Contemporary Perspectives on Immigration

By Joel F. Wurl, Former Head of Research Collections & Associate Director, IHRC
The evolving dynamics of immigration and its impact in this area are fascinating to observe. Taking a ride on the local bus system in Alexandria, Arlington, Falls Church, or Annandale is like shuttling between events at the United Nations.

I was tempted to label this a “Perspective from Inside the Beltway,” but this is going to be more about things “near” the beltway and beyond. As some readers will recall, I had worked for many years at the IHRC, through September 2006 when I moved to the Washington DC area and currently living in Northern Virginia.

The evolving dynamics of immigration and its impact in this area are fascinating to observe. Taking a ride on the local bus system in Alexandria, Arlington, Falls Church, or Annandale is like shuttling between events at the United Nations. The spectrum of languages, attire, appearances, and more is a potent demonstration that this region contains one of the nation’s most broadly diverse populations. Some excellent research and analysis of this has been done by George Washington University’s Marie Price and the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace’s Audrey Singer (see, for example, The World in a Zip Code). As they have noted, the extraordinary heterogeneity and dispersion of the foreign born here don’t fit neatly into patterns and norms of settlement, past or present.

What does, however, ring familiar is a counter response to the growing non-native population. Interestingly, the locus of intensity for this reaction isn’t to be found in Fairfax and Arlington Counties, with the greatest number and percentage of foreign born, but in neighboring Prince William County, on the outer ring of suburban DC. And intense it has been. In October of last year, the county board enacted measures aimed at curtailing illegal immigration, including a policy that directs police to check the residency status of any criminal suspects they believe might have entered the country unlawfully. Almost no day goes by without some news coverage pertaining to this decision, its after effects, and its varied reception by locals. (For a couple of the most recent items in the Washington Post, see:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/27/AR2008042702432.html
and
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/20/AR2008042002136.html.)

As I sat down to make note of these circumstances, I received in the mail a little piece of analog comfort food to offset what sometimes feels like an unrelenting electronic diet – the latest publication catalog from the University of Illinois Press with history-related titles. Besides being thankfully reminded that knowledge still, indeed, can come from books and not just new media, I felt a little tinge of sadness to think, I believe accurately, that so many of the really exceptional-looking volumes listed will be read only by other specialists. How many of the newer Latino/a immigrants and those who live among them in Northern Virginia will read the new book Memories and Migrations, which has the promise of “introducing readers to the ways in which Latinas have shaped history?” The historical insights in a book like Making Lemonade out of Lemons, on Mexican American labor and leisure, could likely bring substance to ideas and attitudes as they continue to be shaped in places like Prince William County. Will such insights be discovered and learned in such places where the contest has been joined? It appears that the extraordinary new compendium American Dreaming, Global Realities, edited by Donna Gabaccia and Vicki Ruiz, has the true potential to help readers re-think immigration history, as the sub-title says, something that could be profoundly important in the way the general populace approaches today’s migration developments. Will this fresh approach to the subject be experienced and absorbed outside of the scholarly guild?

Probably the answers to these questions, as they long have been, are that ultimately the pure research and scholarship does wind its way down to the larger public, through the media, through adaptations in other forms directed at more general audiences, or through the gradual updating and reshaping of pre-collegiate education. But these forces are indirect and eventual. Of course, the disconnect between town and gown is nothing new, and I should add that few academic institutions I know of have worked harder to address this than the IHRC, with the very active engagement of staff, supporters, and advisory council members in historical documentation efforts, local community-driven research initiatives, and public history student projects, to name just a few.

I believe that people who make enforceable decisions about immigration do so with some notion of history. The past -- their sense of it -- is almost always invoked as a basis for their thinking. This happens inside the beltway, near the beltway, and beyond. Professional historians have a huge challenge to find better, more immediate ways to get their informed sensibilities directly into the minds of these people. It’s a challenge worth persistent response and attention – and maybe even some rethinking.

Posted by herna130 at 07:29 PM | Permalink

By Matteo Pretelli, Fulbright Scholar Researcher at the IHRC
The Latino vote will be very influential in the election for the next President of the United States. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/10/us/politics/10hispanics.html; http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/20080303/young-latino-voters-on-the-rise.htm; http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/07/us/07immig.html?scp=13&sq=immigration&st=nyt

In 2002 Hispanics outnumbered African-Americans and they have become the largest minority in the country, counting circa 32.8 million of people (60% with a Mexican ancestry). As the numbers of Latino voters increase, they are becoming an influential political lobby. Indeed, since the beginning of 2007 the National Association of Latino Elected Officials and the Hispanic Television Network Univision have promoted a national campaign to help Latinos obtain U.S. citizenship and vote in the next election. The reasons behind this strategy lay in the uncertain feelings many immigrants when faced with nativist feelings expressed in discussions of immigration. According to Stephanie Pillersdorf – speaker for Univision – after six months, this campaign is estimated to have increased the number of applications for citizenship in Los Angeles County by 146%.
In the presidential elections of 2004, President George W. Bush obtained 40% of Latino vote. http://www.pewtrusts.org/news_room_ektid34802.aspx ;http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/07/us/politics/07immig.html?ref=politics Yet, Federal agent raids against illegal immigrants and the enforcement of the Southern border soon lowered Latinos’ support of Bush.

Earning the Latino vote has become a main target for all Presidential candidates. Although it is not viewed by the public as important as arguments over Iraq and the war on terrorism, immigration law reform has become a priority in the political agenda. In 2006 and 2007 President Bush failed to gain Congressional support for new legislation. This political fiasco was only partially solved with the 26 October 2006 signing of the Border Secure Fence Act. This law authorizes the construction of a 700 mile fence along the U.S.-Mexico border in order to deter individuals from illegally entering the United States.

In the debate over the reform of immigration law candidates have differed. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/19/us/politics/19candidates.html?scp=2&sq=immigration+presidential+candidates&st=nyt; http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9805EFD91038F933A25751C1A9619C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=2; http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/05/us/politics/05debate.html; http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/23/opinion/23brooks.html
Among the Democrats, Hillary Clinton, strenuously searched out the Latino support, and obtained the endorsement of Antonio R. Villaraigosa, mayor of Los Angeles and one of the most outstanding figures of the Hispanic community. Senator Clinton endorsed a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants in the United States who have a job, pay taxes, and have a clear command of English, whereas she proposed hard penalties to employers who exploit illegal workers. Yet, in Spring 2007 she opposed a bipartisan bill to reform immigration law because it did not include a measure for immigrant family reunification. These positions have mostly been shared by the two other main Democratic candidates, Illinois Senator Barack Obama and South Carolina Senator Johnny R. Edwards.
In the Republican field, candidates’ voices were less homogeneous. Arizona Senator John McCain maintained the most moderate stance. He has called illegal immigrants sons of God who compassionately deserve a chance in the United States. But, seeking votes among a conservative electorate, he has also emphasized the reinforcement of the Southern border over reform of immigration law.
Italian-American candidate Rudolph Giuliani was even more ambiguous. A moderate Republican when he was mayor of New York City, Giuliani adopted policies against the criminalization of illegal immigrants, who become eligible for the city’s educational and medical public services. In 1996, he even intervened to impede public officials and physicians from denouncing illegal immigrants. Giuliani welcomed to New York any immigrants - even if illegally in the United States – who wished to work hard. However, in search of conservative voters Giuliani too switched his former stance, emphasizing instead the need to fight illegal immigration through the introduction of identification card. Pointing out the importance of a “safe” border and recalling his mayoral policy of using policemen to end criminality in New York (“Zero Tolerance”), he endorsed an increasing allocation of Patrol agents along the U.S.-Mexican border to deter further illegal accesses.
Giuliani was harshly criticized by another Republican candidate, former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, who made the fight against illegal immigration a cornerstone of his presidential campaign. Despite talking positively of a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants in 2005, during his bid for Republican ticket he accused Giuliani of having transformed New York City into a illegality “sanctuary”. Romney then proposed severely curtailing Federal funds to cities, such as San Francisco, which avoid criminalizing immigrants without documents. Both Giuliani and Romney had criticized the bipartisan bill in 2007: the former considered it as a compromise, the latter remained adamantly against the idea of conceding temporary visas to individuals illegally residing in the United States.
Two minor Republican candidates, Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson and former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee, had tough anti-immigrant stances as well. Thomson even proposed to curtail funds to cities and states which did not turnover illegal aliens to the Federal authorities and he requested to officially declare English as the national language. Huckabee advocated for curbing immigration from countries which sponsor terrorists. Furthermore, although during his governorship he provided support to illegal students, he proposed a national plan to expel illegal immigrants within 120 days

Posted by herna130 at 05:43 PM | Permalink

Lisong Liu is a PhD Candidate in the History Department at the University of Minnesota

In recent years American media have paid a lot of attention to the surging public interest in the Chinese language and the increasing Mandarin Chinese language programs in the US.

Traditionally the Chinese language had been taught mainly within Chinese immigrant communities to preserve cultural heritage among next generations. The normalization of US-China relations in the 1970s led to the establishment of Chinese language programs in American schools. However, up to the early 2000s, the Chinese language was still much undeveloped compared to other commonly taught languages such as Spanish, French, German, Italian and Japanese. A 2002 survey of college and university courses shows that less than 3 percent of total enrollment in foreign language is in Chinese, and the number of the enrollment at American elementary and secondary schools was even lower, with only 0.3 percent. (http://askasia.org/chinese/publications.htm, www.actfl.org/files/public/Enroll2000.pdf, http://www.adfl.org/projects/index.htm).

Realizing (again) its lack of understanding of non-Western societies and cultures after 9/11, the US government designated several languages as critical for its national security and launched the National Flagship Language Initiative (NFLI) in 2002. NFLI provided funding to major US universities to develop institutional and national infrastructure required to produce highly proficient language graduates in strategic languages such as Arabic, Chinese, Hindi/Urdu, Korean, Persian/Farsi, and Eurasian languages (Russian, Central Asian). http://www.nflc.org/nfli/languages.asp; http://www.nflc.org/projects/recent_projects/nfli; http://www.iie.org/programs/nsep/flagship/ In 2006, President Bush launched the National Security Language Initiative (NSLI) which was designed to increase the number of Americans learning strategic languages through new and expanded programs from kindergarten through university and into the workforce. http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2006/58733.htm; http://exchanges.state.gov/nsli/fact_sheet.htm

With China’s fast economic development and increasing global influence, Mandarin Chinese has been given intensive attention as one of the critical languages. In 2005, the National Security Education Program chose Chinese as the prototype for a new major development of the NFLI: the Chinese K-16 Flagship http://www.actfl.org/files/public/NFLIChineseK-16PilotProjectPR.pdf In Congress, Senators Joseph Lieberman and Lamar Alexander introduced the US-China Cultural Engagement Act in May 2005 which aimed to provide $1.3 billion to enhance Chinese-language education in K-12 schools, expand the exchange of artists, scientists, and students between the US and China, and promote scholarly studies on contemporary China. http://www.nccaonline.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=22&Itemid=36

This surging public interest in Chinese language and culture contributes to Chinese immigrants’ interaction with and integration into the American society. In the Twin Cities, social and cultural events organized by Chinese immigrants have attracted more and more Americans not of Chinese origin (http://www.caam.org/modules/wfchannel/index.php?link=home;
http://www.mn3c.org/home.php). The Ha Family Entertainment, a local troupe performing Chinese dance, has witnessed increasing demand for Chinese cultural performances in American schools and local festivals (see this audio slideshow of its lion dance in the New Year’s party of Yinghua Academy, the first Chinese immersion school in MN: http://www.startribune.com/slideshows/15475716.html). During the late December 2007 and mid-May 2008, it has been scheduled for 18 performances in various circumstances including the grand opening of a law firm and other cultural activities of large corporations such as Target, Best Buy and the Marriott Hotel (http://www.ha-family.com/)

While the surging American public interest in Chinese language and culture has provided unprecedented opportunities for Chinese communities in the US, a historical reflection cautions us about the potential challenges and risks as well. There had been similar American public interest in the Russian language in the 1950s and 1960s and in the Japanese language in the 1980s, and both cases remind us that American interest in foreign languages and cultures had been usually triggered by the fear of the US government of those cultures as existing or potential challengers: the Soviet Union as an “evil” communist rival and Japan as a formidable economic competitor. In the current case of China, things may be even more complicated as China may be perceived as a combination of both. This in turn will place Chinese Americans in a trap of being perceived as potentially disloyal and harmful to the US national interest.
Recent history indicates that this potential risk is not imagined but is lurking right around the corner. In 1982, with increasing Japanese economic competition, Vincent Chin, a Chinese American, was mistaken as Japanese and beaten to death by two white Americans working in the declining auto industry hit hard by its competitive Japanese counterpart. In 1999, Dr. Wen-ho Lee, a Chinese American scientist from Taiwan, was falsely charged as a spy for mainland China, a case clearly revealing the US government’s fear of the “red China” and its readiness to cast suspicion and exert persecution on Chinese Americans.
This potential risk has been made even more delicate by recent efforts of the Chinese government of boosting Chinese language programs abroad. Since 2004, the Office of Chinese Language Council International (Hanban), a government agency promoting the spread of Chinese around the world, has started opening Chinese language and cultural centers (Confucius Institutes) abroad. It has sent over 2000 voluntary teachers abroad and up to July 2007, there had been more than 170 Confucius Institutes established in more than 50 countries. The US has the largest number of Confucius Institutes (18), followed by Thailand (13). http://www.hanban.org/en_hanban/index.php

While current American attitude towards the spread of Chinese language programs is welcoming in general, there has been no lack of concerns and suspicions about China’s political influence and expansion of power (http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0104/p17s01-legn.html, http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=89350477) Therefore, while emphasizing its purpose of promoting cultural exchanges and friendship, the Chinese government needs to be cautious about both guarding against any tendency to misuse its energy for unwarranted purposes and avoiding being mistaken by other countries as disguised expansionism or neocolonialism (http://www.economist.com/opinion/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10853534). Also importantly, the Chinese government needs to be cautious about the delicate impact of its increasing global influence on Chinese immigrants and their descendants abroad.

On the part of the US, a more efficient way seems to be supporting the learning of Chinese and other foreign languages not simply for national security but for long-term solid cultural understanding. Its support for foreign languages cannot be just responsive to constantly rising and ever-changing crises but should be based on sincere respect for and acceptance of different cultures. A fundamental guiding principle for foreign language programs in the US should not be “clash of civilizations” but be cultural coexistence, mutual enrichment and co-prosperity. By enlarging foreign language programs, the US also gains a great opportunity to engage and understand its own diverse ethnic communities and to better integrate them into the mainstream society rather than single certain groups out as suspicious aliens when needed or convenient.

Posted by herna130 at 10:06 PM | Permalink

Dan Detzner, Professor College of Education and Human Development, University of Minnesota

Researchers, policy makers, immigration lawyers, and social service providers often focus on the issues confronting individual immigrants while overlooking how embedded each individual is within communally oriented transnational families, tribal groups, and clans.

Those who study families make use of systems theories to understand that what happens to one individual or smaller group with the family (subsystem), affects the entire family system. Through such a multidimensional lens we can discern the basic elements needed in comprehensive immigration policy reform so that families and communities are not pulled apart by the process instead of reunited and integrated.

The importance of one person in the family getting a foot in the door to citizenship through military service has become obvious since 9-11 when it became possible for “non U.S. citizens” to earn the right to become citizens through active duty and honorable service. During the past 6 years, more than 37,000 “green card warriors” have achieved citizenship through this program; more than 7300 requests are pending the 7-10 month review process; and 20,500 non citizens are estimated to be currently serving in the armed forces. In some cases, soldiers have served 2-3 tours in Iraq and/or Afghanistan before making application.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/03/27/greencard.marine.folo/

Although one or more family members may be citizens, that does not guarantee that immigration laws and judges will treat other family members who are not citizens with the best interests of the family in mind. In a lecture focusing on this topic Professor David Thronson reports that some “mixed status” families, where a child has one parent who is not a natural born or documented American citizen, can be problematic when it comes to deportation. Although he argues that family and immigration laws are closely related, the family part is “often missing” from debates about immigration reform. When one aspect of immigration policy encourages family reunification and another aspect promotes family separation, it is clear that the systems are not working well together.
http://www.unlvrebelyell.com/article.php?ID=11788

There are numerous examples in the news every day. Because Congress has failed to act on reform and it is politically popular in the post 9-11 environment, more than 40 states have been busy trying to crack down on undocumented immigrants whether they are parents or minors. Under the guise of the rule of law, families are separated when parents are pulled away from jobs, arrested, and deported. An estimated 2 million mixed families are living in fear that their breadwinner won’t be home for dinner if stopped for an auto violation or found to be working without appropriate documentation.
http://www.columbiatribune.com/2008/Mar/20080328Feat002.asp

Another example of a family who has played by all the rules but still found themselves in a difficult situation is a South African family living in Ohio who were recruited to teach in the U.S. and later applied for permanent residency. Although the married couple’s application has been processed and their pathway to citizenship made clear, this is not the case for their 18 year old son. Due to immigration law stipulations, they were not able to apply for their son’s residency until after theirs was approved in 2005. Meanwhile, the son was becoming ineligible as a minor as he waited for the delayed paper work to be reviewed and approved. The parents are worried that he could be picked up and deported since technically he is no longer a minor and does not have documentation.
http://www.limaohio.com/story.php?IDnum=51001

The problems confronting children and immigration agencies are the topic of a forthcoming conference in Chicago that is addressing the absence of communication and collaboration between child welfare and immigration systems. One sponsor of the program pointed out that “many families today are dealing with both the immigration and the child welfare system - –yet the professionals representing these systems rarely work together.” The hope is that the conference will bring together both parties to stimulate dialogue and cooperation for the benefit of families and communities.
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/03-28-2008/0004782136&EDATE=

There are other ways that families and communities can benefit from dialogue about immigration and what kind of nation we want this to become. Since the winnowing of the more extreme candidates who were running for their party’s nomination for the presidency, we are less likely to be hearing nativist and reactionary rhetoric about immigrants from the remaining three candidates. In the absence of comprehensive reform some states (New Jersey and California) are trying to make a positive contribution by passing state versions of the Dream Act—a proposal to enable children of immigrants to pay in-state tuition at state colleges and universities even if there parents are not documented. In other states (Minnesota is an example), the governor and some legislators are arguing against state Dream Act laws as a way of enforcing the rule of law while punishing the children of parents who came to work in the U.S. without papers. Depending on the outcome of the November elections, it may be possible to reintroduce a federal Dream Act that would make it possible for all children, regardless of parental heritage, residency, or legality to achieve a higher education.
http://www.alternet.org/rights/80643/

In a op-ed column entitled “disorder at the border”, Timothy Egan applauds the fact that the political demagogues have left the stage, leaving the three most moderate voices on comprehensive immigration reform still standing. This fact may well put an end to the seemingly futile and very expensive effort to build a wall across the Mexican-U.S. border. Property rights seem to conflict with where the wall needs to run and not many are seeking to have their agricultural land, back yards, or college campus divided by a wall topped with razor wire and patrolled by armed borders guards and minutemen vigilantes. The deportation of undocumented immigrants and the separation of families that results is also not going very well in Arizona—a state with an estimated half million undocumented workers. Although a new state law has been passed placing penalties on the businesses who hire them, not a single person has been found, despite numerous reports and profiles that have been followed up on by police. Whatever the results of the fall election, it is likely that persons from Arizona and the southwest will be involved in brokering a deal that leads to comprehensive reform.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/29/opinion/29egan.html?ref=opinion

Posted by herna130 at 05:36 PM | Permalink