Skip to Page Content

Political Action

From WolfWikis

Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

Introduction

As a nation almost entirely comprised of immigrants,our multicultural nature is a source of great pride. However, despite the enormous opportunities which many immigrants have undoubtedly found in the United States, our country also harbors a much darker history of xenophobia and persecution of ethnic minorities. The tension of these conflicting ideals has been a source of great political debate and contestation dating back to the first major wave of immigration in the early 19th century. Tragically, U.S. treatment of immigrants has historically been harshest during times of war. The internment of approximately 120,000 Japanese Americans during WWII is an example of the distortion of American principles in the name of national security. [2] More recently, in the wake of September 11th, U.S. immigration policy has once again been framed as an issue of national security with an increased emphasis on border enforcement and criminalization. In today’s intense and hyper-competitive political environment, immigration policy remains one of the most hotly contested issues.

Issues at Stake

The public discourse surrounding immigration reform has come to focus almost exclusively on Mexican immigrants to the United States. As of 2006 it is estimated that there are approximately 29.1 million foreign born people living in the United States, 11.6 of whom are not documented. Of the 11.6 million unauthorized residents 6.6 million (56 percent) were from Mexico. [3] The number of unauthorized immigrants is predicted to increase by 500,000 annually. [1] As statistics show, unauthorized Mexican immigrants make up a significant percentage of the total number of unauthorized immigrants living in the United States, but they are certainly not the only group of undocumented residents in the U.S. [2] The debate surrounding so-called illegal immigration focuses on several prominent issues. In the past 15 years, the issue of border protection has received an enormous amount of attention. Proposals include calls for more patrols along the border, increased funding for enforcement of immigration law, and most recently plans to build a fence along sections of the 2,000 mile long border. Other hotly contested issues include paths to legalization for undocumented residents currently living in the U.S., guest worker programs, social services provided to undocumented residents, and human rights violations. Despite the efforts of the white house, several prominent senators and congressmen, and many activist groups, no comprehensive immigration reform program has been enacted to address these complex issues. Instead these issues have become political fodder for both Democrats and Republicans, and the possibility to passing comprehensive immigration seems increasingly remote. [4]

Past Legislation and Enforcement

Along with the politicization of immigration has come a windfall of proposed legislation to address the issue of immigration. Since 1986, there have been several significant pieces of legislation. The most notable example of the past twenty years was the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, signed into effect by President Reagan. In his signing statement, President Reagan said, “Future generations of Americans will be thankful for our efforts to humanely regain control of our borders and thereby preserve the value of one of the most sacred possessions of our people: American citizenship.” [3] Unfortunately, the President’s predictions about the future impact of the act proved to be without merit. Throughout the 1990s, the trend in immigration legislation was toward the criminalization of undocumented residents, harsher treatment of employers who hired unauthorized workers, and huge increases in resources to protect the border. The passage of the Violent Crime and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 gave the Attorney General the option to bypass standard deportation practices for “aggravated felon aliens”. The definition of aggravated felon aliens was vague at best, and subsequent acts broadened the definition considerably. Perhaps the most notable immigration legislation of the 1990s was the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996. This act expanded the list of crimes considered aggravated felony, expanded the definition of illegal entry, and “reduced the judicial review of immigration decisions.” [4] This act, passed during President Clinton’s, illustrates the emphasis on criminal penalties as a solution to the growing numbers of undocumented residents. The act also made it a criminal offense to prepare false documents for undocumented immigrants, and for immigrants to present these documents to the government. The act correctly recognized the negative consequences of the growth of an underground industry in creating false documents. In much the same way that U.S. ant-drug policies have encouraged drug cartels to become more creative and clever in their techniques and driven up the prices of drugs, this act likely forced the document industry further underground. The most significant change in immigration policy under IIRIRA is the increase in border patrol agents stationed along the U.S.-Mexico border. The act authorized an addition of 5,000 new agents, and $12 million to build a 14 mile long fence along the border in San Diego. [5] IIRIRA provided for several similar security and enforcement initiatives in the southwest. The San Diego fence and accompanying border enforcement, which came to be called “Operation Gatekeeper”, is illustrative of the tragic consequences such security initiatives often have for immigrants trying to cross the border. [6]

Operation Gatekeeper began in 1994 and has come under fire for its policy of attempting of using deterence to discourage immigration. [5] Gatekeeper was a result of the Clinton administration’s efforts to get tougher on immigration; a move with broad political support. The plan focused on a 14-mile region from Imperial Beach in San Diego to the east. As a result of the buildup of security during Operation Gatekeeper, the region went from having only 19 miles of fencing to 52. Although the San Diego area makes up 66 miles of the 2000 mile southwestern border, it had 72 percent of total fencing. [7]The Operation was based on the assumption that greater border security would stop immigrants from attempting to cross the border. Although the increased fencing and border patrols did reduce the number of immigrants attempting to cross the border near San Diego, numbers in Arizona surged. In effect, the impact of Operation Gatekeeper was to shift immigration patterns to the east, through much more remote and difficult terrain in Arizona and Texas. For example, in 1993 531,689 immigrants were apprehended while attempting to cross the border in California. In 1998, that number had dropped considerably to 248,092. However, apprehension numbers increased astronomically during this same period in Tucson, Arizona. In 1993, border patrol caught 92,639 immigrants in the Tucson region. In 1998 that number had skyrocketed to 387,406. Moreover, total apprehension numbers have also increased since Operation Gatekeeper went into effect. In 2000, border patrol stopped a record-breaking 1.64 million immigrants crossing the border into the United States. [8] The timing of Operation Gatekeeper could hardly have been worse. The program began almost simultaneously with a massive economic crisis in Mexico, in which the value of the peso dropped 40%. Worsened economic conditions in Mexico served to push more Mexicans to attempt to cross the border, despite the enormous risks. [9]

The most striking consequence of Operation Gatekeeper is the increase in immigrant deaths while attempting to cross the border. [10] By blocking entry through the San Diego region, immigrants have been forced eastward to much more dangerous, and remote terrain through New Mexico, Arizona, and Texas. The eastern route contains much more difficult terrain including deserts, steep mountains and canyons, and the treacherous All-American Canal. “It is unfenced and unlighted, 21 feet deep and nearly as wide as a football field. It has strong currents and is one of the most polluted rivers in the United States.” [11]
Not surprisingly, the dangers of this new route have resulted in steep increases in migrant deaths. In 1994, 23 migrants died along the California border. Of these, 2 died of hypothermia or heat stroke and 9 from drowning. In 1998, 147 migrants died in crossing. 71 of these were from hypothermia or heat stroke and 52 from drowning. In 2001, 387 migrants died. Overall, there has been a 600% increase in migrant deaths from 1994 to 2000. [12]

Under heavy pressure from human rights activists, the INS began a new safety initiative, “Operation Lifesaver.” The program is made up of three main elements: awareness and prevention in Mexico, search and rescue in dangerous crossing territories, and identifying the bodies of immigrants. The program has not had great success in either preventing immigration, or saving immigrants in physical danger. Additionally, the Border Patrol has threatened U.S. citizens that if they help immigrants by providing water or shelter from the elements, they would be charged with a criminal offense. [13]

Operation Gatekeeper has also been critiqued for encouraging the growth of the smuggling industry along the Mexican border. Increasing, Mexican immigrants have turned to smugglers to help them get across the border. Not surprisingly, smuggling rates have increased along with demand. The cost of hiring smugglers has risen considerably from approximately $150 in the Douglas, Arizona area in 1999, to anywhere between $800 and $1300 in 2001.[14]Unfortunately, increased security initiatives like Operation Gatekeeper have not reduced immigration; rather they have fueled the demand for dangerous smuggling operations, and falsified documents. [15] Programs like Operation Gatekeeper ignore the economic, political and social factors which pull Mexican migrants into the United States, as well as the economic demand in the United States. The issue at stake is not whether the United States has a right and a duty to protect its border, but whether the consequences of operations like Gatekeeper are morally acceptable.

[16]

Recent Policy and Enforcement

Since September 11th, the structure and enforcement of immigrant law has undergone considerable changes. After 9/11 the Homeland Security Act of 2002 put Immigration and Nationality Services, now called the Bureau of Immigration and Custom Enforcement, under the jurisdiction of the newly created Department of Homeland Security. This restructuring illustrates the emphasis on immigration as a matter of national security. Also in the wake of 9/11 Congress passed the USA Patriot Act of 2001. Among its many components, the Patriot Act “broadened the terrorism grounds for excluding aliens from entering the United States, and increased monitoring of foreign students.”[17] The Patriot Act has come under heavy fire from critics who argue that it undermines civil rights and individual privacy. Despite such protests, the Patriot Act was recently renewed amidst fears of a terrorist attack this past August.

In May of 2005, Senator Edward Kennedy (MA) and Republican Presidential hopeful Senator John McCain (AZ) introduced the Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act in the Senate. [[6]] The bill, commonly referred to as the McCain-Kennedy Bill proposed comprehensive immigration reform. The bill included the development of a national border security plan by the DHS, an essential workers program, initiatives to prevent human smuggling, protection of immigrant worker’s civil rights and bilateral efforts with Mexico to reduce immigration and defer its costs to the U.S. The essential workers visa program would allow for temporary guest worker status for immigrants not covered under current guest worker programs. The most controversial element of the plan was a path for citizenship for immigrants currently living in the United States without documentation. Under the bill, immigrants would be eligible for citizenship after they had paid back taxes and a fine, and learned English. [18]Conservative critics attacked the McCain-Kennedy Bill for providing amnesty to unauthorized immigrants, and essentially rewarding illegal behavior. Republicans attacked McCain for his support of the bill, and pressures from the upcoming 2008 election forced McCain to gradually withdraw public support. By March, 2007, support for the act declined precipitously, and it was unable to pass. [19]

After the failure of the McCain-Kennedy Bill, Senate House Majority Leader Harry Reid sponsored the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007. The bill, which was supported by the White House and a bipartisan coalition of 12 senators is similar, but more conservative in its modifications, than the 2005 McCain-Kennedy Bill. Under the bill, the 12-15 million unauthorized immigrants currently living in the United States would receive a “Z” visa, which would give them temporary citizenship. In order to become permanent U.S. citizens, immigrants would have to meet several conditions. These include payment of a $5000 fine, and a clean background check. The head of household would also be required to return to his or her home country for one year, and then re-enter the United States. After meeting these conditions, the estimated waiting period to be granted citizenship is 8-14 years. The bill also proposes the creation of a guest worker program, in which immigrants would be able to stay in the United States for three two-year visits. Between those stays, workers would be required to return to their home country for one year. The bill provides for a very limited path to citizenship for guest workers. [20] Critics argue that the limits imposed on guest workers creates a permanent lower class among Hispanic minorities. Ultimately, the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007 also did not pass into law. However, in September, 2006 the Senate did pass a bill to build 1100 km of fencing along the 3200 km border with Mexico. The bill passed by a margin of 80-19. The act provided for 70 new border patrol watchtowers, 380 more miles of walls along the border, and 18,000 new U.S. Border Patrol agents. The fence has been the object of considerable controversy recently, with many groups vocal in either support or opposition. [7] Estimates on the total cost of building a 700-mile long fence vary considerably. The main proponent of the fence, Representative Duncan Hunter (California) has estimated the cost at $2.2 billion. Others have argued that the cost would be considerably higher. Critics note that Hunter’s estimate only accounts for the actual building materials, but not labor, technology, potential legal fees, and the cost of buying land from private owners. [21] The plan is based on the original fence built along the San Diego border under Operation Gatekeeper. As data has shown, the San Diego fence has not prevented immigration; rather it has simply forced immigrants and smugglers to be more creative and daring in their efforts to cross the border. Supporters of the plan argue that the fence is crucial to protecting national security. Critics of the new plan say that the fence is a surface level solution to a deeply entrenched social and economic problem. Environmentalists also worry that the fence will have a negative impact on wildlife in the region. The Mexican government has also been outspoken in its opposition. “Mexican President Vicente Fox denounced as "disgraceful and shameful" a proposal to build a high-tech wall on the US-Mexico border to stop illegal immigrants. Media reports on 21 December 2005 quoted Foreign Secretary Luis Ernesto Derbez as saying, “Mexico is not going to bear, it is not going to permit, and it will not allow a stupid thing like this wall.” [22]

The Future of Immigration Policy

The issue of immigration, especially immigration of Mexicans into the U.S., is a major focus of the 2008 elections. The majority of the Republican candidates are in favor of much harsher crackdowns on unauthorized immigrants, and increased border security. On the Democratic side however, candidates appear to vary a bit more on their stance toward immigration. In the most recent Democratic debate in Las Vegas, candidates addressed the issue of driver’s licenses for undocumented residents. The difficulty Democrats face with immigration was apparent at the debate as several candidates struggled to come up with a firm stance on the issue. Democrats face pressure from both the right and their Hispanic constituency. [23]

Even as Republicans challenge them on their “toughness” on national security, Democrats must consider the rapidly growing numbers of Hispanic voters in Florida, California, and Texas (all states with considerable electoral points). However, in this high-stakes atmosphere of political maneuvering, it is not clear that many of the candidates are grappling with the substantive issues of immigration reform. Regardless of whether the candidates address the need for a more streamlined immigration policy, the economic, social, and political conditions which encourage unauthorized immigration in the U.S. and Mexico remain. [8]


Annotated Bibliography

Isenburg, Bruno T., ed. Immigration Enforcement and Policies, (New York: Nova Science Publishers, Inc., 2007). Outlines the changes in creation and enforcement of U.S. immigration policies in the last twenty years. Provides a particularly good overview of the most significant legislation since 1986.

Hing, Bill Ong, Defining America Through Immigration Policy (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2004). This was a particularly helpful resource. Great details on Operation Gateway, with statistics on the number of immigrant deaths in the past 10 years.

Johnson, Kevin R., The “Huddled Masses” Myth: Immigration and Civil Rights (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2004). Good analysis of the way immigration policies unfairly discriminate against minorities throughout U.S. history. Also discusses the way much of the terminology of the current immigration debate is racially coded.

The Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act Section-by-Section Analysis http://www.shusterman.com/pdf/mccain605.pdf Great analysis of the McCain-Kennedy bill. Makes it much easier to understand the most significant elements.

MPI Resources on US Immigration Reform http://www.migrationpolicy.org/pubs/US_Immigration_Resources.php Excellent non-partisan analysis of the most current issues in the debate over immigration reform, along with statistics.

References

  1. ↑ Isenburg, Bruno T., Ed. Immigration Enforcement and Policies, (New York: Nova Science Publishers, Inc., 2007),2.
  2. ↑ http://www.migrationpolicy.org/pubs/US_Immigration_Resources.php
  3. ↑ http://www.reagan.utexas.edu/archives/speeches/1986/110686b.htm
  4. ↑ (Isenberg, Bruno T., ed., Immigration Enforcement and Policies,(New York: Nova Science Publishers, Inc., 2007), 7.
  5. ↑ http://www.visalaw.com/96nov/3nov96.html.
  6. ↑ [1]
  7. ↑ http://www.migrationpolicy.org/pubs/US_Immigration_Resources.php
  8. ↑ Hing, Bill Ong, Defining America Through Immigration Policy, (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2004), 189.
  9. ↑ Hing, Bill Ong, Defining America Through Immigration Policy, (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2004), 193.
  10. ↑ http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/features/migrant/20030621-9999-border.html
  11. ↑ Hing, Bill Ong, Defining America Through Immigration Policy, (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2004), 189.
  12. ↑ Hing, Bill Ong, Defining America Through Immigration Policy, (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2004), 195.
  13. ↑ Hing, Bill Ong, Defining America Through Immigration Policy, (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2004), 193.
  14. ↑ http://www.migrationpolicy.org/pubs/US_Immigration_Resources.php
  15. ↑ Hing, Bill Ong, Defining America Through Immigration Policy, (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2004), 192.
  16. ↑ Isenburg, Bruno T., ed. Immigration Enforcement and Policies, (New York: Nova Science Publishers, Inc., 2007).
  17. ↑ Isenburg, Bruno T., Ed. Immigration Enforcement and Policies, (New York: Nova Science Publishers, Inc., 2007), 7.
  18. ↑ http://www.shusterman.com/pdf/mccain605.pdf
  19. ↑ http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=16719
  20. ↑ http://usliberals.about.com/od/immigration/i/BushImmiReform.htm
  21. ↑ http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5326083
  22. ↑ http://www.globalsecurity.org/security/systems/mexico-wall.htm
  23. ↑ http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/11/16/position_on_immigration_testing_democrats/
Retrieved from "http://wikis.lib.ncsu.edu/index.php/Political_Action"
Personal tools

Wiki Stats

Users:  4,180
Pages:  2,481
Uploads:  2,889
Views:  2,771,595
Edits:  51,887