Contemporary Perspectives on Immigration

By Allison Adrian, PhD. candidate at the University of Minnesota's School of Music, IHRC Affiliate

While religious freedom is thought of as the primary appeal for immigrants who set their sights on the United States in the 17th century, recent immigration seems to have less to do with religious choice and more to do with political asylum or economic opportunity. How much does religion matter in the current process of immigration to the United States? How does religion factor in to the process of making the U.S. home?

The United States continues to remain a predominantly Christian nation, but the last fifty years have been witness to a dramatic rise in American religious pluralism as millions of adherents of Buddhism, Islam, Hinduism and more have made the U.S. their home. Take Minnesota as an example: While Minnesota is thought of by many as an American Scandinavia, it ranks second in the nation for proportion of refugees to residents. From 1990-2000 Minnesota increased its foreign-born population by 130% to 260,000. Mosques and Hindu and Buddhist temples now dot the predominantly Christian landscape of the Twin Cities.

Iraqi Immigration and Religion

The war on Iraq has placed the United States in the strange position as both the culprit of escalated levels of religious persecution in Iraq and a refuge offering asylum for those persecuted. U.S. immigration policy towards Middle Easterners tightened after 9/11, at the same time that many Middle Easterners were in greater need of immigrating. A Media Line article details the effect of changing immigration policy on the amount of Middle Eastern immigrants in the U.S. http://www.themedialine.org/news/news_detail.asp?NewsID=16754
The article reports that tension around religion – Shi’ites & Sunnis, Christians & Muslims -- seems to dissipate once individuals leave the Middle East for the U.S. A Palestinian-American journalist at the end of the story alludes to a source of “peace” in the United States: “I think when people weigh it up, they figure if they can get good money then ‘what the hell, we can manage’.” Can economic prosperity really reduce religious tensions? And, if so, was the conflict truly religious to begin with?

While Shi’ites, Sunnis, and Kurds struggle to create a new Iraq, the plight of smaller Iraqi groups is sometimes overlooked. A Seattle Times article posted on the 17th outlines the predicament of Mandaean Iraqis who look to John the Baptist as their spiritual leader. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/faithvalues/2003576055_mandaeanism17.html
Because of their small numbers, they are threatened by both Islamic extremists in Iraq and as a consequence of the violence against them in Iraq, by their geographic dispersal around the United States. In fact, most Mandaeans cannot imagine their religious community existing into the third generation in the U.S. and most are convinced there will soon be no Mandaeans left in Iraq.

Immigration and Religious Tension in the U.S.

As U.S. foreign policy renders the Middle East uninhabitable for many groups, it must accommodate more and more people onto American soil. Some American Jews see the expanding boundaries of religious pluralism as a threat to their lifestyle. One article in recent press reports that the increasing Muslim population in the U.S. “jeopardizes” Jews. http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54278
Meanwhile, a conference held February 15-17 at Dartmouth College explored similarities in the migratory struggles of the two groups. http://www.thedartmouth.com/article.php?aid=2007021901060
Instead of pitting the two groups against one another, speakers sought to explore Judeophobia and Islamophobia in a comparative context, highlighting the contradiction between the western world’s self-perceived openness and growing anti-Semitic and anti-Islamic sentiment. One speaker sought to use Jewish migration experience as a template to ease Muslim integration into western life. Another drew comparisons between suburban Parisian neighborhoods largely inhabited by North Africans today and their history during WW II as Jewish immigrant neighborhoods.

Religious Plurality and the Media

Regardless of the U.S.’s self-congratulatory attitude of national unity despite cultural and religious diversity, religious plurality in the media is highlighted as a largely negative force that renders individuals unable to reconcile their differences. It is often used as an easy explanation to violence. A random mall-shooting by a teenager left five dead in Salt Lake City. Because the guilty teenager happened to be Bosnian and because the current climate happens to be anti-Islamic, the mayor sent out a vitriolic reaction to media sources stating the shooter was an “Islamic terrorist” regardless of the fact that there is no evidence to suggest that the incident had religious motivations. http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=2879307

While the American Muslim population is growing at a quick clip, the U.S.’s strong roots in Protestantism also attract Christians from around the world and often convert those that migrate here. The Chinese Christian Church is now the predominant religious institution among the Chinese in the United States. Whereas only 1-5% of the population in China is Christian, a third of American Chinese are Christian. http://religion.ssrc.org/reforum/Kim/
Despite rhetoric that increased immigration and religious plurality endangers American religious life, it is a sign that religion in the U.S. is alive and well, perhaps more vibrant than ever.

_____________________________

Allison Adrian is a PhD candidate in Ethnomusicology at the University of Minnesota’s School of Music. Her research explores the worship music of Lutheran immigrant congregations formed within the past twenty years in the Twin Cities.

Contact information: adri0032@umn.edu

Visit us on the Web: http://www.ihrc.umn.edu
To receive email notices about events at the IHRC: http://www.ihrc.umn.edu/about/e-notice.htm

Posted by Dan Ott at 11:33 AM | Permalink

By David LaVigne, PhD candidate in History at the University of Minnesota, IHRC Affiliated Faculty

A popular idea often heard about the United States’ most famous port of immigration, Ellis Island, is that immigrants commonly had their family names changed there. This, however, is a myth: inspection agents at Ellis Island and other ports of entry rarely changed immigrants’ names. For immigrants to be admitted to the United States, they needed detailed documentation that proved their identity. These papers were filled out in the country of emigration—often by professional clerks—and adhered to the spelling patterns of the local language. Passenger ships used the travel documents to compile accurate passenger lists at European ports of debarkation. If all this were not enough, Ellis Island employed hundreds of interpreters who interrogated immigrants in their native languages. In short, immigrants were likely to begin their lives in the United States with their names spelt correctly. (American Names)

That said, the practice of immigrants changing their names after settling in the United States was—and continues to be—a bit more common. Statistics quoted from the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service indicate that today 16 percent of immigrants who become citizens change their names. An unscientific poll by the Boston Globe adds that name changes are especially common amongst Asian, Arab, and Muslim immigrant groups. The reason for changing one’s name depends on the individual. In the Boston survey, for instance, immigrants who recently completed the process for becoming United States citizens offered various reasons: the desire to avoid embarrassment and frustration when others can’t pronounce one’s name, the need to adapt to American culture, the benefits that an American-sounding name offers for advancement at work and in society. (Welcome Candy, Sam and George: Immigrants Change Countries and Their Names)

Name changes have been particularly popular among those individuals who aspire for careers in entertainment or politics. Bob Dylan, born Robert Zimmerman, abandoned the family name inherited from his Jewish immigrant grandparents. Similarly, former vice president Spiro Agnew modified his Greek-American birth name of Spiro Anagnostopoulos for political advantage. When another political hopeful, Barack Obama, announced his candidacy for the Democratic presidential nomination this past week, the on-going debate over whether Americans would elect a black President flared up anew. One journalist from Maine’s Sun Journal mused tongue-in-cheek that voters will not vote for Obama simply because of his foreign-sounding name (Obama is, of course, the son of a native Kenyan). The writer recommended that Obama reclaim his college nickname, Barry, because “Americans like presidents with simple, short, familiar names.” (Pop 20: What's in a Name?)

The motivation for an immigrant to change his or her name is often influenced by prejudices and discrimination encountered in the United States. “No Fly Lists” and “FBI Name Check” lists, for example, affect many individuals who not coincidentally also happen to be immigrants. The consequences can be maddening. A recent article in Minneapolis’s Star Tribune noted that immigrants with common last names are more likely to become entangled in security checks that can delay one’s hope of becoming an American citizen. (Immigrant entangled in post-9/11 checks) Indeed, disgust over “FBI Name Check” lists led to the filing in San Francisco during the past week of a class-action lawsuit against the federal government. The eight plaintiffs in the suit had all completed the requirements for citizenship, but their applications had been held up for over two years as a result of the security check process. ('Name Checks' for citizenship hopefuls trigger lawsuits)

It seems then that despite the historical inaccuracies concerning Ellis Island, the prospect of a name change has been and continues to be a significant decision that many immigrants face at some juncture. Immigrants change their names for myriad reasons, not the least of which is the need to feel as if one fits into American society. But at the same time, to give up one’s birth name is, in a way, to give up a major part of one’s personal and cultural identities. “Becoming American”—through name change or whatever means—is hardly an easy business. William Shakespeare famously contemplated the significance of a name when he told the story of the star-crossed lovers, Romeo and Juliet. The Capulet and Montague family feud aroused his heroine Juliet to ask “What’s in a name?” The experiences of immigrants, both historical and contemporary, suggest that the question still carries great relevance, even though it is not easily answered. Names are an element of culture and, as a result, closely related to the politics of identity.

________________________

David LaVigne is a Ph.D. candidate in History at the University of Minnesota and a member of the IHRC Advisory Council and Collections Council. His research studies the changing meaning of race and ethnicity for European immigrants during the twentieth century, with particular focus on the white ethnic revival during the 1960s through the 1980s.

Contact information: lavig004@umn.edu

Visit us on the Web: http://www.ihrc.umn.edu
To receive email notices about events at the IHRC: http://www.ihrc.umn.edu/about/e-notice.htm

Posted by Dan Ott at 11:41 AM | Permalink

by Katherine Fennelly, Professor
Humphrey H. Institute of Public Affairs
University of Minnesota
IHRC Affiliate

The rights of immigrants –both authorized and unauthorized—have steadily eroded as the result of actions and policies of the US Department of Homeland Security.

Unauthorized immigrants.
In the absence of meaningful immigration reform the Bush Administration has recently begun selectively targeting unauthorized immigrants (individuals without legal visas). The Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has described “Operation Return to Sender” as a program to arrest individuals who have missed deportation hearings or returned to the US after having been deported, but many of those arrested in well-publicized raids do not fit this profile. Instead, some appear to have been randomly selected on the basis of their appearance. The example of Joel Baltazar Reyes was cited in an article in the San Bernadino Reporter. http://www.sbsun.com/news/ci_5148968 He was walking down a street in Pomona, California when he was stopped and asked if he had immigration documents. Because he had no papers, he was arrested and deported to Mexico the following day. Furthermore, among those individuals detained, and later released in raids on Swift meat processing plants several weeks ago were permanent residents and citizens who ‘looked Latino’.

Permanent residents applying for citizenship:
Since 9/11 security checks have greatly increased the processing delay for individuals applying for permanent residence status and for US citizenship. This week the Minneapolis Star Tribune described the plight of one such applicant, Ragab Sadek.
http://www.startribune.com/462/story/988171.html In July of 2005 Mr. Sadek received a letter from the government saying "Congratulations. Your application has been recommended for approval.” Two years later his application remains ensnarled in a backlog, with no indication of when it will end.

To make matters worse for would-be citizens, ICE has issued a proposal to increase fees for naturalization applications by 80%, from $330 to $595. An editorial in the New York Times described the increase thusly: “With one hand, Lady Liberty lifts her lamp beside the golden door. With the other, she roots around in an immigrant’s wallet, plucking out bills.” http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/04/opinion/04sun2.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print

Asylum Seekers
As a signatory to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights the United States accepts the right of individuals to seek asylum from persecution. However, a bipartisan federal commission warned on Wednesday that “the Bush administration, in its zeal to secure the nation’s borders and stem the tide of illegal immigrants, may be leaving asylum seekers vulnerable to deportation and harsh treatment.”http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/08/washington/08asylum.html The commission cited a number of instances in which asylum seekers were treated like common criminals, jailed for long periods of time, and even deported.

The Future
There are indications that urgently needed immigration reform is in the offing. This week Senator Mel Martinez, chairman of the Republican National Committee urged Congress to pass guest worker legislation with provisions for an earned ‘path to citizenship.’ http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20070202-124747-8013r.htm President Bush has vowed to work with the Democratic majority in Congress to pass legislation that includes these changes. However, immigrant advocates caution that issues of administrative delays, backlogs and preservation of the rights of refugees and asylum seekers must also be part of the reform package.

_______________________________

Katherine Fennelly is Professor of Public Affairs at the Hubert H.
Humphrey Institute, University of Minnesota, and the 2006-2007
Fesler-Lampfer Chair in Urban and Regional Affairs. Her research,
teaching and outreach interests include immigration and public policy,
leadership in the public sector, the human rights of immigrants and
refugees in the United States, and the preparedness of communities and
public institutions to adapt to demographic changes. Recent projects and
publications focus on the determinants of attitudes toward immigrants
and their successful integration into US communities.

Visit us on the Web: http://www.ihrc.umn.edu
To receive email notices about events at the IHRC: http://www.ihrc.umn.edu/about/e-notice.htm

Posted by Dan Ott at 04:50 PM | Permalink

By Louis Mendoza, associate professor and chair of the Department of Chicano Studies at the University of Minnesota. IHRC Affiliated Faculty.

Last fall’s triumph at the polls by Democrats signaled possible action on a number of legislative fronts that had been stalled by a Republican Party divided against itself. Among the many issues which people hope to see meaningful action taken on is comprehensive immigration reform. Early indicators seem to suggest that despite the combination of a Democratic majority and a president favoring action on immigration, the topic will continue to lend itself to divisive politics among political representatives in Washington and around the nation.

Of course, though we often take it for granted, we would do well to keep in mind that political debates, public discussion, and media discourse on the topic shape our cultural common sense on the topic through language. Language shapes reality. The power to define people or phenomena establishes a framework of control or understanding. A University of Colorado professor reminds us that so powerful is language that the terms of the debate on immigration have already been set http://www.longmontfyi.com/Local-Story.asp?id=14340. Whether the discussion is about ‘undocumented immigrants,” or “illegal aliens,” about providing “amnesty” or a “pathway to citizenship” or any other of a number of contrasting terms does make a difference; but the battle for people’s sentiments has already been established by political and media pundits. Like stereotypes that endure over time, the images conjured up by these words have the power to invoke ready-made categories that defy reality.

Among the headlines this week were signs that local and national legislative efforts are gearing up for battle on both sides of the issue. In New York, pro-immigrant advocates expect to hold Governor Eliot Spitzer accountable for his campaign promise that would allow undocumented immigrants to obtain driver’s licenses http://www.thejournalnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070127/NEWS05/701270345/1021. Opponents argue that such a measure compromises national security: “"To think that we would put out the welcome mat to terrorists and illegal aliens five years after 9/11 is in my opinion, unconscionable," said Assemblyman Greg Ball, R-Carmel.” In contrast, proponents frame it as a practical matter that increases security and provides the financial responsibility that comes with insurance. “`The facts show that restricting immigrants' access to drivers' licenses does nothing to improve security,’ a Spitzer spokeswoman told The Associated Press in October. "All it does is drive immigrants into the shadows, creating a class of people with no public records." Currently, nine other states in the nation do not require lawful U.S. presence to get a license. In Massachusetts, among other states including Minnesota, legislators will be revisiting an in-state tuition bill. Though a version of the bill was defeated in the recent past some legislators who were against the legislation last time have expressed a willingness to revisit the issue. “Rep. Richard Ross, R-Wrentham, . . . agreed that legislators have a responsibility to revisit the proposal.”

A one-sided story in Atlantic City.com, calls to mind Governor Pawlenty’s report on the cost of undocumented immigrants to the state of Minnesota, without any consideration of the income they generate in the local economy or state tax coffers http://www.pressofatlanticcity.com/news/story/7153085p-7008557c.html. Reading this, an uninformed reader would think that New Jersey is facing imminent collapse because of an immigrant drain on the economy. No doubt states are looking for solutions, but many of them are not counting on deferral legislation to address the local impact of immigration. Alabama legislators are gearing up for contentious proposals that will place a large burden of responsibility on employers with those who fail to comply facing possible jail time http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities/16561561.htm. Here the consequences on the economy are clearly part of the debate. Boyd Campbell, a Montgomery attorney who specializes in immigration law, notes that “a ‘get tough’ policy on hiring immigrants could harm farmers and other employers who depend on immigrant workers. … He cited instances where peach farmers have needed hundreds of workers on short notice to save their crops during freezing weather.”

The first volley of immigration bills on Capitol Hill was passed by the senate this week http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/16547021.htm. “Federal contractors caught hiring illegal immigrants would be banned from government work for up to a decade under sanctions the Senate added unanimously to a minimum wage bill.” Not surprisingly, the bill, which requires punishment even if the hiring occurs inadvertently, prompted opposition from business leaders who feel that while the focus on federal employees who work in jobs that pertain to national security is understandable, the wholesale application to all government contractors will be unwieldy, burdensome, and potentially unfair. "The Sessions amendments are comparable to using the nuclear option for a paperwork violation," wrote Jeffrey D. Shoaf of the Associated General Contractors of America. Small businesses also feel that the conditions for exceptions favor large companies over small companies.

A cursory glance at these legislative proposals shows why comprehensive reform at the federal level is needed. Failure to act will result in piecemeal and localized approaches that are likely to vary widely by region and state. An LA Times editorial raises the specter, however, of federal legislators, primarily Democrats, avoiding the issue altogether as a way to keep the issue alive for the 2008 presidential race http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-ed-immig29jan29,0,7890768.story?coll=. The editorial asks: “Might Democrats be tempted to put off the issue in order to deprive the administration of a major domestic accomplishment? Will their embrace of economic populism translate into raising the drawbridge?” Such a move would not only be a sad commentary on American politics, it would also be a travesty for the lives of so many people to be passed around like a football because politicians are trying to use the issue to their advantage.

____________________________________________________

Louis Mendoza
Associate Professor
Department of Chicano Studies Chair
University of Minnesota
19 Scott Hall
72 Pleasant Street, Minneapolis 55455
Office: 612-624-8031
Email: lmendoza@umn.edu

Visit us on the Web: http://www.ihrc.umn.edu
To receive email notices about events at the IHRC: http://www.ihrc.umn.edu/about/e-notice.htm

Posted by Dan Ott at 09:11 PM | Permalink