The Politics of Immigration Reform

1984 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 486-504 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan K. Simpson

The U.S. is the target for international migration, more now than ever. Population growth and economic stagnation in the Third World are increasing the pressures for outmigration, and current immigration law is wholly incapable of responding to the ever increasing flow of illegal immigrants. Border apprehensions of illegal aliens in the U.S. were up 40 percent during 1983, and total apprehensions reached 1.25 million by the year's end.1 Recent public opinion polls have disclosed that an overwhelming majority of the American public demands immigration reform, and yet we as a nation have been distinctly unwilling or unable to respond to this clear public sentiment. This article will discuss the politics of the issue: the current “Simpson-Mazzoli” Immigration Reform and Control Act, previous immigration legislation, current counterproposals for U.S. immigration policy, and the political realities of immigration reform.

Author(s):  
Jimmy Patiño

The Conclusion is a brief analysis of how the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) both conceded to and fragmented the Chicano/Mexicano immigrant rights mobilizations facilitated in part by the CCR. Signed by a Republican, it was the first mass amnesty act revealing the influence of the human rights components of Chicano/Mexicano organizing that activists in San Diego had taken part in formulating beginning in the late 1960s. Yet the act also marginalized the abolitionist position of the movement, giving concessions by providing amnesty to a subsection of undocumented migrants, while further militarizing the U.S.-Mexico border. The chapter concludes with an analysis of two divergent responses by Chicano/Mexicano activists o the new law: those who invested their energies in politicizing and assisting undocumented migrants who qualified for the amnesty provisions of IRCA by working with immigration state mechanisms and other activists who continued to criticize the “carrot and stick” immigration policies and maintain the call to abolish immigration state apparatuses.


1983 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 22-26
Author(s):  
Melvin Krauss

Public opinion polls indicate that West Europeans continue to share values with the U.S. and have no illusions concerning the Soviet threat or what life is like under a Communist government. At the same time, an unmistakable and disturbing trend toward neutralism, pacifism and accommodation of the Soviet Union exists today in Western Europe.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 335-350
Author(s):  
Concha Pérez-Curiel ◽  
Ricardo Domínguez-García ◽  
Gloria Jiménez-Marín

(1) In a context of an unprecedented global pandemic, an analysis of the effects of political disinformation on audiences is needed. The U.S. election process culminating in the official proclamation of Joe Biden as president has led to an increase in the public’s distrust of politics and its leaders, as public opinion polls show. In this context, the change in the electorate’s attitude towards Donald Trump, throughout the legislature and especially after the elections, stands out. So, the objective of this research was to determine, through the measurement of surveys, the views of the electorate on the behavior of the Republican candidate and the possible causes that determine the loss of confidence in his speeches and comments. (2) The methodology, a comparative quantitative-qualitative approach, analyzed the responses collected by Pew Research waves 78 and 80 (2020 and 2021). Specifically, the surveys analyzed were 11,818 U.S. adults in the case of the American Trends Panel 2020 and 5360 in the case of the same panel for 2021. (3) Results showed the change of position of the electorate, especially Republicans, in the face of the policy of delegitimization of the process and Trump’s populist messages on Twitter. (4) Conclusions pointed in two directions: society has decided not to trust Trump, while at the same time showing distrust about the correct management of the electoral ballot.


Author(s):  
A. A. Filippenko

By the beginning of the XXI century, the US had about 12 million illegal aliens and the immigration reform was evidently much needed. The Immigration Act of 1990 was significantly outdated and required revision. Additional regulations that passed in the 1990-s had to be systematized. The White House and the president George W. Bush inclined to the comprehensive immigration reform that would include an amnesty for the certain part of the illegal aliens. Some lawmakers were ready to strike a deal, but than happened the 9/11 tragedy. Immigration reform was shelved and turned into a matter of national security. Immigration reform bills were taken into consideration only in conjunction with boarder security bills. Edward Kennedy was very much aware of the issue's complexity and the need for reform; he did all he could to reach a compromise with his fellow Republicans. John McCain became his closest ally in the reform. Democrats made considerable concessions, while moderate Republicans were willing to meet them halfway, but the conservatives would not let the Congress adopt a new legislation, calling any attempt at comprehensive immigration reform an amnesty for the criminals. During the 107-110 Congresses the immigration reform was thoroughly worked through from both sides, but the proposed bills rarely got to the floor and never passed both Houses. Even though the time has passed, suggestions offered and deals reached during the Bush presidency did not lose the edge and any new immigration legislation is going be based on the 2002-2008 bills.


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen W. Yale-Loehr

21 International Lawyer, (1987)Maurice A. Roberts and Stephen W. Yale-LoehrThe Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA), also known as the Simpson-Rodino Act, is the most significant piece of immigration legislation in over thirty years. It radically revamps this already complicated area of law. Its impact on employers is particularly great, and can be seen in three ways. First, fines of up to $10,000 and even jail sentences can be imposed on businesses that knowingly hire undocumented aliens. Second, every employer must now verify and maintain records on the immigration and citizenship status of each prospective employee, even if the applicant is a U.S. citizen. Third, antidiscrimination provisions prohibit all but the smallest employers from discriminating in hiring or firing on the basis of an individual's national origin or citizenship status. Persons who feel they have been discriminated against may initiate an action against the employer.These provisions create major new responsibilities for businesses, and in effect deputize them as junior immigration inspectors. Employers must now provide the sort of enforcement check that the woefully undermanned Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) is unable to perform. Lawyers will feel these duties and prohibitions doubly: first in advising their business clients, and second in having to comply themselves, in their own role as employers.This article analyzes the employer sanctions and antidiscrimination provisions of the Simpson-Rodino Act. The article points out ambiguities, gaps, and unanswered questions in the statute and supplementing regulations, and provides practical pointers for attorneys, businesses, and individuals.


2005 ◽  
Vol 74 (2) ◽  
pp. 195-236 ◽  
Author(s):  
THOMAS R. MADDUX

Immigration was not a major priority for President Ronald Reagan and his conservative agenda in 1981. Political, economic, and foreign policy considerations, however,forced the Reagan administration to create a task force and address the issues of refugees, legal immigration priorities and numbers, and escalating numbers of illegal aliens. This article evaluates the task force's review of the issues, its recommendations to the President, and his response. Although immigration remained a secondary issue for the Reagan administration, the White House's response to the issue in 1981 offers revealing insights on Reagan's management style, on the disagreements within his administration over how to deal with illegal aliens, and on the ultimate contribution of the White House to the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986.


1990 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 142-161 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan Huss

RESUMEN El requisite de educatión en el Acto sobre Reforma y Limitatión de Inmigraciôn a losEstados Unidos (1986): Estudio de un ejemplo de una planificatión lingüística ineficaz El 6 de noviembre de 1986, el presidente Ronald Reagan firmó como ley el Acto sobre Reforma y Limitaciôn de Inmigraciôn (1986). El objetivo de la ley es detener la corriente de inmigrantes ilegales a través de la frontera mejicano-estadounidense y aplicar sanciones a patronos estadounidenses que hacen uso de trabajadores ilegales. La sección 2 del Acto especifica un programo legislativo en dos partes, por medio del cual extranjeros que habitan en Estados Unidos desde el 1 de enero de 1982, tienen derecho a solicitar residencia legal, temporal en primera instancia, y permanente posteriormente. Este programo de legalización está con-siderado como menos costoso que la deportaciôn de millones de extranjeros ilegales. Un requisito para la adquisición de esta residencia legal es que los extranjeros a los que se ha acordado este privilegio, sean capaces de probar un conocimiento bâsico del inglés, historia estadounidense y conocimientos sociales, o intenten conseguir ese conocimiento asistiendo a una instrucción de al menos cuarenta horas en un programa reconocido por el INS (Servicio de Naturalización e Inmigración). El requisito de educación se encuentra en la ley para lógicamente apoyar la concesión de residencia permanente a extranjeros ilegales, principalmente de origen hispánico, antes que a otros extranjeros que solicitan residencia dentro de otros programas de inmigración. El cono-cimiento del inglés esta considerado como un signo de integration en la sociedad. El inglés es un importante sfmbolo cultural para esa sociedad, y los legisladores piensan que se ve amena-zado por una creciente minorfa hispanohablante. Puesto que el objetivo del requisito de education no es capacitar a los participantes para alcanzar una competencia funcional en inglés, el resultado es una polftica lingufstica costosa e ineficaz. RESUMO La klereca devigo en la Usona Akto pri Enmigra Reformo kaj Limigo (1986): Studo de ekzemplo de neefika lingvoplanado La 6-an de novembro 1986, Prezidento Ronald Reagan jure subskribis la Usonan Akton pri Enmigra Reformo kaj Limigo (1986). La celo de la leĝo estas haltigi la fluon de neleĝaj enmigrantoj trans la usonmeksikan limon kaj apliki sankciojn kontraŭ usonaj dungantoj, kiuj uzas neleĝajn laborfortojn. Sekcio 2 de la Akto specifigas dustadian leĝigan programon, per kiu fremduloj, kiuj loĝas ene de Usono jam de la 1-a de januaro 1982, rajtas peti unue dumtempan kaj poste konstantan laŭleĝan lograjton. Oni konsideras tiun programon de leĝigo pli mal-multekosta ol deportado de milionoj da neleĝaj fremduloj. Unu devigo por tia laŭlega lo|rajto estas tio, ke fremduloj, kiuj ricevas tiun privilegion, povu montri scion de baza angla lingvo, usona historio kaj sociaj scioj, aŭ klopodu atingi tian scion per ĉeesto de minimume kvardek horoj da instruado en programo rekonata de INS (la Servo pri Naturalizo kaj Enmigrado). La klereca devigo troviĝas en la lego por logike subteni la transdonon de konstanta loĝrajto al neleĝaj fremduloj, cefe hispandevenaj, antaû tiuj alilandanoj, kiuj petas leĝan loĝrajton laŭ aliaj enmigraj programoj. Scipovo de la angla estas konsiderata kiel signo de integriĝo en la ĝeneralan socion. La angla lingvo estas grava kultura simbolo por tiu socio, kaj leĝfarantoj kredas, ke ĝi estas minacata de kreskanta hispanparolanta minoritato. Pro tio, ke la celo de la klereca devigo ne estas ebligi al la partoprenantoj atingi funkcian kompetentecon en la angla, la rezulto estas multekosta kaj neefika lingva pohtiko.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document