations such as the Professors Association of the Central University of Venezuela rejected “the policy of replacing salaries with bonuses,” which they argued do not affect workers’ social security contributions and “ignore merit, experience and seniority.” The workers also demanded respect for salary scales and collective bargaining agreements.
Miguel Monserrat holds a sign with a message in Spanish, “Yankees, get out of the Caribbean,” at a May Day rally by union workers, retirees and teachers in Caracas, Venezuela, on May 1, 2026. (AP Photo/Ariana Cubillos)
The acting president acknowledged that the $240 increase is “insufficient” but said it is “a responsible increase” to improve purchasing power “without generating an excessive inflationary impact.” According to the Central Bank, annual inflation in Venezuela reached 130,000% in 2018, the peak of a four-year hyperinflationary period that ended in 2021. It was then that the government decided to freeze wages and implement a bonus policy to avoid a relapse.
However, some economists also attribute the high inflation rates to the uncontrolled issuance of money by the Central Bank to finance the fiscal deficit. Unions argue that the economy will not collapse from paying off labor liabilities like wages and benefits.
“For the past four years, salaries have been frozen and increases through bonuses have been meager. So, clearly, workers’ salaries or benefits haven’t contributed to causing the current inflation rates,” Venegas says. “There are millions of us in the public sector, but benefits are only received by those who retire, resign or are dismissed — a small amount per year.”
Venegas believes the government and business leaders are currently colluding to try to reform the Organic Law of Labor and Workers (LOTTT) in order to eliminate the country’s social benefits system.
The LOTTT, passed by then-President Hugo Chávez in 2012, is considered a bastion of workers’ rights. Among its provisions, it prohibits unjustified dismissal and subcontracting, provides 26 weeks of maternity leave, guarantees the right to work for women and people with disabilities and extends retirement pensions to all workers, including full-time mothers and the self-employed.
Now, businesspeople have argued at the Council of the International Labour Organization for reform of the LOTTT, especially Article 104, which defines what constitutes a salary, and Article 122, which establishes the basis for calculating social benefits and severance pay. They say the current model of accumulating social benefits would be structurally unsustainable if the legal minimum wage is increased.
The U.S. decides
Amid these debates, the acting Venezuelan president has said that the economic situation of workers will improve “progressively” thanks to restored relations with the U.S. and the recovery of oil production, which — after some relaxing of sanctions — has exceeded 1.2 million barrels per day.
“In 2025, Venezuela produced a similar average number of barrels, but they were sold at a 30% to 35% discount to get around the sanctions,” sociologist and political analyst Franco Vielma said on X. These discounts acted as a key economic incentive for private buyers and intermediaries to assume the high legal and financial risk of violating the sanctions imposed by the U.S. Furthermore, the price per barrel exceeded $126 at the end of April 2026, reaching its highest level in four years due to the conflict between the United States and Iran.
Rodríguez has said the latest salary increase is backed by oil and fuel oil income. But Venezuelans still do not know how much oil revenue they are receiving, where it is deposited, what percentage the U.S. is getting or what the new agreements mean.
Acting Venezuelan President Delcy Rodriguez smiles standing next to U.S. Charge D’affaires Laura Dogu after signing an agreement to allow Chevron to expand its oil operations in Venezuela in Caracas, Venezuela, on April 13, 2026. (AP Photo/Ariana Cubillos)
In January, Trump stated that the U.S. would control Venezuelan oil sales, saying Venezuela would submit monthly budgets to the White House, which would then be reviewed by auditors. Rodríguez said at the time that citizens could track every oil dollar through a new website. However, this website has not materialized.
The United States, after attacking Venezuela four months ago and, according to the Venezuelan Anti-Blockade Observatory, having imposed 1,081 sanctions on the country since 2015, has argued that increased oil income will benefit Venezuelans. Trump asserted in January that Venezuela would experience “an unprecedented economic upswing … It will earn more money in six months than in the last 20 years.”
In this regard, the U.S. Office of Foreign Assets Control issued 14 licenses in April that allow for the development of the Venezuelan oil sector and the possibility of conducting banking transactions with Venezuela, although each transaction requires OFAC approval. Payments in gold or cryptocurrencies are prohibited; Venezuela cannot trade with China, Russia, Iran, North Korea or Cuba; and the country’s frozen assets will not be released. Crucially, all revenues from oil and mineral exports must be deposited into accounts controlled by the U.S. Treasury Department, which then decides when and how much to return to Venezuela from its own resources.
Although the international media has framed this as a “lifting of sanctions,” the licenses granted by the U.S. are only conditional and temporary permits that allow some oil and banking operations in Venezuela. Executive orders blocking state assets and controlling and supervising the operations of the state oil company PDVSA remain in place, limiting the legal certainty that is necessary for long-term investments.
Many Venezuelans did believe the economic situation would improve after Jan. 3. In fact, some pollsters claimed that 70% to 80% of the population then had “hope for the future.” Now, in April, according to an AtlasIntel poll, 77% of Venezuelans rate the current economic situation as “bad,” and 76% hold a negative opinion about the state of the labor market.
According to Datanálisis, economic despair also prevails, with 55% of those surveyed identifying inflation and low wages as their main problems. These worries are followed by devaluation and failures in the electrical system.
Datanálisis also found in April that 65% of the population agrees that Venezuela’s priority should be resolving the economic crisis above any political transformation or electoral process. However, Trump hinted on May 12 that beyond the current intervention, he’s also “seriously considering” making Venezuela the 51st U.S. state, posting a map of the country with a U.S. flag. Joke, threat or a reflection of how Trump already sees Venezuela, Venezuelans have much to worry about.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect those of the Venezuelanalysis editorial staff.
