| Immigration
: History of American Policy
The first move stopping immigration decided by Congress was a law in
1862 restricting American vessels to transport Chinese immigrants to the U.S. The Alien
Contract Labor Laws of 1885, 1887, 1888, and 1891 restricted the immigration to the U.S.
of people entering the country to work under contracts made before their arrival. Alien
skilled laborers, under these laws, were allowed to enter the U.S. to work in new
industries. By this time anti-immigrant felling rose with the flood of immigrants and in
this period the anti-Catholic, anti-foreign political party the Know-Nothings, was already
born.
After World War I a marked increase in racism and the growth of
isolationist sentiment in the U.S. led to demands for further tight legislation. In 1921 a
congressional act provided for a quota system for immigrants, which the number of aliens
of any nationality admitted to the U.S. in a year could not exceed 3 percent of the number
of foreign-born residents of that nationality living in the U.S. in 1910. This law applied
to nations of Europe, the Middle East, Africa, Australia, New Zealand, Asian Russia, and
certain islands in the Atlantic and Pacific. In the 1980s concern about the surge of
illegal aliens into the U.S. has led Congress to pass legislation aimed at cutting illegal
immigration. The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 allows most illegal aliens who
have resided in the U.S. regularly since January 1, 1982, to apply for legal status. Also,
the law prohibits employers from hiring illegal aliens and mandates penalties for
violations.
Debate over immigration and immigration policy is not new to the
nation's history. From time to time, Congress jarred legislation to control the flow of
immigration. As immigration rises and hatred grows more laws will be implemented trying to
release some of the pressure. Illegal immigration has some pros and cons. I will discuss
the pros first and explain them briefly in order for you to get a better understanding of
the position. It offers cheaper labor to businesses. By not paying minimum wages to the
workers who are willing to work for a lower price, this gives the business an edge over
other competitors. Provides culture diversity in the united states. Bringing in immigrants
gives more and different cultures to the U.S.. which can expand businesses to other fields
of the world. Also giving people a more understanding of other cultures.
Lowers the cost of products produced in the .U.S. that we buy. If the
businesses can produce products and services at a low price keeping there overhead low,
then we as a consumer will also pay a lower price. Most illegals are skilled workers and
helps run the economy.
Other countries economy is also being helped. The workers bring money to
their families out side of the U.S. which in most cases the U.S. dollar has a higher value
than their own.
Experts disagree saying the cons of this issue out way the pros. Next I
will discuss some cons and explain them briefly. Illegal immigrants pay no tax. If they
pay no taxes then how can we as a country pay for public services we as well as they do.
Sending money out of our economy and sending it to their families
abroad. If money is taken out of our economy it causes a monetary problem. this can cause
an inaccurate account of money in circulation which might cause inflation. Lower wages. If
an illegal is willing to work for under the minimum wage then the employer will not pay
more for the job to any other employ. In fact might higher only illegals and take away
jobs form legal residents who are willing to work.
When illegals come to this country they do not get tested for diseases
that might infect the population. Which can cause a heath problem. Such as polio,
tuberculosis and other forms of diseases.
Illegals cost the states money, paying for education, health care, and
other social services. In an already under funded programs they give these services a more
heavy burden to deal with.
Republicans have reached agreement among themselves on legislation
designed to combat illegal immigration. But with their package facing
delaying tactics from Senate Democrats and a veto from the president, they finished the
week of Sept. 2 uncertain of their next move1 "Republicans need to show we can
govern,"2 said bill sponsor Lamar Smith, R-Texas. "We need to show we can pass
good legislation."3
Dianne Feinstein (d-Calif.) called for tough and controversial
enforcement measures, including imposing a toll on anyone entering the united states to
raise revenues to beef up the Border patrol.4 Sen. Alan Simpson (R-Wyo.) one of senate's
leading authorities on immigration issues, also proposed a similar border tax ten years
ago, but was defeat in senators fearing it would detour tourists.5
Referring to the Democrats "If they want to go home and do nothing
about illegal immigration, that's a gross violation of what we should be doing,"6
said Sen. Alan K. Simpson, R-Wyo., sponsor of the Senate bill. Sen. Edward M. Kennedy,
D-Mass., and other Democrats on the Immigration Subcommittee said Republicans would have
to choose between passing an immigration bill, or proving their ideological purity on the
public school issue.7
Both democrats and republicans agree that illegal immigration should be
dealt with. The problem is they cant agree on anyone purposes given to them. The Democrats
say it is the Republicans fault, the Republicans say it is the Democrats fault. With this
type of finger pointing neither of them will gain a fast decisive action to resolve the
problem.
When it comes to illegal immigrants there are a lot of interest groups
that have been involved in this issue. From businesses to governments agencies.
First the businesses, especially in agriculture. Agriculture employs
more undocumented workers than any other industry in the country. Half of California's
700,000 farm workers are estimated to be undocumented. "Three decades ago, the
percentage of foreign-born farm workers in California was 50 percent,"8 the Chronicle
stated. "Now it is 92 percent."9
Agriculture, however, is not the only industry with an insatiable need
for the cheap labor provided by immigrants. Published by the Chronicle, a list of
businesses fined by the INS in San Francisco includes a car rental company, construction
firms, restaurants, clubs, a trucker, a travel agency and even a Protestant church.10
Everywhere one looks today, one sees immigrant workers cleaning rooms in hotels, mowing
lawns in the suburbs, pumping gas in service stations, doing janitorial chores in
countless workplaces, toiling in the garment industry and doing all sorts of temporary
jobs.
These business groups have a lot of interest in illegal immigration.
They provide cheaper labor which cuts costs and causes better competition. Richard Rogers,
district director of the INS in Los Angeles, was quoted as saying: "If we were to
increase fines 75 to 80 percent, we would probably have a lot of people out of
business."11
Government agencies are also involved. The new immigration legislation
nearly doubles the size of the Border Patrol. In addition, National Guard and active-duty
armed forces personnel are used more and more along the border. Local police forces are
also being authorized to enforce immigration law, says Roberto Martinez of the American
Friends Service Committee's U.S./Mexico border program.12
Possible solutions to the problem. Faster citizens processing, helping
illegals country's economy such as NAFTA which is already in affect. Some suggest tamper
proof residency cards, computerize the I.N.S., increases the number of boarder patrol
agents, and build a wall around the U.S. and problem countries.
There has been many suggestions made in dealing with this problem. The
Gallegly bill is one of them. If ever completed by House-Senate conferees, is likely to
include several conditions already adopted in similar form by both chambers. As passed by
the House and Senate, the bill would:
Increase the number of border patrol agents by 1,000 each year between
1996 and 2000, roughly doubling the force to reach 10,000. Make it difficult for people
caught trying to enter the United States illegally, or overstaying a visa, from being
granted visas in the future. Establish pilot programs in which employers could
electronically check the immigration status of their employees. Restrict public benefits
for legal immigrants by increasing the time for which their sponsors are responsible for
them. This section is
partially obtained by the welfare law, which denies benefits to many
legal immigrants. Allows the deportation of legal immigrants who illegally accepted public
benefits for 12 months or more.
Besides the Gallegly provision, which is in the House bill only,
conferees face two other issues with major disagreements between the two chambers:
The House would require that any family wishing to sponsor a legal
immigrant earn at least twice the poverty rate. The Senate bill would require the family
to earn an income one-fourth higher than the poverty rate. The House bill would also make
it much more difficult to apply for political asylum, both for those who apply upon entry
into the United
States or for those already on U.S. soil.
Immigration experts generally agree that the Clinton Administration has
devoted more attention to immigration than either of its two Republican predecessors and
he always has at least two reactions: his initial public statement (determined largely by
public-opinion polls, which show support for restrictions), and then the actual policy (as
determined by his advisors and the various special interests they represent).
Clinton proposed legislation that included expedited exclusion for
frivolous asylum claimants, an increase in INS asylum personnel, and various
anti-smuggling provisions. President Clinton's record on legal immigration. In June 1995,
the U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform, chaired by the late Barbara Jordan, recommended
a modest cut in legal immigration and the elimination of some extended-family immigration
categories.
President Clinton immediately endorsed the recommendations as
"consistent with my own views" and added that they "are pro-family,
pro-work, pro-naturalization."13
Clinton's record on illegal immigration, since that is a major focus of
his re-election campaign, particularly in California, a must-win state. Less than three
months after taking office Clinton sent to Congress his Fiscal Year 1994 budget proposal
for the Immigration and Naturalization Service, which included cutting 93 Border Patrol
positions. President Clinton gave a speech in which he proclaimed that "our borders
leak like a sieve" and urged that $45.1 million be spent to beef up the Border
Patrol, including six hundred new agents.14 He failed to mention that the House had
already approved an additional $60 million for the Border Patrol, or that the Senate
Appropriations Committee had approved an additional $45 million.
One of the California's response to the problem was proposition 187.
This proposition seeks to deny social services to illegals and their children. Pete
Wilson, governor of California, announces his intention to file a suit against the federal
government for "its failure to control our nation's borders."15 He claims that
there are a million illegal residents in the city of Los Angles alone, and that since 1988
the taxpayers of California have spent more than $10 million in education, medical, and
prison costs for illegal immigrants.
My personal opinion is not good for illegal immigrants. I believe that
illegals should deal with their problems in their countries, instead of coming here and
creating more problems. If there country has a poor economy then they should fix it. In
the long run it would be good for their country, but I know this is easier said than done.
The illegals that are already here should be deported. The term "illegal" speaks
for itself , that is what they are called illegals. Also they should not live and take up
social services that legal residents use. Some people say "They have the right to use
these services they, pay sales tax and don't file income tax which in most cases the
government owes them." Well I do not see it that way. I found that a majority of
illegals that work here take the money out of the country and into there families in other
countries. Most of their net income goes outside of the U.S. economy.
My father came to this country over 30 years ago. He applied for a visa,
which took him two years to get, complied with all regulations dealing with immigration to
the U.S.. After arriving to the U.S. he work hard to became a legal resident and finally a
citizen, gaining all privileges of that citizenship. Why should others come and take those
privileges while they come here illegally.
Out of the solutions given in section three the one I believe to be the
best is the Gallegly bill. I believe that a tighter restriction with added border patrol
would be the best and reasonable option. Building a wall with machine gun towers would be
a great deterrent as in the old Germany, but I don't think that's America's style.
Endnotes
1. Dan Carney, " Social Policy " Congressional Quarterly Weekly Report,
9/7/96, Vol. 54 Issue 36, p2531.
2. Dan Carney, " Social Policy " Congressional Quarterly Weekly Report,
9/7/96, Vol. 54 Issue 36, p2531.
3. Dan Carney, " Social Policy " Congressional Quarterly Weekly Report,
9/7/96, Vol. 54 Issue 36, p2531.
4. Glenn F. Miller, Los Angles Times, 7/1/93,pA25.
5. Glenn F. Miller, Los Angles Times, 7/1/93,pA26.
6. Dan Carney, " Social Policy " Congressional Quarterly Weekly Report,
9/7/96, Vol. 54 Issue 36, p2531.
7. Dan Carney, " Social Policy " Congressional Quarterly Weekly Report,
9/7/96, Vol. 54 Issue 36, p2531.
8. Moises Sandoval ,National Catholic Reporter, 6/28/96, Vol. 32 Issue 33, p20.
9. Moises Sandoval ,National Catholic Reporter, 6/28/96, Vol. 32 Issue 33, p20.
10. Moises Sandoval ,National Catholic Reporter, 6/28/96, Vol. 32 Issue 33, p20.
11. Moises Sandoval ,National Catholic Reporter, 6/28/96, Vol. 32 Issue 33, p20.
12. Moises Sandoval ,National Catholic Reporter, 6/28/96, Vol. 32 Issue 33, p20.
Bibliography
Taylor, Monica. Workbook For Political science 5, Western Custom Publishing.
Conover, Ted. A Journey Through the Secret World of America's Illegal Aliens. Vintage,
1987.
Hutchinson, E. P. Legislative History of American Immigration Policy, 1798-1965.
Pennsylvania, 1981.
Bontemps, Arna and Conroy, Jack. Anyplace But Here. Hill & Wang, 1966.
May, Charles Paul. The Uprooted. Westminster, 1976.
Carney,Dan, " Social Policy " Congressional Quarterly Weekly Report, 9/7/96,
Vol. 54 Issue 36,p2531.
Miller,Glenn F., Los Angles Times, 7/1/93,pA25.
Sandoval, Moises, National Catholic Reporter, 6/28/96, Vol. 32 Issue 33, p20.
studyworld |
