Print

Introduction xvii example, a change from Protestants from Northwestern Europe to Cath- olics and Jews largely from Southeastern Europe led to the enactment of the quota system to limit and redress that change in the composition of the fl ow of immigrants. The need to deal with the refugee crisis after World War II and the coming of the Cold War in U.S. foreign policy was refl ected in the Immigration Act of 1952 that compelled another sub- stantial change—to the preference system enacted in 1965. The current and massive immigration fl ow shifting away from NW Europe toward Mexico, Central and South America, and Asia has led to the new demands to “control the borders” and to protect Fortress America from the danger of international terrorist cells entering the nation amidst a wave of undocumented immigrants, or a wave of displaced refugees from the Middle East. Each shift in immigration policy examined herein came after one or more of the major political parties dominant in American politics at the time decided to advocate such change as an important plank in their party platform. Likewise, each shift followed the formation of specifi c ad- hoc interest groups advocating or opposing such change: from the Know- Nothing Party in the 1840s to the Asian Exclusion League of the 1880s and 1890s to the Ku Klux Klan in the 1920s to the Federation for Ameri- can Immigration Reform and Zero Population growth of the 1990s to the Tea Party and the Heritage Foundation of today. These interest groups formed coalitions to advocate the need for fundamental change in immi- gration policy. The long-term historical perspective highlights recurrent arguments, like variations on a theme in a symphony, from advocates for immigration policy change. Time and again concern is expressed over the impact of immigration on jobs, wages, and working conditions. Over and over, advocates for change in immigration policy voice their xenophobic atti- tudes toward the newcomers, whom they argue cannot, will not, or should not be allowed to assimilate into American society. These social forces fear that the newcomers will damage U.S. culture, religious freedom, social mores, and politics—in their view forever changing the face of America in a detrimental way, putting the country on what they perceive of as “the wrong track” and necessitating the need “to take back America” or to “make America great again.” There is a recurrent search for a new method to “fi x” the immigration problem. Advocates of change suggest some new method or device to screen immigrants. These varied over time from the use of excluded cat- egories, to a literacy test to imposition of a quota system to development of an elaborate preference system to employer sanctions to barring