2-3pages essay book review
Migrant City
1
1. Global Migration 2. The Geography of Immigrant Communities 3. Immigrant Communities 4. Hostility in Receiving Cities 5. From Words to Laws
2
1. Global Migration
3
1. Global Migration
Markets and States: Laying the Foundations
Permitting and Stimulating Migrant Flows
Governments Encourage Global Trade / Restrict Immigration
4
1. Global Migration
Source: Slate http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2013/05/10/historical_data_on_foreign_born_population_percentage.html
5
2. Geography of Immigrant Communities
6
Occupational Structure Before Globalization
Earnings and Job Growth in the Middle
Occupational Structure
After Globalization
TOP: Growth in Earnings and Jobs
MIDDLE: Decline in Earnings and Jobs
BOTTOM: Growth Jobs, Decline Earnings
Hour Glass Economy
2. Geography: Global-Gateway Cities
7
Demand for Low Wage Workers
Source: Monthly Review:http://monthlyreview.org/2006/07/01/harder-times-undocumented-workers-and-the-u-s-informal-economy/
2. Geography: Global-Gateway Cities
8
Atlantic City Lab: http://www.citylab.com/politics/2014/04/2-very-different-migrations-driving-growth-us-cities/8873/
2. Geography: New Immigrant Communities
Gateway Cities
New Destinations
Gateway Cities
New Destinations
9
Portes and Rumbaut 2010: 15
Gateway Cities
New Destinations
10
3. The Structure of the Immigrant Community
11
Immigrant Enclaves
3. Structure of Immigrant Communities
12
Based on what you know of group and community formation in large cities, describe the different steps that might be involved in the formation of new migrant communities.
3. Structure of Immigrant Communities
13
Immigrant Enclaves
Immigrant Community Formation
Absorbing Immigrants into Urban Economies
3. Structure of Immigrant Communities
14
3. Structure of Immigrant Communities
Contexts of Reception: Upward and Downward Assimilation
Politics and Policies of Host Country and Community
Values and Prejudices of Receiving Society
Opportunities: Presence or Absence of Mobility Ladders
Size and Density of Immigrant Community
15
3. Structure of Immigrant Communities
Example of Upward Mobility: Cubans in the 1960s and 1970s
Political Context: Receptive Government Policies: Automatic Residency
Prejudices: White Cubans
Opportunities: Strong with Many Mobility Ladders
Community: Large, Rich, and Strong Institutions
16
3. Structure of Immigrant Communities
Example of Troubled Mobility: Central Americans in the 1990s and 2000s
Political Context: Unreceptive Government : Denial of Refugee Status / Undocumented
Prejudices: Dark Phenotype
Opportunities: Hourglass Economy with Weak Mobility Ladders
Community: Fracture, Poor, and Weak Institutions
17
3. Structure of Immigrant Communities
Troubled Mobility: Central Americans in the 1990s and 2000s
Political Context: Unreceptive Government : Denial of Refugee Status / Undocumented
Prejudices: Dark Phenotype
Opportunities: Hourglass Economy with Weak Mobility Ladders
Community: Fracture, Poor, and Weak Institutions
Upward Mobility: Cubans in the 1960s and 1970s
Political Context: Receptive Government Policies: Automatic Residency
Prejudices: White Cubans
Opportunities: Strong with Many Mobility Ladders
Community: Large, Rich, and Strong Institutions
18
4. Hostility
19
From Local to National: Anti-Immigrant Hostility
Fast Demographic Change
Conservative Community and Republican Primaries
Local and State Political Entrepreneurs
National Organizations and Intellectuals
National Politicians
National Media
4. Hostility in Receiving Cities
20
4. Hostility in Receiving Cities
1. Fast Demographic Change
Gateway Cities
New Destinations
21
4. Hostility in Receiving Cities
2. Conservative Community and Republican Primaries
22
4. Hostility in Receiving Cities
3. Local Political Entrepreneurs – Transform Troubles into Existential Threat
23
4. Hostility in Receiving Cities
4. National Organizations and Intellectuals
24
National Organizations and Intellectuals
“In this new era, the single most immediate and most serious challenge to America's traditional identity comes from the immense and continuing immigration from Latin America, especially from Mexico ….[T]hey [Americans] have overlooked the unique characteristics and problems posed by contemporary Hispanic immigration. The extent and nature of this immigration differ fundamentally from those of previous immigration, and the assimilation successes of the past are unlikely to be duplicated with the contemporary flood of immigrants from Latin America. This reality poses a fundamental question: Will the United States remain a country with a single national language and a core Anglo-Protestant culture? By ignoring this question, Americans acquiesce to their eventual transformation into two peoples with two cultures (Anglo and Hispanic) and two languages (English and Spanish).”
Samuel Huntington, Professor of Government, Harvard University, Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences
4. Hostility in Receiving Cities
25
5. National Politicians
4. Hostility in Receiving Cities
26
5. National Politicians
4. Hostility in Receiving Cities
“After the Crime Bill passed in 1994, we build a stronger record on crime. The illegal immigration legislation provides that same opportunity; now that the legislation is passed, we can build up a strong administration record on immigration. If we want continued public support for trade and friendly relations with Mexico, we must be vigilant in our effort to curb illegal trade (e.g. narcotic and immigrants).”
Emanuel, Rahm. 1996. “Memorandum to President Clinton: Domestic Policy.” November 12.
27
6. National Media
4. Hostility in Receiving Cities
Massey, D. and K. Pren (2012) “Unintended Consequences of US Immigration Policy: Explaining the Post-1965 Surge from Latin America,” Population and Development Review, p. 7
28
From Local to National: The Process of Nativism
Fast Demographic Change
Conservative Community and Republican Primaries
Local and State Political Entrepreneurs
National Organizations and Intellectuals
National Politicians
National Media
4. Hostility in Receiving Cities
29
5. From Words to Laws: Centralizing and Localizing Immigration Policy
30
Centralizing Government Policy
31
History: Braceros (end in 1964)
Government Migration Restrictions:
Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965
Immigration Reform and Control Act, 1986
1990 Immigration Act
Operation Blockade, Operation Gatekeeper, 1993
Illegal Immigration Reform and Responsibility Act, 1996
Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDP), 1996
Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) , 1996
5. From Words to Laws: Centralizing Power
32
Massey, D. and K. Pren (2012) “Unintended Consequences of US Immigration Policy: Explaining the Post-1965 Surge from Latin America,” Population and Development Review, p. 7
5. From Words to Laws: Centralizing Power
33
9/11 Terrorism and Tightening the Screws
“The nation's defense against terrorism has been seriously eroded by the efforts of open-border advocates, and the innocent victims of today's terrorist attacks have paid the price” (Dan Stein, Federation of American Immigration Reform, NY Times, September 24, 2001)
“I note worries that terrorists would use the Mexico border as a back door to the United States, and there is the need to stop illegal crossings” (Condoleezza Rice, NY Times, March 11, 2005).
Grover Norquist (Americans for Tax Reform, “Immigration reform and border security are not competitors; they are the same thing” (Grover Norquist, NY Times, April 13, 2005).
5. From Words to Laws: Centralizing Power
34
2001 USA Patriot Act Created Department of Homeland Security: increased funding for surveillance and deportation of foreigners, and authorized deportation of noncitizens without due process
2004 National Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Protection Act: Funded new equipment, aircraft, Border Patrol agents, immigration investigators, and detention centers for border enforcement
2005 Real ID Act: Sharply increased the data requirements, documentation, and verification procedures for state issuance of drivers licenses
2006 Secure Fence Act: Authorized construction of additional fencing, vehicle barriers, checkpoints, lighting and funding for new cameras, satellites, and unmanned drones for border enforcement
2010 Border Security Act: Funded hiring 3,000 more Border Patrol agents and increased BP budget by $244 million
5. From Words to Laws: Centralizing Power
35
Spending Increases
Meissner, D., Kerwin, D.M., Chishti, M., and C. Bergeron, 2013: 12
5. From Words to Laws: Centralizing Power
36
Unintended Consequences:
Hostile Words
More Borders
Reduces Circular Temporary Migration
Increases Settlement of Unauthorized Migrants
Increases Family Migration
Increases Mixed Family Status
5. From Words to Laws: More Laws, More Undocumented Immigration
37
Localizing Government Policy
38
Federal Partnerships
287 (g)
Secure Communities
Restrictive Local / State Laws
5. From Words to Laws: Localizing Policy
39
287g Partnerships: By Region
5. From Words to Laws: Localizing Policy
40
Source: http://trac.syr.edu/immigration/reports/349/
Secure Communities
5. From Words to Laws: Localizing Policy
41
Local Anti-Immigrant Measures “Spreading like Wildfire”
The Role of the Federation of American Immigration Reform and Kris Kobach
Source: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/03/anti-immigration-law-database
5. From Words to Laws: Localizing Policy
42
5. From Words to Laws: Localizing Policy
Centralizing and Localizing Immigration Policy =
Deportations
44
“None of the terrorist attacks involved Mexicans, and none of the terrorists entered through Mexico. Indeed, all came to the United States on legal visas…Mexicans nonetheless bore the brunt of the deportation campaign launched in the name of the war on terrorism, comprising 72% of those removed in 2009” (Massey and Pren 2012: 16, emphasis added).
Massey, D. and K. Pren (2012) “Unintended Consequences of US Immigration Policy: Explaining the Post-1965 Surge from Latin America,” Population and Development Review, p. 7
5. From Words to Laws: Localizing Policy
5. From Words to Laws: Localizing Policy
Local and County Policies: Sanctuary
Los Angeles: Special Order 40 (1979) – Forbids Police to Inquire about Immigration Status
Maricopa County Arizona: Strong Cooperation in 287(g) and Secure Communities
5. From Words to Laws: Localizing Policy
State Sanctuary Policies
California: Trust Act AB4 (2013); Values Act, SB54 (2017)
Arizona: Anti-Immigrant Laws: “Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act” SB1070 (2010)
1. Global Migration 2. The Geography of Immigrant Communities 3. Immigrant Communities 4. Hostility in Receiving Cities 5. From Words to Laws
51
|
State-Level Comprehensive Anti-Immigration Laws |
|
|
State |
Passed |
|
Arizona |
April 2010 |
|
Utah |
March 2011 |
|
Georgia |
April 2011 |
|
Indiana |
May 2011 |
|
Alabama |
June 2011 |
|
South Carolina |
June 2011 |