2
Background to Contemporary U.S. Immigration

At many times in the last two decades, photographs of our planet from outer space would have revealed movements of people on a massive scale. People have moved in response to the growing interdependence of the major economic powers and to the wide disparities between countries in income and employment opportunities. Migrants have also been driven by political factors—witness the large-scale shifts of populations from Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union after the break-up of the Soviet hegemony and the famine- and war-induced migrations in Africa. By the early 1980s, 77 million people were living outside their country of birth, 14 million of them (about one in five) in the United States.

Because of its commanding economic position and its long-held reputation as a haven, the United States continues to attract immigrants—although movements of refugees and asylum seekers affect many European countries, Australia, and Canada as well. Temporary movements, stimulated in part by the demands of multinational companies for the rapid transfer of their employees, have become a major concern for developed nations. And fears about illegal immigration are not confined to the United States; other developed countries have experienced large, and often organized, flows of illegal immigrants. These developments highlight the need for a better understanding of the historical context for the global changes that form the backdrop to U.S. immigration.

In this chapter, we briefly outline the landmarks of this country's immigration legislation to highlight their role in shaping the historical ebbs and flows in the number of immigrants and in their characteristics. Second, we describe the main features of the long-term swings in these features of immigration. We detail the main characteristics of contemporary immigration laws, as shaped by our current "preference system." We then highlight the numbers and attributes of the other foreigners who come to our shores—the nonimmigrants and undocumented



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 20
--> 2 Background to Contemporary U.S. Immigration At many times in the last two decades, photographs of our planet from outer space would have revealed movements of people on a massive scale. People have moved in response to the growing interdependence of the major economic powers and to the wide disparities between countries in income and employment opportunities. Migrants have also been driven by political factors—witness the large-scale shifts of populations from Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union after the break-up of the Soviet hegemony and the famine- and war-induced migrations in Africa. By the early 1980s, 77 million people were living outside their country of birth, 14 million of them (about one in five) in the United States. Because of its commanding economic position and its long-held reputation as a haven, the United States continues to attract immigrants—although movements of refugees and asylum seekers affect many European countries, Australia, and Canada as well. Temporary movements, stimulated in part by the demands of multinational companies for the rapid transfer of their employees, have become a major concern for developed nations. And fears about illegal immigration are not confined to the United States; other developed countries have experienced large, and often organized, flows of illegal immigrants. These developments highlight the need for a better understanding of the historical context for the global changes that form the backdrop to U.S. immigration. In this chapter, we briefly outline the landmarks of this country's immigration legislation to highlight their role in shaping the historical ebbs and flows in the number of immigrants and in their characteristics. Second, we describe the main features of the long-term swings in these features of immigration. We detail the main characteristics of contemporary immigration laws, as shaped by our current "preference system." We then highlight the numbers and attributes of the other foreigners who come to our shores—the nonimmigrants and undocumented

OCR for page 20
--> immigrants. Finally, we compare U.S. approaches to immigration with those of other countries. A Word about Terminology For clarity's sake we first define a few terms that will be used in this volume. Immigration and emigration generally refer to movements of people into and out of the United States. Foreign-born persons who enter the United States for residence are immigrants;1 residents of the United States, whether native- or foreign-born, who leave the country to settle elsewhere are emigrants. Net migration is the difference between the two. If the number of people entering the United States exceeds the number who leave, net migration will be positive and immigration will contribute to America's population growth. A distinction is made between legal and illegal (or undocumented) immigrants. Among those who intend to reside permanently in this country, legal immigrants apply for and receive permanent resident visas, "green cards" allowing them to live here indefinitely. Although illegal immigrants are often lumped together as if they formed one homogeneous group, people become illegal immigrants in three ways. The first way is by entering the country illegally; they enter without inspection and at some place other than a lawful point of entry, usually across a land border. The second way is by staying beyond the authorized period after their legal entry, as some foreign students do. And the third way is by violating the terms of their legal entry; tourists become illegal immigrants by taking jobs here. Most people who enter the United States legally do not intend to become permanent residents. These people, referred to as nonimmigrants by the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), are authorized to stay in the United States for a specified length of time. The types of visas granted reflect the purpose of the visit to the United States, of which tourism is by far the most dominant. In addition, foreign students may study in the United States for several years; foreign diplomats and foreign members of the staffs of international organizations also have nonimmigrant status. This report largely ignores nonimmigrants, except when pertinent to its focus on the economic and demographic consequences of immigration.2 1   The Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) has a more restricted use of the term "immigrant." In INS usage, an immigrant is an alien admitted to the United States as a lawful permanent resident. Under the INS definition, such undocumented aliens or foreign students on a temporary entrance visa are not immigrants, even though they may be enumerated in the decennial census and included in federal government surveys. We note in this report when there a different usage for the term "immigrant." 2   Although we do not explicitly address this group, nonimmigrants are indirectly included to some extent in our report because they are included in census data, pay taxes, influence public opinion polls, and constitute a stock of persons who may become illegal immigrants.

OCR for page 20
--> Finally, refugees and asylees are a special group of foreign residents who have fled their own countries because of a fear of persecution. The distinction between these two groups is that refugees apply for admission to an Immigration and Naturalization Service official outside the United States (think of Cubans seeking to flee Castro's Cuba), whereas asylees seek protection within the United States or at a port of entry (think of a defector from a foreign ballet company on tour in this country). Refugees and asylees are generally admitted to the United States as nonimmigrants, although their status may be adjusted later. Although these are useful formal definitions, much of the evidence presented in this volume is based on data compiled by the Bureau of the Census, which frequently do not permit distinctions based on these terms of law. For example, the Census Bureau typically presents information on foreign-born persons without regard to their immigrant status. Many foreign-born persons enumerated in the decennial census are immigrants, but some are nonimmigrants and some are illegal immigrants. Census data also do not designate the visa status at the time of arrival in the United States, so we do not know whether a person may have entered the United States as a legal immigrant, as a refugee, or as a nonimmigrant who subsequently adjusted his or her status to permanent resident. Moreover, census data on immigrants by period of arrival do not correspond to INS data on annual immigrant admissions. In INS data, immigrant arrivals are dated by the year in which an alien is admitted to the United States as a permanent resident; respondents to the census, however, are directed to provide the date at which they came to stay in the United States, which may be different. U.S. Immigration Laws and Trends During the last century, many restrictions on immigration have been placed into law by the federal government. These restrictions have dealt with five generic issues that have always been at the core of the country's political dialogue on immigration policy. First and most basic, how many people should be allowed into the United States? Second, within that number, who shall be let in and who shall be excluded? In those decisions, what weights should be assigned to nationality or race, family ties, economic contribution, and economic self-sufficiency? Third, how should the United States deal with the unique problems that refugees pose? Fourth, what resources should be devoted to interdiction and deportation of illegal or undocumented immigrants, and what sanctions should be imposed on American institutions that deal with illegal immigrants, whether in the workplace, the schools, or hospitals? Finally, to what extent should the United States treat immigrants, whether legal or illegal, differently from citizens—in the right to vote, treatment by the criminal justice system, and eligibility for publicly provided services.3 3   An important aspect of immigration is the meaning and criteria for U.S. citizenship. Chapter 8 presents a comparison of citizenship requirements in the United States and in other countries, as well

OCR for page 20
--> Immigration legislation over the past century has embodied the ever-evolving answers to these questions. Ebbs and flows in the volume and composition of immigration have not always been dictated by conscious policy decisions and legislation, but they certainly have been shaped by them. This section describes that evolution and also reviews recent legislation of special significance. Until 1875, no direct federal legislation restricted admission of aliens into the country or the automatic qualification of immigrants and their children as citizens. States and the federal government did, however, impose some restrictions on immigration before 1875. In the colonial period, several colonies enacted laws to prohibit the entrance of criminals. After independence, many states restricted the entrance of paupers from outside the United States. And, before 1875, certain federal provisions affected immigration, such as laws to prohibit Chinese ''coolies" on American vessels. But even when there was little federal immigration legislation, immigration has been a subject of ongoing discussion throughout U.S. history. Changes in public policy have quickened in this century, which has witnessed periodic and significant revisions in federal immigration policy. Table 2.1 provides a brief summary of major federal immigration legislation. The initial federal attempts at controlling immigration dealt not with overall numbers, but instead with the types of people who were admitted. The first restrictive immigration law, passed in 1875, prohibited persons who were destitute, engaged in immoral activities, or physically handicapped. Direct and blatant exclusion of people based on their race was a major focus of early immigration legislation. The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, for example, was largely a response to racism and to anxiety about threats from cheap immigrant labor. Until 1860, virtually all immigrants to the United States were from Germany, Ireland, and the United Kingdom. After 1860, growing numbers came from Scandinavia, China, and South America, drawn by the job opportunities in the expanding American West. In the 1860s, for instance, about one-third of the western miners were Chinese.4 As the numbers of immigrant laborers increased, so did opposition from native-born labor groups. This was the impetus behind the Chinese Exclusion Act. It limited the number of Chinese allowed to enter the United States; later amendments ultimately prohibited immigration of Chinese altogether. The Immigration Act of 1891 broadened the role of the federal government in monitoring and regulating immigration. Creating the Office of Immigration, the precursor to today's Immigration and Naturalization Service, this act directed the superintendent of immigration to enforce immigration laws under the supervision of the secretary of the treasury. Concern about Asian immigration, originally specific only to the Chinese,     as a discussion of recent naturalization trends. For a background on the evolution of the concept of citizenship, see Klusmeyer (1996). 4   Many others, experienced in mining operations, came from Chile, Peru, and Mexico.

OCR for page 20
--> TABLE 2.1 Major U.S. Legislation on Immigration Legislation Provisions Chinese Exclusion Act, 1882 Restricted immigration of Chinese laborers for 10 years. Prohibited Chinese naturalization. Provided deportation procedures for illegal Chinese in the United States. Immigration Act of 1891 Provided the first comprehensive immigration laws for the United States. Established the Bureau of Immigration within the Department of the Treasury. Directed the Immigration Bureau to deport unlawful aliens. Immigration Act of 1924 Imposed the first numerical limit on immigration. Began a national-origin quota system, which greatly restricted immigration from countries outside Northern and Western Europe. Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 Continued national-origin quotas. Set a quota for aliens with skills needed in the United States. Immigration and Nationality Act Amendments of 1965 Repealed the national-origin quotas. Initiated a 7-category visa system for family unification and skills. Set a quota for Western Hemisphere immigration for the first time and set a country limit of 20,000 immigrants for the Eastern Hemisphere. expanded to the Japanese in the early twentieth century. The 1907 Gentleman's Agreement with Japan—so called because it was arranged with the cooperation of the Japanese government—restricted immigration from that country. Japanese immigration was formally and unilaterally prohibited in the Japanese Exclusion Act of 1924. Even though the distinctions made in successive pieces of legislation may seem peculiar in today's light, each "new" wave of immigrants always has seemed different from its predecessors. For example, the sharp increases in the 1880s in "new" European immigrants—from Austria-Hungary, Italy, Greece, Poland, and Russia—provoked a strong reaction in the United States. This reaction intensified with the wave of immigrants in the first two decades of the new century—more than 1 million immigrants each year for several years, over half of whom were from Italy, Russia, and Austria-Hungary. And concerns became more urgent because the rise of immigration coincided, for some years, with periods of economic weakness and high unemployment in the United States. The Dillingham Commission, one of several appointed around this time to examine

OCR for page 20
--> Legislation Provisions Immigration and Nationality Act Amendments of 1976 Extended the 20,000 country limit for the Western Hemisphere. Refugee Act of 1980 Established the first systematic procedures for refugee admission. Removed refugees from the preference system for visa categories. Began a program for refugee resettlement. Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 Started employer sanctions for knowingly hiring illegal aliens. Created a program for legalizing illegal aliens already residing in the United States. Increased border enforcement. Immigration Act of 1990 Increased legal immigration ceilings. Tripled the numerical limits for employment-based immigration. Created a diversity admissions category. Illegal Immigration Act of 1996 Introduced a pilot telephone verification program for employer to authenticate the legal immigration status of potential workers. Expanded restrictions on access of legal immigrants to welfare benefits. Increased border enforcement. immigration, recommended that immigrants be required to be literate and that the ban on Asian immigrants be continued. Congress followed these recommendations in 1917 when it required immigrants over age 16 to be literate in English or their own language, and it banned those from certain "barred zones" in Asia. Immigration slackened during World War I but resumed at a high level after the war, despite shortages of jobs and housing in this country. Then, public opinion shifted again. In response to the economic situation and with widespread public support, Congress enacted the 1921 Quota Act. This important piece of legislation and its follow-up in 1924 set the broad outlines of immigration policy for the next half century. Most important, it dictated that the favored few would come from countries that had already sent large numbers of immigrants. Using data from the 1910 census, the act limited immigration to 3 percent of the foreign-born population, by national origin, already in the United States. In 1924, Congress reduced immigration to 2 percent of the foreign-born groups in the United States according to the 1890 census population. This cut immigration from Southern and Eastern Europe further. This change, like that

OCR for page 20
--> using the 1910 census, was temporary, and new national-origin limits went into effect (after several postponements) in 1929. The national origins system put into place then limited immigration from the Eastern Hemisphere to approximately 150,000.5 Each nation received a quota based on its proportion of the population according to the 1920 census. This system increased immigration from Southern and Eastern European nations compared with using the 1890 census of the foreign-born, but it still gave the largest quotas to the countries in Northern and Eastern Europe. The 1924 act also barred aliens who were ineligible for citizenship, thus excluding Asian immigrants (except for Filipinos) who, as a group, had been declared ineligible for U.S. citizenship in previous naturalization legislation.6 During the Great Depression and World War II, few immigrants came to America. The quota of 150,000 from the Eastern Hemisphere—in practice from Europe, because immigration from Asia was barred—was not fully filled because the United States at times made it difficult for immigrants to enter. Various groups feared that immigrants might take jobs from native-born Americans and they wanted tight enforcement of laws to prevent immigrants from becoming public charges. For the Western Hemisphere there were no quotas, either for the entire hemisphere or for individual nations. Immigrants had difficulty, however, finding employment, and local, state and federal governments sent many Mexicans home instead of placing them on welfare. By the 1940s, there were substantial numbers of Hispanic residents in the southwestern region of the United States. Some Hispanic residents were descendants of original settlers in the area, having resided there prior to its incorporation by the United States. Others had entered in previous decades from Mexico, although many Mexicans were deported from the United States in the 1930s during the Great Depression. An unintended consequence of the 1920s legislation was an increase in illegal immigration. Many Europeans who did not fall under the quotas migrated to Canada or Mexico, which were not subject to national-origin quotas; subsequently they slipped into the United States illegally. In response, during the 1920s, additional funds were regularly granted to establish the Border Patrol and to expand its operations. By the early 1930s, the Bureau of Immigration aimed the bulk of its attention at exclusion and deportation. 5   The Western Hemisphere comprises North, Central, and South America as well as the Caribbean. The rest of the world makes up the Eastern Hemisphere. 6   Congress acted to cut Filipino immigration during the Great Depression of the 1930s when it gave the Philippines an annual quota of only 50 visas. When independence came, immigration from the Philippines was scheduled to be barred like all East and South Asian countries. However, this changed after World War II. In 1943 Congress gave China a small quota and allowed Chinese immigrants to become U.S. citizens. It did the same for the Philippines and India in 1946. Other foreign-born Asians were not to regain the right of citizenship through naturalization and immigration until 1952.

OCR for page 20
--> From 1943 to 1964, the United States authorized a special program for the admission of temporary agricultural workers from Mexico and other Latin American countries. Initiated as a way of aiding agricultural production during World War II, in 1947 the program became the legal basis for the Bracero Program, which lasted until 1964. This program allowed seasonal agricultural workers to be admitted on a temporary basis from Mexico to meet U.S. agricultural labor shortages. In practice, the federal government operated reception centers near the Mexican border that screened applicants who arrived from Mexican recruitment centers. The program oversaw the transportation of the farmworkers to the work sites and ensured that employers provided transportation and wages. Employers were required to pay the prevailing wages in the area, to employ the workers for at least three-quarters of the contract period, and to provide free housing and meals at reasonable cost. By the early 1960s, critics of the program were claiming that Braceros adversely affected the wages, working conditions, and job opportunities of resident farmworkers (Martin, 1996). At the same time, increased mechanization was reducing the heavy reliance on agricultural workers for several crops and political support for the program from farmers had weakened. In the final stages, the Mexican ambassador asked the U.S. government to continue the program, but President John F. Kennedy supported only a final two-year extension, and the program ended in 1964. Although immigrants were relatively few throughout the 1930s and 1940s, there were large numbers of applications for refugee admission from Europeans fleeing Nazi persecution. Applications for legal admission into the United States increased following World War II—and so did illegal immigration. It was also clear by the late 1940s that many of the old immigration laws were outdated. Faced with large numbers of refugees seeking entrance into the United States, special legislation was required for each group. The national-origin quotas severely limited the numbers who could be admitted from Asia and Eastern Europe, yet many from these areas who wished to immigrate had desirable occupational skills. Congress responded by passing several laws permitting displaced persons and refugees to enter the United States outside the quotas. President Harry S Truman believed that special legislation for refugees was not enough. He appointed a special commission in 1952 to examine immigration and naturalization law. Although the commission recommended substantial changes, Congress took no action. President Dwight D. Eisenhower also wanted the system liberalized, but reforms were delayed until 1965, when major amendments to the Immigration and Nationality Act were enacted. These amendments removed quotas and placed all countries on an equal footing with similar numerical quotas. Although only 20,000 immigrant visas could be issued to any single country in the Eastern Hemisphere, by the new rules, immigrants who had immediate relatives (spouses, children, and parents) in the United States would not be automatically excluded because of their national origin. The 1965 act also placed the first numerical limitation on immigration from the Western Hemisphere.

OCR for page 20
--> Thus, amid the complex workings of the 1965 preference system, the main outcome was that about 80 percent of the numerical limits were allocated to family members, mostly U.S. citizens; the rest went primarily to those with desirable job skills and their dependents. 7 A major feature of the 1965 reforms was that the number of immediate relatives of U.S. citizens was "uncapped" and not subject to numerical limits. In 1965, few policymakers foresaw that this provision would increase immigration, particularly from developing countries. One of the unintended consequences of the 1965 legislation was that, in its wake, the labor market skills of successive groups of new immigrants (as measured by wages and education) gradually declined relative to those of native-born workers. The countries favored by the old 1924 national-quota system had become increasingly prosperous over time, and, with that prosperity, their citizens had become better educated and more skilled. In the 1950s, three of the top five sending countries of immigrants to the United States were in Europe—Germany, the United Kingdom, and Italy (the second was Canada and the fifth was Mexico). By contrast, the two European countries in the top 10 in the 1990s have been Poland and Ireland—and Ireland only in the single year 1994, because of a special provision favoring Ireland in the Immigration Act of 1990.8 Instead, Mexico has risen to the head of the list of sending countries, followed by the Philippines, Vietnam, the Dominican Republic, and China; the introduction of the 1965 rules has seen a dramatic increase in other Asian immigration. These countries are much less prosperous than those favored by the old national-origin system. Not surprisingly, their immigrants tend also to be less educated and less skilled, although a large number of professionals have come from Asia. This shift in major sending countries brought about by the 1965 legislation toward those of lesser economic development continues to have a major effect on the composition of U.S. immigration. The 1980s and 1990s witnessed four major pieces of new legislation. Before 1980, the admission and resettlement of refugees had been governed by several pieces of legislation, including laws dealing with such special groups as Indochinese refugees. Refugees had been admitted to the United States with the humanitarian goal of offering protection to those fleeing persecution. The Refugee Act of 1980 modernized refugee policy and provided a systematic way of deciding who is a refugee. It also established a program for settling and assisting 7   Refugees are admitted under separate rules, and they may convert their status to permanent residence after arrival in the United States. If refugees are counted along with legal immigrants, then about 74 percent of all immigrants are family preference immigrants. 8   If refugees and legal immigrants entering the United States from the nations of the former Soviet Union are counted together, then this group would also rank as one of the top 10 sending countries in the 1990s.

OCR for page 20
--> refugees and established better coordination between the president and the Congress on this issue. A major focus of recent legislation has been how to deal with problems associated with illegal immigrants, including the large numbers already living in the United States. The primary purpose of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) was to decrease the number of illegal immigrants by limiting their flow and by legalizing the status of illegal aliens already residing here. To accomplish the first goal, IRCA strengthened the Border Patrol and established penalties for employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants—the so-called employer sanctions. It also set up a program that would admit agricultural workers when not enough native farmworkers were available; however, this program has not been used to date. The result of IRCA was the legalization of about 2.7 million persons who were residing in the United States before 1986 as illegal immigrants. The role of employer sanctions has been widely debated (Fix, 1991), but those established by IRCA, even in combination with a strengthened Border Patrol, may not have significantly diminished the flow of illegal immigrants (Bean et al., 1990). The Immigration Act of 1990 substantially revised the laws relating to legal immigrants for the first time in 25 years. It continued the policy of family reunification by allowing an unlimited number of visas for immediate relatives of U.S. citizens; it addressed labor issues by reducing the number of visas for unskilled workers, simultaneously increasing the number of visas for priority workers and professionals with U.S. job offers; it made available 10,000 visas for investors with $1 million or more that they intended to use to create employment for at least 10 U.S. residents; and it promoted a more heterogeneous immigrant stream by opening "diversity" immigrant visas for "underrepresented" countries (countries that were adversely affected by the 1965 immigration amendments), with 40 percent of the visas for the years 1992 to 1994 reserved for Irish applicants.9 The vigorously debated Illegal Immigration Act of 1996 also sought to reduce illegal immigration in two ways. First, it set up a pilot project through which employers can verify by telephone the immigration status of potential workers. This effort is aimed at stemming the use of fraudulent identification records and thus hindering illegal immigrants in their search for work. Second, the act bolstered the Border Patrol by adding guards and by strengthening the physical barriers where crossing traffic is heaviest. Although immigration policy is not their principal focus, several pieces of recent legislation have a bearing on immigration and offer examples of the ways in which the federal government has been developing immigrant policies. The 9   The 1990 act also specifically legalized some Central American and Asian refugees who were residing in the United States in 1990 and offered naturalization to certain Filipino veterans of World War II.

OCR for page 20
--> Anti-Terrorism Act of 1996 was concerned primarily with strengthening the prevention of terrorism in the United States and imposing the death penalty for acts of terrorism. The act sets out criteria for the exclusion of foreign-born persons who are members of terrorist organizations and precludes asylum for them. The act broadens the range of offenses for federal prosecution, permits faster deportation procedures (for nonviolent crimes), and authorizes state and local police to arrest illegal immigrants. The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 has several features of great importance for U.S. immigrants. First and foremost, during the first five-years of their residence in the United States, it restricts access to and use of public assistance programs for legal immigrants who are not citizens. It also bars noncitizen immigrants who have been here for more than five-years from some federal welfare programs. It thus increases the incentive for permanent-resident aliens, especially poorer ones, to apply for naturalization after the requisite five-years because citizenship is a prerequisite for welfare eligibility. The act also sets a lifetime limit of five-years on the use of public assistance by any individual—a restriction that applies not just to legal immigrants but to all residents. The exclusion of immigrants from public programs is not without precedent. For example, before current welfare reforms, some permanent residents whose entry was family-based had part of their sponsor's income taken into account in determining eligibility for three federal assistance programs—Supplemental Security Income (SSI), Aid to Families with Dependent Children, and food stamps) in their first three-years in the United States (the first five-years for SSI). (The sponsor is the person who promised to provide support for the immigrant as part of the immigration process.) Until the early 1950s, most Asian Americans who were foreign-born could not become naturalized citizens and so they could not vote or, in some states, own land. In another situation, Mexicans who came to the United States under the Bracero Program were not eligible for citizenship, nor could they apply for state or federal public assistance programs. Until an immigrant becomes a U.S. citizen, he or she does not have the right to vote. Finally, the Constitution provides that no immigrant can become president of the United States. Although always part of the national dialogue on immigration, the extent to which distinctions should be made between the native-born and the foreign-born has become an increasingly intense part of the debate. Background to Immigration Numbers Immigration affects the size, composition, and distribution of populations, at any particular time and also, with continued immigration, over time. From a policy perspective, it is important to distinguish between flows and stocks of immigrants. Flows refer to people moving into the United States over a given period of time—say, the number of people admitted in calendar year 1990, as

OCR for page 20
--> system to seek permanent residence. Germany has enacted a series of visa obligations and special control measures for guest-workers, but it has had continued problems with regulating the increasing number of asylum applications. A significant proportion of immigrants into European countries—two in five—are refugees, almost twice the proportion for the United States. Labor migration plays roughly the same role in many European countries and in traditional immigrant-receiving countries, including the United States—about one-third of total immigration. Where the United States stands apart is in the relative numbers of family-oriented immigrants. As shown in Table 2.13, the source countries for immigration are diverse. Among countries receiving immigrants, the top three source countries vary greatly. Although Mexico is the major source country for immigration into the United States, Mexico is not a major source country for other immigrant-receiving countries. Other countries also tend to receive specialized immigration flows: only the United Kingdom tends to receive a significant proportion of immigrants from Australia and New Zealand. Canada and the United States receive immigrants from a large number of countries. Less than one-fourth of immigrants into these two countries are from the top three sources. This contrasts with the situation in several other countries, such as France, where most immigrants are from only two or three countries. Although the concern of this report is with immigration into the United States, the United States also supplies immigrants to other countries. Australia is the only major immigrant-receiving country that receives a substantial proportion from the United States. In addition, although the United Kingdom, Japan, and Israel do not receive a large volume of immigrants, persons from the United States constitute an important source of their immigrants. The Canadian Case Any time immigration is restricted, there must be a mechanism for choosing immigrants. Countries have adopted a wide variety of procedures that emphasize different factors. Which set of rules is chosen has large consequences for the composition of immigration. Canada offers an interesting contrast to the United States, because it places less emphasis on family unification and more on employment skills, admitting more than one-half of its annual immigrants on economic grounds. A comparison of the United States and Canada illustrates how immigration selection works in another country. It is not meant as an endorsement or criticism of the Canadian immigration system, nor that the United States should place more weight on a point-based preference system that stresses employment skills. The Canadian immigration system, which has been operating for two decades, begins by setting a total for immigration for planning purposes, along with projected immigration in several components (Citizenship and Immigration

OCR for page 20
--> TABLE 2.13 Top Three Sending Countries for Selected Immigrant-Receiving Countries, 1989   Top Three Sending Countries Percentage of All Immigrants From Top Three Countries Country First Second Third Kuwait Jordan (16%) India (10%) Pakistan (6%) 32 Switzerland Yugoslavia (13%) Portugal (10%) Italy (8%) 31 Austria Yugoslavia (23%) Poland (17%) Czechoslovakia (13%) 53 Germany Poland (35%) Turkey (9%) Yugoslavia (6%) 50 Canada Hong Kong (11%) Philippines (6%) India (4%) 21 Australia United Kingdom (19%) New Zealand (14%) United States (6%) 39 Norway Denmark (12%) Sweden (12%) United Kingdom (7%) 31 Sweden Iran (16%) Finland (12%) Norway (8%) 36 Netherlands Turkey (12%) Morocco (10%) Germany (9%) 31 France Algeria (73%) Morocco (8%) Tunisia (2%) 83 Israel U.S.S.R. (15%) United States (10%) Argentina (10%) 35 United States Mexico (9%) Philippines (8%) Vietnam (7%) 24 Denmark Sri Lanka (9%) Turkey (6%) Iran (4%) 19 United Kingdom United States (11%) Australia (9%) New Zealand (5%) 25 Finland Sweden (57%) U.S.S.R. (6%) Norway (5%) 68 Italy Germany (24%) Switzerland (16%) France (8%) 48 Japan United States (24%) China (13%) Korea (12%) 49 Note: A number of countries follow the U.N. definition of a long-term immigrant as someone who arrives in the country with the intention of staying one or more years. Such a definition would include intra-company transfers, for example, of Americans to Japan for extended work. In the United States, such intra-company transfers would be classified as nonimmigrants; the Unites States does not report nonimmigrants to the U.N. as immigrants. Source: United Nations (1991:Table 28).

OCR for page 20
--> Canada, 1996a). Canada's legislation requires that the government make an annual announcement of the number of immigrants and refugees that Canada plans to admit over the next five-years. This number is determined after consultation with the provinces, government organizations, and other appropriate institutions. Canadian immigrants fall into three broad classes. First, Family Class immigrants are sponsored on the basis of family reunification by Canadian citizens and permanent residents who are living in Canada. Second, Independent Immigrants, including those under the Business Class, are selected for their special occupational skills and experience, assessed in a point-based preference system. Third, Convention Refugees are admitted in accordance with Canadian laws governing refugee admissions and are evaluated not on a formal point system, but on their education, job skills, knowledge of English and French, and ability to adapt successfully to Canadian life. The Canadian immigration system is distinctive in its selection of immigrants under the Independent Class. Immigrants are evaluated on 10 factors and admitted to Canada only if they score a minimum of 70 points. Most of the factors are related to labor market skills, including occupation, practical training, experience, ability to communicate in English or French, and general education. Canadian immigration officials maintain a fairly detailed list of occupations, which are updated periodically, that indicates the "value" of occupations and their labor market demands. If an applicant, such as a janitor, has an occupation with a very low score, he or she will be denied admission. An applicant with a university degree, in contrast, receives the full 16 points available for education. The appendix to this chapter describes the point-based system in more detail and presents examples of the factors and their scoring. The September 1996 projection for 1996 immigration into Canada was for 199,000 to 205,000 total immigrants and refugees. Of these, 52 percent will be admitted on economic grounds (42 percent under skilled workers and 10 percent under one of the three business classes), 31 percent will be admitted under the Family Class, 13 percent will be admitted as refugees, and the remaining 4 percent will be in an "other" category.30 Conclusions Throughout this country's history, immigrants have arrived, ever changing in their numbers and composition and presenting daunting economic and social challenges to successive American generations. The nation's history offers abundant legislative experiments alongside the 200 year history of successes and fail- 30   The "other" class of immigrants includes persons admitted under the live-in caregiver program, special immigrant categories, humanitarian and compassionate admissions, and provincial and territorial nominees.

OCR for page 20
--> ures of the immigrants themselves. And the experiences of other nations assure us that we do not stand alone in deciding how many and which citizens of the world should be permitted to join our national experiment. As long as there is a virtually unlimited supply of potential immigrants, the nation has to make choices on how many immigrants to admit, and within that number, who should be selected. Since colonial times, successive waves of immigrants have forced us to make these choices. The answers, in regulations and legislation, have reflected the nation's notion of itself and, often, reactions to the characteristics of the immigrants. An important piece of national legislation was the Immigration Act of 1924, which established a system of national origins quotas for immigrants. The 1924 act restricted total immigration, with limits set for annual immigration by country or nationality based on its relative proportion of the population according to the 1920 census. Because there were relatively fewer persons from some countries with high immigration demands, this system resulted in large reductions in immigrants from Eastern and Southern Europe and essentially ended immigration from Asia. Impeded by the Great Depression and the Second World War, immigration slackened during the 1930s, and the pressure of legislation eased. But after the war, as applications for both legal and refugee admissions rose, it became clear that many of the old immigration laws were outdated. This eventually led to the second major piece of legislation, the Immigration and Nationality Act Amendments of 1965, which abolished the national-origins quota system that had been governing U.S. immigration for more than 40 years. The 1965 act replaced national-origin, race, and ancestry quotas with a preference system based on family reunification and special occupational skills or training. The 1965 act also was the first legislation that placed numerical limits on immigration from the Western Hemisphere. With the 1965 legislation, the emphasis of immigration policy shifted to a new approach, introducing employment-based preferences to a system with family-sponsored preferences. Family ties clearly dominate, accounting in 1995 for two-thirds of admissions; moreover, nearly half those admitted in this category were spouses or children of men and women with preferred occupations. References Ahmed, B., and J.G. Robinson 1996 Estimates of Emigration from the United States. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Bureau of the Census. Bean, F.D., B. Edmonston, and J.S. Passel, eds. 1990 Undocumented Migration to the United States: IRCA and the Experience of the 1980's. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute Press. Bureau of Consular Affairs 1977 Visa Bulletin. U.S. Department of State 7(69):2.

OCR for page 20
--> Carter, S.B., and R. Sutch 1996 The Economic and Demographic Consequences of Immigration to the United States: Quantitative Historical Perspectives. Paper prepared for panel. Department of Economics, University of California, Riverside & Berkeley, September. Citizenship and Immigration Canada 1996a Canada's Immigration Law. Ottawa, ON: Minister of Supply and Services Canada. 1996b Applying for Permanent Residence in Canada: A Self-Assessment Guide for Independent Applicants. March 1996 version downloaded from the Web Site of the Canadian Consulate in Buffalo, New York. 1996c Occupational Demand List, as of February 29, 1996: List of Occupations Open to Prospective Independent Skilled Worker Immigrants. December 1996 version downloaded from the Web Site of the Commission for Canada, Hong Kong. Duleep, H.O. 1994 Social Security and the emigration of immigrants. Pp. 97-128 in International Social Security Association, Migration: A Worldwide Challenge for Social Security. Geneva, Switzerland: International Social Security Association. Fix, M., ed. 1991 The Paper Curtain: Employer Sanctions' Implementation, Impact, and Reform. Washington, D.C.:The Urban Institute Press. Gonzalez Baker, S. 1990 The Cautious Welcome: The Legalization Programs of the Immigration Reform and Control Act. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute Press. Institute for International Education 1996 Open Doors 1995/6. New York: Institute for International Education. International Centre for Migration Policy Development 1994 The Key to Europe: A Comparative Analysis of Entry and Asylum Policies in Western Countries. Vienna, Austria: International Centre for Migration Policy Development. Jasso, G., and M.R. Rosenzweig 1990 The New Chosen People: Immigrants in the United States. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Klusmeyer, D. 1996 Between Consent and Descent: Concepts of Democratic Citizenship. Washington, D.C.: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Lieberson, S., and M. Waters 1988 From Many Strands: Ethnic and Racial Groups in Contemporary America. New York: Russell Sage. Martin, P. 1996 Promises to Keep: Collective Bargaining in California Agriculture. Ames: Iowa State University Press. Martin, P., and J. Widgren 1996 International Migration: A Global Challenge. Washington, D.C.: Population Reference Bureau (May). Massey, D.S., K.M. Donato, and Zai Liang 1990 Effects of Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986: Preliminary data from Mexico. Chapter 6 in F.D. Bean, B. Edmonston, and J.S. Passel (editors), Undocumented Migration to the United States: IRCA and the Experience of the 1980's. Washington, D.C.:The Urban Institute Press. McInnis, Marvin 1994 Immigration and emigration: Canada in the late nineteenth century. Pp. 139-155 in T.J. Hatton and J.G. Williamson (editors), Migration and the International Labor Market, 1850-1939. New York: Routledge.

OCR for page 20
--> Neuman, K.E., and M. Tienda 1994 The settlement and secondary migration patterns of legalized immigrants: Insights from administrative records. Chapter 7 in B. Edmonston and J.S. Passel (editors), Immigration and Ethnicity: Immigration and the Adjustment of America's Newest Immigrants. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development 1995 Trends in International Migration, Annual Report, 1994. Paris: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. Passel, J.S., F.D. Bean, and B. Edmonston 1990 Undocumented migration since IRCA: An overall assessment. Chapter 9 in F.D. Bean, B. Edmonston, and J.S. Passel (editors), Undocumented Migration to the United States: IRCA and the Experience of the 1980's. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute Press. Passel, J.S., and B. Edmonston 1994 Immigration and race: Recent trends in immigration to the United States. In B. Edmonston and J.S. Passel (editors), Immigration and Ethnicity: Immigration and the Adjustment of America's Newest Immigrants. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute. United Nations 1991 U.N. Demographic Yearbook, 1989. New York: United Nations. 1996 U.N. Demographic Yearbook, 1994. New York: United Nations. U.S. Bureau of the Census 1975 Historical Statistics of the United States, Colonial Times to 1970, Bicentennial Edition. Part 1. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Commerce. 1993 1990 Census of Population. The Foreign-Born Population of the United States. 1990 CP-3-1. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Commerce. 1996 Statistical Abstracts of the United States, 1996. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Commerce. U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform 1994 U.S. Immigration Policy: Restoring Credibility. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service 1975 Statistical Yearbook of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, 1974. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice. 1985 Statistical Yearbook of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, 1984. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice. 1994 Statistical Yearbook of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, 1993. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice. 1996 Statistical Yearbook of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, 1994. Washington, D.C.: Department of Justice. 1997 Statistical Yearbook of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, 1995. Department of Justice. Warren, R. 1996 State Population Estimates: Legal Permanent Residents and Aliens Eligible for Naturalization. Office of Policy and Planning, Immigration and Naturalization Service, Washington, D.C.

OCR for page 20
--> Appendix 2.A Admission of Immigrants into Canada Because Chapter 2 is concerned with U.S. immigration and the U.S. immigration system, this appendix describes how immigration selection works in another country. We illustrate the selection system in Canada, not because we wish to endorse it, but because Canada admits a large number of immigrants and has emphasized the admission of immigrants based on employment skills. Classes of Immigrants Immigrants and refugees are admitted to Canada without discrimination on the basis of race, national or ethnic origin, color, religion, or sex (Citizenship and Immigration Canada, 1996a). They are selected according to universal standards that assess their ability to adapt to Canadian society and to settle successfully. Canadian immigration includes three broad classes of immigrants. The major components of Canadian immigration are Family Class, Independent Immigrants, and Convention Refugees as well as members of Designated Classes. Family Class immigrants are sponsored on the basis of family relationships. Canadian citizens and permanent residents, age 19 years and over and living in Canada, have the right to sponsor certain close relatives who wish to immigrate to Canada. Relatives eligible for Family Class sponsorship include wife or husband; fiancé(e); dependent son or daughter (under 19 and unmarried, full-time student, or with disability); parents or grandparents; brothers, sisters, nephews, nieces, or grandchildren who are orphans, unmarried, and under 19 years of age; children under 19 whom the sponsor will adopt; and any other relative if the sponsor does not have any of the above or any family in Canada. Independent Immigrants comprise persons selected on the basis of special occupational skills and experience, business immigrants, assisted relatives, retirees, and other independent immigrants. Immigrants in the Independent class are assessed against formal selection criteria. The point-based preference is described in the section below. This class includes skilled workers, assisted relatives, and three types of immigrants within Canada's Business Immigration Program. Assisted relatives include applicants who have a Canadian relative who is willing to help them or relatives who do not qualify under the Family Class of admission. There are three categories within the Business Immigration Program: entrepreneurs,31 self-employed persons,32 and investors.33 31   To qualify as an entrepreneur, a person must be able to demonstrate to a Canadian immigration official that he or she intends and has the ability to establish, purchase, or make a substantial investment in a Canadian business that will make a significant contribution to the economy. The business must create or continue at least one job in Canada for a Canadian citizen or permanent resident other

OCR for page 20
--> Convention Refugees are refugees admitted to Canada in accordance with Canadian laws governing refugee admissions. Canada defines a refugee in accordance with the United Nations Convention on refugee status. Groups of at least five Canadian citizens or permanent residents, 19 years of age or greater, or local organizations that are legally incorporated may sponsor Convention Refugees. Refugees are not subject to a formal point system for evaluation. Nevertheless, Canadian visa officers take into account the refugee's level of education, job skills, and knowledge of English or French as a guide to determining whether the applicant will adapt successfully to Canadian life. Point-Based Preference System Canada uses formal selection criteria for admission of the Independent Class of immigrants. The criteria are used to determine whether independent immigrants are likely to become successfully established in Canada. The criteria's factors and weights are designed to meet Canada's demographic and labor market needs. Emphasis is placed on the applicant's intended occupation, practical training, work experience, education, ability to communicate in French or English, and personal suitability. Employment-related factors account for about half of the total possible units of assessment that can be awarded. In order to be admitted to Canada as an independent immigrant, the applicant must receive a minimum number of points. Immigrants must also have an occupation that is in demand or can be easily absorbed in the labor markets. In most cases, applicants are also required to have at least one-year of work experience in their intended occupation.     than the entrepreneur and his or her dependents. The applicant must also have the ability to provide active participation in the management of the business. 32   A self-employed immigrant is an applicant who intends and has the ability to establish or purchase a business in Canada that will create employment for that person and will make a significant contribution to the economy or the artistic or cultural life of Canada. 33   To immigrate as an investor, the applicant must have proven track record in business and have accumulated a personal worth of $500,000 or more (about $375,000 U.S.). Investors are admitted in one of three tiers: (1) provinces with less than 10 percent of landed business immigrants require a minimum investment of $250,000 (about $187,000 U.S.) for a minimum holding period of 5 years; (2) provinces with 10 percent or greater of landed business immigrants require a minimum investment of $350,000 (about $263,000 U.S.) for a minimum holding period of 5 years; and (3) investors with a minimum net worth of $700,000 (about $525,000 U.S.) and an investment of $500,000 (about $375,000) for a minimum holding period of 5 years are eligible for immigration to all provinces in the third tier. The investment must be in an accepted project that is of significant economic benefit to the province. The project may not involve residential real estate and must contribute to the creation or continuation of employment opportunities for Canadian citizens or permanent residents. Some provinces, such as British Columbia, have established special investment funds, authorized by the province, so that investors can deposit their investment easily. Such provincial investment funds hold the funds for the minimum period and pay a guaranteed rate of return. At the end, the investor receives the investment with the interest payment.

OCR for page 20
--> Occupations that are in short supply in specific provinces are referred to as ''designated occupations." Additional points, as well as priority processing, are awarded to an applicant in a designated occupation. Not every independent immigrant is assessed on all of the selection criteria. Applicants are assessed on only those factors that actually reflect their ability to become successfully adapted. Since occupation is not a relevant factor in selecting self-employed applicants, for example, it is not assessed for this category. Rather, more emphasis is placed on ability and experience by it making it possible to gain bonus points for being self-employed. Skilled workers are evaluated on all the factors. Assisted relatives are assessed on the same factors as other independent immigrants, but they receive bonus units of assessment if they have a relative in Canada. This section describes the operation of the Canadian point-based selection system for immigrant admissions in 1996 (Citizenship and Immigration Canada, 1996b). Prospective independent immigrants to Canada are assessed on a point-based system; they must obtain a qualifying score to receive an immigrant visa. In addition, prospective candidates must have valid passports, be able to support themselves and their dependents in Canada, be of good health and character, and pay administrative fees. The Canadian point-based system scores an immigrant on 10 categories. In 1996, the candidate needed to score 70 points in order to qualify for an immigrant visa. Applicants with scores less than 70 are refused a visa. Several of the factors relate to employment. Arranged employment is a guaranteed offer of employment from a Canadian employer. The employment must be approved by the Canada Employment Centre, and the applicant must be qualified for the arranged employment. Designated occupations are occupations identified by the province or territory as being especially in demand in that region (Citizenship and Immigration Canada, 1996c). The list of these occupations changes periodically and varies among provinces and territories. Points are calculated (in 1996) on the following: Factor Maximum Points Points Calculation (1) Age 10 0 points for 17 increasing points for 18 to 20 10 points for 21 to 44 decreasing points for 45 to 48 0 points for 49 and over (2) Education 16 0 points for less than high school diploma 5 to 15 points for various types of high school and post-secondary training 16 points for four-year university degree

OCR for page 20
--> (3) Specific Vocational Preparation 18 The score for this factor is based on whether the applicant has a designated occupation, and length of training, education, and/or apprenticeship for Canadian work (for example, an aerospace engineer receives 18 points, a locksmith receives 11 points, and a janitor receives 0 points) (4) Occupation 10 0 points if there are no listed occupations for which the candidate is qualified; if the applicant scores zero on this factor, then then are automatically refused a visa Intermediate points awarded on the basis of the candidate's qualified occupation (for example, an aerospace engineer and a locksmith both receive 5 points) 10 points if the candidate has arranged employment in Canada or has a designated occupation with high specific occupation preparation value (5) Arranged Employment/ Designated Occupation 10 0 points if no arranged employment or a designated occupation 10 points if the person has arranged employment or a designated occupation with high specific vocational preparation 10 points for a member of the clergy with a congregational position offering employment 10 points for full-time employment in a family business approved by the Canada Immigration Centre (6) Work Experience 8 The points are calculated based on the specific vocational experience (factor 3) and the years of experience; a maximum of 8 points is awarded to an applicant with the maximum specific vocational experience and 4 years or more experience in the occupation (7) Language Ability 15 0 points if the person speaks English and French with difficulty Intermediate points are awarded based on the reading, writing, and speaking of English and French 15 points if the person is fluent in both French and English

OCR for page 20
--> (8) Demographic Factor 8 These points are set by the federal government to adjust the volume of annual immigration; 8 points are awarded in 1996 (9) Personal Suitability 10 These points are awarded based on a personal assessment of a Canadian visa officer; the points are based on adaptability, motivation, initiative, and resourcefulness; the purpose is to predict whether the applicant and family will be able to settle successfully in Canada (10) Relative in Canada 5 5 points are awarded if the applicant has a brother, sister, mother, father, grandparent, aunt, uncle, niece, or nephew as a permanent resident or Canadian citizen living in Canada