Thread: A Brief History of American Response to Immigration

A Brief History of American Response to Immigration
http://www.idexer.com/articles/immigration_response.htm

Like any other country in the world today, America owes its roots to those people whom had come from other lands to settle, bringing along with them language, religion and traditions. And like most other countries, its people (not always its politicians) were fiercely protective over who should be allowed to come and settle.

For America, these were English speaking white Europeans of the Christian faith along with black Africans they brought to use as forced slave labor. By 1700, America's heritage was predominately seen and felt with 80 percent of the population being British, 11% African along with a combination of Dutch, Irish/Scottish and German. During the first session of Congress James Madison spoke out on whom was desired to become American citizens when he said:

When we are considering the advantages that may result from an easy mode of naturalization, we ought also to consider the cautions necessary to guard against abuse. It is no doubt very desirable that we should hold out as many inducements as possible for the worthy part of mankind to come and settle amongst us, and throw their fortunes into a common lot with ours. But why is this desirable? Not merely to swell the catalogue of people. No, sir, it is to increase the wealth and strength of the community; and those who acquire the rights of citizenship, without adding to the strength or wealth of the community are not the people we are in want of. ---James Madison on Rule of Naturalization, 1st Congress, Feb. 3, 1790.

Studying early debates in Congress from 1790 through 1900 on immigration matters reveals a vast majority of politicians who are seen as deeply patriotic and proud of America's white English heritage--and defensive in preserving it. These debates also reveal a public at large very concerned with whom might arrive and settle amongst them and made their fears known as evidence by the many petitions recorded in both the House and Senate--praying for federal action to slow or stop the flow of immigrants.

What follows is a brief chronology of Americas response to immigration through the years which in toady’s highly charged political climate of pandering to foreign born voters would be seen as inhumane, racist--or even incorrectly as unconstitutional.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1790: The Naturalization Act of 1790 limits the right of become a naturalized citizen to "free white persons," thereby excluding Africans and Asians. US government takes the first steps toward closing its open attitudes about immigrants by limiting those who could become naturalized citizens on the basis of race and political affiliation. Law remained for 162 years.

1798: The Alien Act of 1798 authorizes the president to order out of the US any alien regarded as dangerous to the public peace or safety.

1852: California's Foreign Miner's Tax imposes $3 monthly tax for non-native-born citizens of the US (the Chinese) and those becoming citizens under the Treaty of Guadeloupe Hidalgo (the Mexicans). The tax was enforced by tax collectors who kept part of the fee for themselves, were allowed to take property of those who failed to pay, and often used extreme violence in their collection methods.

1855: California legislature levies a $50 tax on every ship bringing immigrants "ineligible for citizenship." The California Supreme Court declared the law unconstitutional in 1857.

1862: California legislature passes "An Act to Protect Free White Labor Against Competition with Coolie Labor and to Discourage the Immigration of Chinese to the State of California." Requires a tax on laborers who were not working in agriculture.

1876: California Senate committee investigates the “social, moral, and political effect of Chinese immigration.â€

Hi Zeezil,

Originally Posted by idexer.com

1998: The US government passes the Omnibus Budget Bill authorizing the H-1B visa program that allows the entrance of 115,000 foreign workers annually who have training or experience in high-tech fields - especially engineering, accounting, and programming. An H-1B visa allows a stay of up to three years but can be renewed for a total of six years.

It must have gotten amended; it now last 6 years and can be extended to 7. There is at least one post on the non-immigrant website where a Hindu worker brags about getting an 8th year out of it.

1999: The US government passes the H-1B Visa amendments to close the loophole allowing Americans to be openly fired and replaced by H-1B workers..

But the practice of "knowledge transfer" - firing Americans in favor of India's H-1Bs, continues openly today!

2000: The US government passes the H-1B Visa amendments which almost doubles the number of temporary visas for foreign skilled high-tech workers from 115,000 annually to 195,000 annually for the next three years. the legislation was changed in response to the arguments of tech companies that contend they face a shortage of 300,000 workers and a 1.4 percent unemployment rate in the information technology industry. If they cannot draw the needed workers from abroad, they argue, they will be forced to more their facilities and research overseas.

Sell out senators believe the lies about worker shortage without noting the millions of unemployed or underemployed American citizens! They represent Bangalore, India to our damnation!

Sell out senators believe the lies about worker shortage without noting the millions of unemployed or underemployed American citizens! They represent Bangalore, India to our damnation!


Oh, I don't think they believe it for a minute. What they do believe is big corporations are going to cut back on their 'funding' if they don't vote for more cheap labor.

Do they enforce the part about the sponsor being responsible for the people who immigrate?

Hi nntrixie,

Originally Posted by nntrixie

Oh, I don't think they believe it for a minute. What they do believe is big corporations are going to cut back on their 'funding' if they don't vote for more cheap labor.

Well, they're 2nd priority is to deceive the voters. Their "funding" is corporate campaign contributions.

May I submit?
That their first priority is the real US government:
The Trilateral Commission
The Council on Foreign Relations
The Illuminati

Flags of the North American Union and the New World Order

Originally Posted by nntrixie

Do they enforce the part about the sponsor being responsible for the people who immigrate?

No. Tata presides over the NON-immigrant visa programs, handles the majority of H-1Bs, and commits indentured servitude, according to a posting on the H-1Bs own website.

Hillary invited Tata to Buffalo, NY to expand the H-1B Non-immigrant visa program there.