The Jewish and Mexican Immigration Dilemma: An Historical Institutionalist Perspective

Giovani Galicia

POLI 150A, University of California San Diego Professor, Rumman Chowdhury August 20, 2013

The Jewish and Mexican Dilemma: An 2

As Democratic House Representative Joaquin Castro said, I still believe the momentum is there to accomplish comprehensive immigration reform, and I think there is a bipartisan coalition that would pass right now, a pathway to citizenship if Speaker Boehner lets it come to the floor. In our current immigration debate, our legislative institutions play a major role to successfully pass a comprehensive bill that satisfies both Republicans and Democrats. In his book Dividing Lines: The Politics of Immigration Control in America, Daniel J. Tichenor describes an Historical Institutionalist analysis approach that treats policy regimes as jointly shaped by the dynamism of governing institutions, group alliances, expert narratives, and global pressures to understand the development of immigration policy in the United States. Here we briefly apply the processes of the Historical Institutional analysis to the Jewish and Mexican immigration situation of the 1930s. The two-tiered immigration bureaucracy played a major role in the bias treatment of the Jewish and Mexican immigration. During this period the Southern and Western conservatives had a major influence in Congress and on the Immigration Committees. These congressmen were restrictionists and in no way were happy of allowing more immigrants into the United States. They primarily disliked immigrants from southern and eastern Europe and Asia. According to Tichenor, whether all quota slots were to be made available in any given year and who was to occupy those slots were decisions over which administrators exercised enormous control. Even before the Jewish population was prosecuted by the Nazi regime, many southern and eastern Jews were denied access to the United States because they were considered inferior. It is clear that the power of immigration committees and congressional members play a major role in ensuring that no Jewish immigrants came into the country.

The Jewish and Mexican Dilemma: An 3

The executive order of 1930 by President Herbert Hoover is another institutional change that made immigration of eastern European Jews worse. The clause barred aliens deemed likely to become a public charge. Legal immigration plummeted from 242,00 in 1931to 36,000 in 1932 (Tichenor). The strong opposition of the House and Senate immigration committees dominated by Southern and Western conservatives stopped all efforts to help eastern Jews. It is hard to believe that these restrictionists were so resistant to allow more refugees into the United States. Even President Roosevelt could not extend the quota limits of Jewish refugees because of the strong power of Congress and the State Department. According to Tichenor, Roosevelt had to convince the public at large, and in particular nativists and isolationists, that the greater involvement he sought in the European conict was in the national interesta matter of selfdefense, not some globalist do-gooding; he was not letting Jewish interests determine American policy. As one can see, the institutional structures of power during the 1930s greatly harm the Jewish refugee population. There were many veto points that did not favored the Jewish population at this time due to restrictionists and nativists thoughts. Surprisingly, the institutions that prevented Jewish immigrants were happily welcoming immigrants from Mexico. The Southern and Western restrictionists institutions favored Mexican immigrants, as they pose no threat to the United States. The institutions that refused entry of Jewish immigrants only liked the Mexican immigrants because they believed that Mexican guestworkers were by denition temporary, powerless, and easily expelled. According to Tichenor, House Representative Garner said that Mexican laborers were essential because they performed menial jobs unsuitable for white men of brains and ability. Even though there was strong support to keep Mexican immigrants, there were some mixed feelings on the quota system. The congressmen did not want to jeopardize the quota system, meaning that it will allow immigration

The Jewish and Mexican Dilemma: An 4

from southern and Eastern Europe. According to Tichenor, Congress nally established the Border Patrol in 1924, prodded by Labor Department warnings that inadmissible Asians and Europeans were ocking to Canada and Mexico to gain admission by stealth. It was until the Great Depression that the Immigration Bureau launched a crackdown on undocumented Mexican aliens. Even though there were some policies to encourage Mexican Immigration to return home, it was around 1934 that the same Southern and Western conservatives who restricted European immigration show their first sign of support for Mexican immigration. In other words, there were major protests to impose quota limits on Mexico but the House and Senate Immigration committees overturn all propositions. The State Departments deal with Mexico to establish the Bracero Program shows the power of institutions favoring certain immigrant groups. Even though there was some resistance from some Democrats to create this program, the State Department went a step further and made the agreement with Mexico a law. It is just unbelievable how the State Department used its power to benefit one group of immigrants and not help other groups. According to Tichenor, strict enforcement was reserved principally for those Mexican guestworkers who attempted to organize fellow laborers in pursuit of better wages, housing, and working conditions. It is obvious that these institutions only looked after their own interests as well as their own nativist and restrictionists agendas. They clearly had the power to help the Jewish population but decided to not help them because they saw the Jews as a threat, public charge, and inferior. Although Mexicans, were also seen as inferior they were given many opportunities because institutions believed that Mexicans would eventually return home and pose no threat to the United States. The Alliance of agricultural workers, Southern and Western committee barons, and immigration ofcials would permit the easy ow of Mexican labor immigration for most of the century. This special treatment of Mexican immigrants was not only based on the power of

The Jewish and Mexican Dilemma: An 5

the Southern and Western congressmen but also based on racial hierarchy. As one can see, the two-tiered administrative structure that emerged in the early-twentieth century captured the power Southern and Western congressmen had over immigration policy (Tichenor). Professional expertise and international pressure were also important factors that shape immigration policy for the Jewish and Mexican immigrants. In the case of the Jewish population, the House committee relied on the so-called Eugenics research. According to Tichenor, the House committees special eugenics agent, Harry Laughlin, collected considerable data regarding the racial inferiority of southern and eastern Europeans by collaborating with the Consular Service. It is clear that the Congressional restrictionists and consular ofcers of the State Department shared a close working relationship in the twenties, one that was forged on a shared vision of ethnic and racial hierarchy. This view can also be seen towards the Mexican immigrants. While still serving as the Immigration Committees eugenics agent, Laughlin warned that any intermixture or intermarriage of Mexicans and Anglo-Saxons imperiled whatever population it touches. Nativist intellectuals scorned the economic narcissism of Southern and Western restrictionists who backed nonquota status for Mexicans, noting that racial contamination went hand in hand with importing African slaves and Chinese coolie labor (Tichenor). We can clearly conclude that this professional expertise affected the Jewish immigrants more than the Mexican immigrants. Restrictionists saw the Jewish population as a larger threat and in return did everything in their power to limit their immigration to the United States. The Great Depression also shaped immigration policy for the Jewish and Mexican populations. This crisis affected many countries economically but it had a greater impact on immigration policy of all immigrant groups. According to Tichenor, this crisis was a major reason to keep Jews and Mexicans out of the country. Both groups were equally scrutinized

The Jewish and Mexican Dilemma: An 6

during this economic crisis resulting in harsher immigration measures. As one can see the Historical-Institutionalist approach has allow us to highlight major processes that explain the patterns and transformations of national immigration control in American politics development. The treatment of Jewish and Mexican immigrants has shown us that institutional structures, professional expertise, and national pressure were major factors in shaping their future. This approach showed us how our legislative institutions were biased towards Mexican immigrants by giving them more freedom while restricting the Jewish immigrants who really needed this freedom. The immigration situation today is somewhat similar to 1930s and can also be seen through the Historical-Institutionalist approach. To be more specific, we can clearly see how the power of institutions is playing a major role in current immigration reform policy for undocumented Mexican immigrants. In contrast to the 1930s, the Mexican immigrants are not being welcome or being offered special Bracero programs. Instead, they are facing a somewhat limited support from the House of Representatives. According to the LA Times, House Speaker John A. Boehner said that fixing the nations fiscal problems, not its immigration laws, was his top priority, as the most comprehensive proposal in a generation to overhaul the immigration system languishes in the Republican-controlled House. This is a common theme seen today on immigration issues in our country. There is always someone in congress that has a different priority or agenda. It is hard to convince politicians about the importance of immigration to our country and it will take a greater effort from the Hispanic community to pressure Speaker Boehner to pass the current immigration bill to the floor so congress can vote on it. This is another chance for the House of Representatives to change many immigrants future and they seem not to get it.

The Jewish and Mexican Dilemma: An 7

Cited References Mascaro Lisa. Immigration overhaul languishes; not Boehners top priority. Los Angeles Times [internet]. 2013 July. 21 [cited 2013 August 16]; Available from: http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-immigration-overhaul-languishes-not-boehnerstop-priority-20130721,0,257868.story