Political, economic winds buffet America's 'golden door'

Immigration has been controversial throughout American history. Roger Daniels' book "Guarding the Golden Door" is a scholarly yet eminently readable account of U.S. immigration policy. Over the years, the author contends, the debate has been characterized by an internal contradiction: "the dualistic attitude that most Americans have developed toward immigration and immigrants, on the one hand reveling in the nation's immigrant past and on the other rejecting much of its immigrant present." The book provides the historical perspective to understand these dueling views as policymakers consider how to address the issue of newcomers.

How often we have heard that the United States is "a nation of immigrants"? Starting in preschool, Americans have been taught that we generously welcome, as Emma Lazarus wrote, " your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free " The "golden door" in the title of Roger Daniels' book still beckons refugees and immigrants, symbolized by Lady Liberty in New York Harbor. And yet, we are daily bombarded with the fear- and hate-filled messages of some who would close the door to new arrivals.

It's difficult to imagine a time when immigration was not a political and cultural hot potato, raising emotions on both sides to fevered pitch. Flashpoints have flared and died as issues of the day have changed — remember the Mariel boatlift and subsequent racist tide that rose against Cuban immigrants of the 1980s? Earlier it was the influx of Irish, Italians and Jews into the cities of the Northeast; today it is illegal border-crossers from Mexico.

Arguments echo through history

Daniels, the author of "Guarding the Golden Door," has contributed to the dialog with a scholarly yet eminently readable account of U.S. immigration policy. A renowned expert on immigration, Daniels is a consultant to the Public Broadcasting System and the immigration museum on Ellis Island, with a special expertise in Asian immigration history.

Appropriately enough, he points to the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1822 as the point of U.S. history in which the wide-open door of entry began to close. There was, however, a time when immigration was almost a non-issue. "President George Washington and all his successors through John Tyler took it as a given that continued immigration was vital for the health of the nation," Daniels writes. He quotes Washington in an address to Irish immigrants after the battle of Yorktown:

"The bosom of America is open to receive not only the opulent and respectable stranger, but the oppressed and persecuted of all nations and religions, whom we shall welcome to participate in all of our rights and privileges, if by decency and propriety of conduct they appear to merit the enjoyment."

Not that this benign spirit was universal throughout the land. Daniels also cites individuals whose racist attitudes contributed to the nascent nation's conversation. In an interesting sidelight, the author describes the curious obsession of Benjamin Franklin, prior to his travels in Europe, with maintaining the "whiteness" of U.S. society.

Franklin's definition of "whiteness" apparently was restricted to English and Saxon origin, even to the exclusion of other Western European nations. Franklin's "Observations Concerning the Increase of Mankind" in 1751, for example, targeted the burgeoning German population in Pennsylvania.

Interestingly, his comments about the German immigrants are typical of American complaints against immigrants irrespective of time and place, Daniels points out. " They are clannish they don't speak English and they are going to take over These are the arguments used against Italians, Jews and others a hundred years ago, and they may be heard today against Mexicans, Latinos, Hispanics, etc."

Frustration and confusion

In reviewing U.S. immigration policy over a sweeping arc of time, there is no discernable pattern in Daniels' work, except, perhaps, the lack of a pattern. Policy becomes the inevitable outgrowth of current events, cultural trends, and of course, economic and political climate. One tendency remains constant, the author contends: "the dualistic attitude that most Americans have developed toward immigration and immigrants, on the one hand reveling in the nation's immigrant past and on the other rejecting much of its immigrant present."

Periodically, there are regional flare-ups of nativism and race hatred culminating in riots, such as those in mid-19th century San Francisco. Always, the backdrop was fear of the "other," as well as more practical concerns such as the threat of immigrants taking away jobs from native-born Americans. Between World Wars I and II, immigration numbers dropped substantially as Congress aggressively enacted legislation designed to keep out this or that target population.

Things began to loosen up in the 1950s under the Truman administration and that trend continued, more or less, to this day. Always, the laws enacted were ill-conceived and often ineffective to the point where they actually backfired. One example — and one which played a big part in destroying the Immigration and Naturalization Service — was the Visa Waiver program.

Part of a larger immigration reform package passed by the Clinton administration, it was perceived as part of the INS's ineffective system — unfairly so, as the INS had opposed the measure. Later the INS took the fall when it became known that several of the Saudi perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks gained admittance to the U.S. under the program.

What is surprising is Daniels' contention that the events of September 11, 2001, have not had a substantial impact on either Americans' attitudes toward welcoming immigrants, or the number of immigrants. It did, however, have a great impact on the structure of policy enforcement, resulting in the abolishment of the INS and the placement of immigration enforcement under the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

Daniels does not seem optimistic that the DHS oversight of U.S. immigration policy will produce anything other than continued frustration, confusion and reactionary trends of the past when it comes to immigration issues. Time will tell. Meanwhile, Daniels provides data to back his view that an anti-immigration climate could prove disastrous to the nation — an opinion shared by former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan.

"The real population threat for mature economies is not the old Malthusian bugaboo of too many people, but instead of the shortage of workers, skilled and unskilled, in the so-called first world, the inevitable result of falling birthrates and extended lifespans," Greenspan said. Citing world census statistics, the author shows that other industrialized nations (such as in Western Europe) with restrictive immigration laws are looking ahead to an acute shortage of workers which, he notes, will have devastating effects on social insurance programs.

Bottom Line:

• The history of immigration policy in the U.S. is fraught with confusion, ignorance, misdirection and outright racism.
• The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 was the first restrictive immigration policy enacted; prior to this, anyone who came to the U.S. could stay and become naturalized.
• From 1882 to 1921, the doors to legal entry into the U.S. were slowly closed through a variety of policy initiatives.
• Immigration policy tightened during the Depression years and began to liberalize during the Truman administration.
• Trends toward openness continued and culminated with the "amnesties" of the 1980s under President Ronald Reagan.
• While immigration policies remain relatively liberal (so far) in the aftermath of 9/11, there are indications of further tightening in the future as the political climate surrounding immigration issues continues to heat up.