Thread: History repeated?US immigration reform follows cyclical path

http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2006/09 ... _23_06.txt

History repeated? U.S. immigration reform follows cyclical path

By: EDWARD SIFUENTES - Staff Writer

On the streets across America and in the halls of Congress, those arguing for more restrictive immigration policies usually preface their assertions by saying that they are not motivated by race or ethnicity.

But some historians, including Victor Chavez, a professor at Southwestern College, say that history ---- specifically the history of U.S. immigration laws ---- says otherwise.

Depending on which theory one subscribes to, immigration is as inevitable as the wind or driven by socioeconomic push-and-pull factors. Chavez said the country has rarely adopted policies that adequately address either.


Chavez said immigration isn't being assessed properly, that it should be viewed as a "binational or trinational" phenomenon. "The U.S. has never taken a binational approach. With the exception of the Bracero Program, we have always embraced a unilateral approach."

Capitol ideas

In recent months, Congress has passed several immigration bills, including a recent House bill to build a double-layered, 700-mile fence along the border with Mexico.

A House proposal passed in December would strengthen border security, toughen sanctions against employers who hire illegal immigrants and make it a felony to come into the country illegally. The Senate version of the bill would strengthen border security, create a guest worker program and provide a path to citizenship for millions of illegal immigrants.

Congressional leaders have not been able to reach a compromise proposal. Instead, Republican leaders staged a series of hearings on immigration reform largely designed to whip up public anger against the Senate bill. Democrats have remained largely silent on the issue.

This inaction has inspired mass protests on both sides of the immigration debate ---- for amnesty and against it. Anti-immigration activists say mass illegal migration from Latin American countries, particularly from Mexico, amounts to an invasion requiring the deployment of troops to the border.

The question of race

As adamant as activists may be in denying it, race, ethnicity and culture are clearly part of the debate ---- on both sides.

Immigrant rights activists say restrictive policies are aimed against Latinos and their culture.

On the other hand, some scholars worry about the changing face of culture in California and across the nation.

"Unchecked illegal immigration and multiculturalism are a lethal mix," wrote the prominent scholar Victor Davis Hanson. "California ---- if it is to stay California ---- might have coped with one or even the other, but surely not both."

In a recent campaign tour of Southern California, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a centrist Republican on immigration issues, said people who heckled him for his views were pushing the debate into an "arena of prejudice and intolerance."

But it by no means would be the first time that prejudice has crept into the debate over immigration. In fact, the first time Congress addressed who would be admitted into the country, race was very much in lawmakers' minds.

The 1790 Naturalization Act, which set forth the rules for citizenship, restricted naturalization to "free white persons" and thus left out indentured servants and slaves. That was followed nearly 100 years later by the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, which, as the title implies, restricted Chinese immigration.

A pattern emerges

The Chinese Exclusion Act illustrates a pattern in the nation's immigration history: Rules are relaxed to encourage immigration during times of prosperity and tightened when the economy struggles.

Prior to 1882, the United States imported Chinese laborers by the thousands to work in the mining and railroad industries. Thousands were deported after the act passed, and it was not formally repealed until 1943.

The rhetoric in the 1880s against immigration echoes in the arguments made today. A standing committee of the House and Senate on immigration was created in 1889. It delivered a report to Congress that said:

"Those who came to America in the early years were largely composed of honest, industrious people in sympathy with our form of government, proving a most desirable addition to our population," the committee wrote.

"But can this be said of a large portion of the immigrants we are now receiving? The Committee believe not. ... They have proven a lawless, turbulent class. ... Many are of a very low order of intelligence ... and come here with no intention of becoming citizens."

Wars force changes

The pattern repeated in the early part of the 20th century. Increasingly harsher policies barred the Japanese, most Asians, "idiots," anarchists, "insane persons" and "mentally and physically defective" people.

Soon after the country entered World War I, a labor shortage confronted the nation. More than 50,000 Mexican workers were allowed in as indentured servants, according to historian Constantine Panunzio. The workers were brought to fill specific jobs and were barred from seeking work elsewhere.

About 40 years after the Chinese Exclusion Act, the Emergency Quota Act of 1921 established a national quota system of immigration. The quotas were based on the number of foreign-born residents of each nationality living in the country according to the 1910 Census.

Due to the demographics of the time, the system heavily favored immigration from western and northern European nations.

Mass repatriation

After the Great War ended, the Great Depression brought on one of the most shameful and least studied eras in the nation's immigration history. An estimated half million Mexicans and Mexican-Americans were indiscriminately repatriated during the 1930s, according to historian Abraham Hoffman.

Last week, Rep. Hilda Solis, D-El Monte, announced she would introduce legislation in Congress creating a commission to investigate the removal of Mexican-Americans during the Great Depression.

"Absent from American textbooks and curricula, as many as two million American citizens of Mexican descent were removed from the United States ... to, in the words of authorities, keep scarce jobs for 'real Americans,' not Mexican-Americans," Solis said.

The health of the U.S. economy continued to influence immigration policy with the implementation from 1942 to 1964 of the Bracero Program, which brought Mexican laborers to work in agriculture and other industries, and the passage of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, which introduced the first sanctions against employers who hire illegal immigrant workers.

No easy answer

Throughout history, there are few instances in which the country followed strictly its own immigration laws. Congress and industry frequently sought exceptions due to changing economic winds. This created a disorganized and disjointed immigration system that is more often used as a way to drum up votes than an instrument of policy.

And the remedies offered by congressional leaders are no better today than they were then, Chavez said. Neither fences nor armies have proven effective in stopping the flow of human migration, he said.

Often, those who disagree with enforcement-heavy measures are labeled as open-border advocates. Chavez said he does not believe opening the border is the answer, either. He said he favors trilateral dialogue between Canada, the United Sates and Mexico on the question of migration.

"I don't have a crystal ball," he said. "But I do know that these policies don't work." Because "we're not even identifying the problem correctly."

GAK!!

This guy used the "tri" word waaaay to many times.

He is a PRO-NAU Traitor.