It is well known that the geographic boundaries of the United States lie to the south of Canada and to the north of Mexico. However, historically speaking the southern border has captured all of the attention and for good reasons. It has long functioned as a prime entry point to America. It might be surprising, to learn that it is considered to be the most frequently crossed land border in the world. This attribute is due in large measure to the all-important international trade and commerce between two close allies who happen to share a common border. The level of trade contributes to the overall economic health of both nations. Unfortunately, this is overshadowed by the sheer volume of undocumented individuals seeking entry through the very same border.
It wasn’t always so. Throughout most of the 20th century illegal border-crossings were treated as troublesome yet manageable. The labor intense agricultural industry was the best example of the give and take at the border. It relied on the flow of migrant workers, especially the illegal migrant worker, as the best source of cheap labor. More often than not the cost-benefit analysis trumped all other interests. Thus, the “look the other way” approach prevailed due to economic factors rather than political whims or considerations. It was a time when it was widely believed that during hard economic times the rate of deportations would increase, and conversely, during strong economic periods it was generally accepted that illegal migrants could be absorbed and would help keep the economic engine running at a strong clip. To say that there has been a sea-change in how Americans view the question of immigration would be an understatement.
The changes have been vast and wide-ranging. The spread of new immigrant communities from the traditional urban centers into suburban and rural towns has been welcomed by some and has been friction for others. This and other aspects of the changes felt have led to an increase awareness of immigration in general and the border crisis in particular. In many quarters the lack of answers has allowed the fear factor to set in and to be exploited by extremists and used as fodder for the ongoing cultural wars. The shift away from America being a “Welcoming” society evolved over several decades and has roots that run deep and wide.
During at least a forty-year span politicians and policy makers of all stripes simply kept dueling each other past the point of exertion. The end result has been a damaging paralysis on a vital question for our nation. This vacuum has created the space for an even more bitter cultural war in which the widening national divide flourishes and spreads. This has led to one side seeking to permanently close the border while the other side wishes to assure us that if we could only get to “the roots of the problem” all would be well. Neither side is being realistic.
There is no dearth of explanations for the causes of our current border crisis. From our nation’s birth we have enacted laws and measures to keep out those deemed undesirable. In the early years it made sense to exclude from our country those who were beggars, convicts, prostitutes, and enemy aliens. But that wasn’t enough. One administration after another would push for laws prohibiting nationals from specified countries from entering our lands. The 1862 Chinese Exclusion Act was an early precursor to a string of laws excluding or limiting entry based on a person’s nationality. This culminated in the National Origin and Quota Act of 1924. This Act ushered in a system of national and numerical quotas which favored folks from the Western Hemisphere and, among others, targeted Italians and Eastern Europeans for exclusion. The passage of this Act was driven by the anti-immigrant sentiments of the time and the emergence of the racist Eugenics Movement.
The 1924 Act remained in full force and effect until the Johnson era Amendments of 1965. The 1965 Immigration Act would repeal the harsh and racist aspects of the 1924 Act and replaced it with a race-neutral quota system that called for greater diversity in our population base. As with other measures of the Johnson administration not all Americans were onboard with the changes.
The initial backlash was muted but remained just below the surface. The diversity enabled by the ground-breaking 1965 Act would, to say the least, change the face of immigration. More to the point, by increasing the diversity within the pool of immigrants it transformed America into a more multiracial society. So dramatic was this shift that the decade of the 1980’s was dubbed the decade of the “Browning of America.” As if in response, the decade would also usher in a virulent anti-immigration era that would reverberate well into the 21st century. Many roads, with twists and turns, would bring us to our current state of “Border Madness.”
Two paths often forgotten or neglected helped shape where we stand today. The first was Pres. Ronald Reagan’s Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986. The other came as a cascade comprised of the residue effects and aftermath of the civil wars that plagued Central America in the 1980’s. The backlash over the first would ignite the current anti-immigration movement. The latter would result in four decades of unstemmed migration which would only make matters worse.
Reagan’s effort at reform was dubbed the “Amnesty Act.” This in spite of the fact that it was designed to appease conservative elements in his party with provisions for “Employer Sanctions” to deter the real culprits – Employers – from getting away with employing unauthorized workers. But it was the “Legalization Program” granting “amnesty” and a path to lawful permanent residence for thousands which would prove too much. And soon the Conservative Movement would emerge as the powerful “Moral Majority” bringing the anti-immigrant vitriol to a new “fever pitch;” where it remains today.
During approximately the past 40 years the endless streams of border crossers has caused a major shift in the demographics of the average border-crosser. The traditional Mexican migrant coming to harvest our fields and return home to their families would yield ground to a new crop of migrants seeking to stay here permanently and to ultimately bring the rest of their families here. Another change in the demographics was that they would skip the fields altogether and head straight for our urban centers turning many into “Gateway Cities.” Some of these cities would in turn choose to become “Sanctuary Cities.” Still, for many this would translate into long periods of separation from their loved ones, often for several years or even decades. The constant urge to reunite with their loved ones would keep the waves of border-crossers going. In addition, through a combination of factors a new phenomenon of “Mixed Status” families would emerge. These consisted of undocumented parents with U.S. born children or vice versa.
In recent years many border-crossers would be subjected to inhumane treatment. For example; we had the detention of children in cages, the “Family-Separation” policy, Haitian migrants being assaulted by Border Patrol Agents on horseback; the Texas Governor usurping federal authority to plant Barb Wire fencing in the waters of the Rio Grande causing death and injuries to many; and finally, the Florida Governor joining Texas in busing and flying migrants to “Sanctuary Cities just to prove a political point
For years now nationals of Central America have been joined by waves of Haitians, Cubans, Venezuelans, Ukrainians and other non-Mexican. These have added to the growing anti-immigrant sentiment. And with no end in sight the far right has seized the moment and taken to calling the Border crisis an “Invasion.” Framing it in this coded language led to the 2024 Presidential campaign where a hard-fought bipartisan legislative agreement on immigration was hi-jacked and scuttled based on the political whim of the Republican candidate. This is what “Border Madness” looks like,
David's Corner 