Daniels Chapter 16

After reading this chapter, I became more aware of the overall attitude towards immigration now. Although the book only speculate into the 1980s, Daniels acute observation of a recent return to nativism still holds true in 2012. Daniels points out, “There is one further reason to believe that immigrants will retain its central position on the American agenda: the rediscovery of the immigrant tradition by the American people” (407). It’s interesting that he makes this observation at the time the book was written and it is still very much a centerpiece of both party platforms. Also, the nativist policies of today are unlike those before because now they are not as intentionally racist.

The Immigration Reform Act of 1986 is a very interesting piece of legislation to examine closely. I thought it was interesting that the bill is noted for being nativist in nature but not overtly racist like its counterpart in the 1920s. Despite the aversion from obvious racism, it was interesting to note Republic Senator Alan Simpson of Wyoming had to say about cultural homogeneity of the country. Simpson writes, “Furthermore, if language and cultural separation rise about a certain level, the unity and political stability of our nation will—in time – be seriously eroded” (391). I found this quote to be most interesting because it is almost a contradiction to saying that this bill was not intentionally racist. Here, Simpson is asking for the country to become more uniform in language and culture in order to stay politically stable, yet America has been founded on the very backs of immigrants from all different nations, languages and cultural backgrounds. The cultural diversity of our country is what makes it unique, yet Simpson is asking us to come together as one. I can understand why there is a strong push for all using English, but I never understood why there is a strong push to be culturally united.

Along these lines, I found the discussion of Amnesty which was established under the Immigration Reform Act of 1986 quite interesting. In order to become eligible for amnesty you had to meet one of two requirements, either  an “illegal alien who could prove that they had been in the United States continuously since December 31, 1981” or  “demonstrate that they had worked in U.S. agriculture for at least ninety days between May 1, 1985 and May 1, 1986” (392-293). Under these provisions, 3.1 million people were accepted into the program to eventually be granted citizenship, but there were many obstacles to face along the way. Some of the requirements included: “have no criminal convictions or pending prosecutions, submit a negative test for AIDS antibodies, not have been on welfare and otherwise demonstrate financial responsibility, and demonstrate knowledge of the English language and United States history” (393). This seems like a lot to ask of someone just to be granted citizenship. In addition, many native born Americans barely know United States history or can say they’ve never had a criminal conviction. In addition, most people applying for amnesty were males from Mexico but their families were not eligible for amnesty, especially their children, because they had not been working here. Although amnesty seemed like a good idea, it also managed to create a lot of additional problems linked to chain migration. Also, people coming after the cutoff date were not eligible for amnesty.