Katherine Fennelly

English

Research Papers in Economics

A
 
H
I
S
T
O
R
I
C
A
L
 
P
E
R
S
P
E
C
T
I
V
E
3
ew subjects in the U.S. are as controversial
or have as contentious a history as immi-
gration. Immigration scholars Simon and
Lynch
1 suggest that Americans view immigra-
tion with “rose-colored glasses turned back-
wards”—positive attitudes toward earlier
groups of immigrants and negative ones about
those who enter today. Yet the notion that earlier
waves of European immigrants were welcomed
with open arms is false. At the end of the 19th
century, anti-immigrant backlash toward non-
Protestant immigrants was vicious.
As historian Donna Gabaccia reminds us,
the current outrage against “illegal immigrants”
also has historical parallels. 
Studying the past reminds us that each
restriction of immigration produced its
own patterns of illegal entry. These
immigration restrictions targeted Chi-
nese laborers after 1882, anarchists
after 1902, and Italians after 1924. The
illegal immigrants of the past included
all three groups—and others, too.
2
Moreover, “assimilation” of earlier waves
of immigrants wasn’t as rapid or complete until
well into the 20th century.
3 Although there was
tacit agreement that Americans would share the
English language, bilingualism was politically
protected as one of the rights for which pilgrims
had come to America and was considered an
advantage for “everyday trading, teaching and
spreading the gospel.”
4
The Chinese Exclusion Act, passed by
Congress in 1882, “forever changed Americans’
relationship to immigration” by endorsing defi-
nitions of race and class as criteria to define par-
ticular groups as “undesirable aliens,” ineligible
for entry or citizenship.
5
However, non-Asian immigration remained
largely unregulated until 1924, when rancorous
debates resulted in the passing of the Johnson-
Reed Act—a bill that ended open immigration
from Europe by enacting a quota system for the
purpose of limiting “undesirable immigrants”
from southern and eastern Europe. This act
began an era of restriction. It defined “native
stock” as descendents of the white population of
the country when it was founded. It is notewor-
thy that Mexican immigrants were exempted
from both the quota and restrictions on citizen-
ship because the Southwestern states depended
on cheap, abundant Mexican laborers.
6
Mexican Immigration: Historical Origins
The origin of the contemporary chant “we
didn’t cross the border; the border crossed us”
can be found in the terms of the 1848 Treaty of
Guadalupe Hidalgo after the Mexican-Ameri-
can War. The treaty gave the northern half of
Mexico to the U.S. and stipulated that all inhab-
itants in the ceded area who did not announce
their intention to remain Mexican citizens or
leave the territory in one year would auto-
matically become U.S. citizens. Those who did
not became de facto “illegal aliens.”
7
American policies related to Mexican
workers can be defined historically as cycles of
recruitment in times of labor shortages followed
by massive restrictions and deportations. Dur-
ing World War I, concern over potential short-
ages of farm labor led to legislation that
explicitly called for the temporary admission of
76,802 Mexican workers. 
Within six years of the war’s end, in 1924,
the U.S. Border Patrol was established to secure
the country’s borders. In the 1930s, during the
Great Depression, thousands of Mexican immi-
grants and citizens were deported. However,
with the onset of World War II at the end of the
decade, renewed concern over potential labor
shortages led to the creation of the Bracero Pro-
gram to import Mexican workers.
8
continued on page 4
U.S. IMMIGRATION
In the past decade,
immigration has reached
unprecedented levels, and
Americans are divided on
whether the current number 
of immigrants should be
decreased or increased.
by Katherine Fennelly
Photodisc
FBy 1953, there were more than three-quar-
ters of a million unauthorized Mexicans in the
U.S., prompting the U.S. government to create
“Operation Wetback” the following year to
arrest and deport them. After 1964, when the
Bracero Program was discontinued, tens of
thousands of agricultural jobs were still avail-
able to Mexicans, but they were no longer able
to secure legal entry visas. 
Refugees and Asylees
As a result of World War I, millions of indi-
viduals became stateless, but the U.S. accepted
relatively few refugees until after World War II
with passage of the Displaced Persons Act of
1948. The subsequent arrival of large numbers
of war refugees, asylees and the family mem-
bers who joined them added richly to the diver-
sity of the country. Contemporary refugees
range from the well-to-do, highly educated to
those with limited financial resources and little
formal schooling. 
Changes in both border policies and the
admission of refugees illustrate the ways in
which American immigration is tied to the
country’s political and economic relations with
the outside world. 
As sociologist Ruben Rumbaut describes it,
“Migration patterns are rooted in historical rela-
tions established between the U.S. and the prin-
cipal sending countries . . . [they are] related to
the history of American military, political, eco-
nomic, and cultural involvement in the sending
countries.”
9 Examples include the resettlement
of Hmong allies of the U.S. in the Vietnam War,
the welcoming of thousands of refugees from
the former Soviet Union in the 1990s, and cur-
rent restrictions on Middle Easterners related to
the politics of homeland security. In Rumbaut’s
words, “As the U.S. has become more deeply
involved in the world, the world has become
more deeply involved in America.”
10
Contemporary Legislation
In the Civil Rights era, the immigrant quota
system that had been in effect since the 1920s
was abolished with passage of the 1965 Immi-
gration and Nationality Act (INA). Under the
new system, preference was given to the rela-
tives of U.S. citizens and secondarily to immi-
grants living in the U.S. and those with special
skills needed by American companies. The INA
family reunification provision led to a dramatic
increase in immigrants from Mexico,
11 and the
changes resulting from the act became the core
of the current immigration system.
12 About two-
thirds of all immigrants now enter the country
under sponsorship by a family member.
13
The next significant piece of immigration
legislation was the Immigration Reform and
Control Act of 1986 (IRCA). Under IRCA,
unauthorized immigrants who had been in the
U.S. since 1982 were offered permanent resi-
dent status. IRCA also proposed monetary sanc-
tions against employers who knowingly hired
unauthorized workers (Green). However, few
employers were actually sanctioned, and unau-
thorized immigrants continued to enter the U.S.
An unintended result of IRCA was to encourage
wage and benefits discrimination, as many
employers turned to labor subcontractors as an
alternative to direct employment.
14
The North American Free Trade Agreement
(NAFTA), enacted in 1994, did not include
major provisions addressing immigration pol-
icy, but it was characterized as a treaty that
would substantially reduce immigration.
Instead, due to several factors, it served as a
stimulus to unauthorized immigration. First, the
lowering of trade barriers between the U.S. and
Mexico has integrated the two economies with-
out eliminating large wage disparities. At the
same time, the marketing, sale, and transport of
goods to and from Mexico has encouraged emi-
gration at a time when the commercialization of
agriculture in Mexico has pushed farmers off
the land. 
Furthermore, while NAFTA greatly encour-
aged the free flow of goods and capital, it did
not facilitate the free flow of labor.
15 To the con-
trary, border controls instituted under IRCA con-
tinued, and Congress passed legislation enacting
harsh penalties against individuals who over-
stayed their visas and forbidding authorized and
unauthorized noncitizen immigrants from
receiving most means-tested federal and state
benefits.
16
In the short term, reducing trade barriers
produces “a migration hump—a temporary
surge of more emigration as protected local
industries are exposed to competition.”
17 As
Philip Martin has noted, reductions may be a
long-term outcome of NAFTA, but the transla-
tion of investments into jobs takes time. 
Another outcome of NAFTA that served to
stimulate labor emigration was the proliferation
of “maquiladoras,” predominantly U.S.-owned
firms in a free trade zone on the Mexican side
of the border. 
Highly Skilled Immigrants 
While much of the public, legislative, and
media attention has been focused on low-skilled
immigrants, American business leaders have
put pressure on Congress and the president to
acknowledge the importance of highly skilled
foreign-born workers to the U.S. economy. The
Immigration Act of 1990 raised the immigration
continued from page 3
Immigration Study
This article was written as
part of a two-year study
conducted by the League of
Women voters. For study
information at www.lwv.org,
click on “Projects” at the top,
then “Immigration” on the left. 
Scope of the Study  
 Underlying values and
principles regarding
immigration 
 Reasons for migration
from other countries,
including: 
•  Effects of global
interdependence on
migration 
•  Motivation of refugees
and asylees 
•  Motivation of other
immigrants 
 Current federal
immigration policy,
including: 
• Overview 
•  Effectiveness in uniting
families 
•  Effectiveness in meeting
needs of businesses 
• Effectiveness  of
enforcement 
•  Human rights concerns 
 Impact of immigration,
including: 
•  Economic effects of
authorized and
unauthorized
immigration 
• Diversity 
•  Inclusion of immigrants
in American society  
4ceiling to 700,000 per year and granted prefer-
ence to relatives of U.S. residents or citizens
and to immigrants with high-level work skills.
18
Stimulated by growing high-tech industries
and a “knowledge economy,” educated foreign-
born workers are significantly overrepresented
in the natural and social sciences, medicine,
engineering, and computer-related profes-
sions.
19 Almost half of college-educated immi-
grants come from Asia, particularly India and
China. 
National Security 
Before 9/11/01, national security concerns
were not generally tied to discussions of immi-
gration policy. In fact, just a few years earlier
the Wall Street Journal had advocated a consti-
tutional amendment stating “there shall be open
borders.”
20 However, the 9/11 attacks focused
intense scrutiny on border security and the visa
process, resulting in a number of restrictions
and delays for some individuals attempting
legal entry to the U.S. 
Doris Meissner, former director of the
Immigration and Naturalization Service, sug-
gests that many of these restrictive policies, par-
ticularly the arbitrary arrests and relaxation of
due process protections for Arabs and other Mid-
dle Easterners, were the result of “initial, panicky
responses.”
21 Such actions have been decried by
civil libertarians in the U.S. and abroad. 
Current Status of Policy Debates
In the past decade, immigration has
reached unprecedented levels as the result of a
combination of factors, including continued
reunification of immigrant families, a strong
economy, trade expansion, and the govern-
ment’s refusal either to authorize sufficient
numbers of visas for the legal entry of low-
skilled immigrant workers or to enforce
employer sanctions. At the same time, Ameri-
cans are about equally divided in their opinions
on current levels, with half saying the number
should be decreased and the other half saying it
should be maintained or even increased. 
Most recently, in 2006, after failing to get
the immigration reform he had sought in the
form of a guest-worker program, President
Bush signed into law a bill authorizing the con-
struction of a 700-mile fence on the 2,000-mile
southern border. 
As of this writing, Democrats have control
of both the House and Senate, and the country
is preparing for the 2008 presidential elections.
Only a year ago, Congress seemed close to
enacting major immigration reform, including
the regularization of status of unauthorized
immigrants. However, in recent months mem-
bers of both parties have argued instead for
more punitive measures and for increased bor-
der security. The picture may change again after
the inauguration of a new administration. What-
ever happens, there is little doubt that immigra-
tion policy will remain at the forefront of the
U.S. political scene for years to come. 
Katherine Fennelly is a professor at the Uni-
versity of Minnesota’s Hubert H. Humphrey
Institute of Public Affairs, where she teaches
and conducts research and outreach related to
international migration and ethnic relations.
References 
1. Simon, R.J., and J.P. Lynch. 1999. “A Comparative
Assessment of Public Opinion toward Immigrants and
Immigration Policies.” International Migration Review 33:
455–467. 
2. Gabaccia, D. 2006. “Today’s Immigration Policy
Debates: Do We Need a Little History?” Migration Infor-
mation Source (November).
3. Ricento, T. 1995. “A Brief History of Language
Restrictionism in the United States.” TESOL (Teachers of
English as a Second Language).
4. Fitzgerald, J. 1993. “Views on Bilingualism in the
United States: A Selective Historical Review.” Bilingual
Research Journal 17: 35–56. 
5. Lee, E.  2002. “The Chinese Exclusion Example:
Race, Immigration, and American Gatekeeping, 1882–
1924.” Journal of American Ethnic History 21:36–62. 
6. Ngai, M. 2004. Impossible Subjects: Illegal Aliens
and the Making of Modern America. Princeton, New Jersey:
Princeton University Press. (Note: All Western hemisphere
countries were excluded from quotas except colonies,
which were counted under their ruling countries’ quotas.) 
7. Ibid.
8. Zolberg, A. 2006. “Rethinking the Last 200 Years of
U.S. Immigration Policy.” Migration Information Source. 
9. Rumbaut, R.G. 1994. “Origins and Destinies:
Immigration to the United States since World War II.” Soci-
ological Forum 9: 583–621. 
10. Ibid.
11. Green, N. 2002. Immigration. Washington, DC:
CQ Press. (Further notes to this work are listed simply as
“Green.”)
12. Congressional Budget Office. 2006. Immigration
Policy in the United States.  
13. Green.
14. Massey, D. 2004. “The American Side of the Bar-
gain.” In Jacoby T, ed., Reinventing the Melting Pot: The
New Immigrants and What It Means to Be American. Basic
Books, pp. 111–121. 
15. Massey, D.S. “March of Folly: U.S. Immigration
Policy after NAFTA.” The American Prospect. 1998.
16. Ibid.
17. Martin, P. 2006. “The Battle over Unauthorized
Immigration to the United States: New Bills in the U.S.
House and Senate Vary on How to Deal with Illegal Immi-
grants.” Population Reference Bureau.
18. Green.
19. Batalova, J. 2005. “College-Educated Foreign
Born in the U.S. Labor Force.” Migration Information
Source. February 1.
20. Teitelbaum, M. 1992. “Advocacy, Ambivalence,
Ambiguity: Immigration Policies and Prospects in the U.S.”
Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 136:
208–225. 
21. MPI staff. 2002. Interview with Doris Meissner.
Migration Information Source (December). 
5
American business
leaders have put
pressure on
Congress and the
president to
acknowledge the
importance of
highly skilled
foreign-born
workers to the U.S.
economy.

A Brief History of Language Restrictionism in the United States.” TESOL (Teachers of English as a Second Language).

Advocacy, Ambivalence, Ambiguity: Immigration Policies and Prospects in the U.S.”

College-Educated Foreign Born in the U.S. Labor Force.” Migration Information Source.

Immigration. Washington, DC: CQ Press. (Further notes to this work are listed simply as

Impossible Subjects: Illegal Aliens and the Making of Modern America.

Interview with Doris Meissner. Migration Information Source (December). American business leaders have put pressure on Congress and the president to acknowledge the importance of highly skilled foreign-born workers to the U.S.

March of Folly: U.S. Immigration Policy after NAFTA.” The American Prospect.

Origins and Destinies: Immigration to the United States since World War II.”

Rethinking the Last 200 Years of U.S. Immigration Policy.” Migration Information Source.

The American Side of the Bargain.”

The Battle over Unauthorized Immigration to the United States: New Bills in the U.S. House and Senate Vary on How to Deal with Illegal Immigrants.” Population Reference Bureau.

The Chinese Exclusion Example: Race, Immigration, and American Gatekeeping,

Today’s Immigration Policy Debates: Do We Need a Little History?” Migration Information Source

Views on Bilingualism in the United States:

U.S. Immigration: A Historical Perspective

http://www.mtsu.edu/~berc/tnbiz/immigration/fennelly.pdf

U.S. Immigration: A Historical Perspective

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Research Papers in Economics