Migrants, Aliens…Terrorists?

“Comic-book superheroes have an alter ego, and so do immigrants in the United States.”

Depending on the commentator, America is “under attack,” in danger of being overwhelmed by the “flood/tide/invasion” of illegal Mexican “aliens,” or even “terrorists.”  These loaded terms, independent of historical context, give the impression that American culture, property, and livelihood are in a state of siege and constant threat, and that the nation should be on high alert.  Mexican immigrants are one of the most visible and largest of the immigrant populations that reside in America today.  But are they a threat?  And have we always considered them as such?

Mexican immigration to the United States didn’t begin with a flood, but with the disenfranchisement of approximately 100,000 Mexican nationals living in what was to become the southwestern United States, effectively transforming them from residents to semi-authorized aliens, living in limbo.  The 1848 Treaty of Guadulupe Hidalgo had given the United States sovereignty over Mexicans living in the newly conquered western territories.  The ones who stayed were given the choice of “removing” themselves back to Mexico, or continuing to live in the United States as permanent outsiders.  Yet another option was a species of default citizenship, if they didn’t publicly declare themselves to be American.  However, this wasn’t by any means an automatic grant of citizenship; in fact, the United States altered the original terms of Guadalupe Hidalgo to allow for an indefinite deferral of citizenship for those who remained.  Instead of becoming naturalized American citizens or retaining Mexican citizenship, in effect the 100,000 Mexican nationals became a multitude of undesirables, permanently unwelcome non-citizens, much as the Native American tribes that had been confined to reservations before them to make space for the burgeoning American nation-state.

Over the intervening century, the legal status of Mexicans who migrated to the United States in search of work underwent many changes, but at the outset no real government effort was made to limit Mexican immigration.  As railroads were built and agricultural production was expanded in the late 19th century, Mexican laborers were vigorously recruited from across the border to replace the Chinese immigrant laborers who had been displaced by Congress’ passage of the Chinese Exclusion Act in 1882.  Further illustrating the United States’ ambivalence towards Mexican migrants at this time was the passage of the 1924 Johnson-Reed Immigration act, which imposed a quota system on European immigrants, but imposed no restrictions whatsoever on migrants in the Western Hemisphere, including Mexico.

The Border: Interactive Timeline

The Border Patrol’s establishment in 1924 (under the umbrella of the Department of Labor) marked a change in the United States’ attitude towards Mexican migrants and initiated the inane commentary that passes for “facts” by most Fox News pundits.  The revolving door policy essentially provided for both mass deportation and simultaneous importation of Mexican migrants according to the seasonal requirements of agricultural interests.  This was a neat trick, and one still very much in evidence today.  You don’t really think the Border Patrol exists to keep out ALL Mexican migrants, do you?

Later during World War II, with a shortage of labor at home, the United States instituted the Bracero Program, a bilateral agreement with the Mexican government that allowed the legal importation of Mexican laborers to fill the American labor gap.  But after the end of the war, the United States again decided that it didn’t really need all those surplus Mexican laborers; so Operation Wetback was launched in 1954 and more than 1 million Mexican immigrants were deported.

About-faces in policy decisions continued to mark the United States’ relationship with the migrants who crossed its borders.  Major stops along the way included:

1964: Bracero program formally ended.

1965: Immigration legislation places limits on the number of legal immigrants allowed from the Western Hemisphere, making legal immigration extremely difficult.

1986: IRCA (Immigration Reform and Control Act) criminalizes employment of unauthorized immigrants by American companies, and increases funding for the Border Patrol.

1990: Immigration Act further curtails immigration quotas

2005: Sensebrenner Act seeks to make unauthorized crossing, employment, and provision of humanitarian services to unauthorized migrants felonies, but is not passed by the Senate.

2005: a version of the Real ID Act, also sponsored by Representative Jim Sensebrenner, provokes controversy over its requirement that state-issued IDs conform to a set of minimal federal standards, raising controversy over the implications of a national ID card.  Representative Sensebrenner states that the bill’s purpose was to make mobility within the United States difficult for “terrorists and criminal aliens.”

This is where the altered identities of unauthorized Mexican migrants stands today; at the juncture of terrorist and alien, categorized in the American consciousness in the same class as Al Qaeda or the Taliban.

Leave a Comment

Filed under International Politics, Uncategorized

Gridlocking Your Political System, Republican-Style

Salon writer David Sirota brings several things to our collective attention that have been mostly overlooked by the press due to yet another congressional sex scandal.  After all, what’s more important-the sexting habits of our politicians, or this report by the Alliance for Justice which shows that our very ability to function as a country has been compromised by Republican refusal to compromise?  Republican desire to block Obama at every turn reminds me of a little boy on a playground, stomping his feet because no one will give him the ball.

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2011/06/02/234775/mcconell-wont-confirm/

The report notes that the obstruction of judicial nominees is at the worst point that it’s ever been.  The Senate has confirmed only 5% of President Obama’s nominees, a stark contrast to the confirmation record of Baby Bush (President George  W. Bush), Bill Clinton, or Ronald Reagan, all of whom saw at least 70% of their nominees confirmed.

And Think Progress sadly notes:

Disturbingly, much of this obstructionism targeted women and people of color. Although Obama’s nominees are the most diverse in American history, every district court nominee with unanimous Republican opposition in the Senate Judiciary Committee was a woman or person of color.

 

Leave a Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Good Question: The Practicality of Republican Budget Proposals

In the ongoing budget talks (read: the Epic Battle of the Government Bulge), House Republicans propose to cut $87 million dollars from the FDA’s annual budget.  The concern, of course, is how to pay for increased inspections mandated by the December 2010 food safety legislation that passed with bipartisan support with an aim towards preventing more instances of the numerous food safety recalls that have affected 1 in 6 Americans in recent years (see egg recall August 2010;  spinach, July 2010; peanut butter, 2009).   Is undermining our ability to keep the food supply safe a good idea?  The House Appropriations Subcommittee says it is.

Meanwhile, the subcommittee voted to continue to fully fund the $200 million dollar Market Access Program, which awards grants to help promote American agricultural products and make them competitive overseas.  This program, derided as a failure by both parties, assists big producers like Sunkist and Welch’s in addition to smaller non-profits.

Why are these choices not surprising?  Because this strategy falls right in line with classic anti-government, pro-business Republican ideals.  However, it could result in our food supply being even more unsafe, and more people getting sick or dying because somewhere, someday, yet another overlooked and unsafe egg producer will bring eggs to market containing salmonella.  A reasonable assumption is that Republican politicians want to eat and not get sick or die, just like the rest of us.  What does this proposal say about the real motivations behind why Republicans want to cut certain programs from the budget, but not others?

Read the Washington Post article here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/food-safety-advocates-decry-fda-cuts/2011/05/27/AGzY7yEH_story.html

Leave a Comment

Filed under Budget Woes

I Can’t Believe My Best Friend is a Conservative

http://www.salon.com/life/feature/2011/04/05/my_best_friend_is_a_republican

Leave a Comment

Filed under Uncategorized