Immigration, Race, and Economic Globalization on the U.S.-Mexico Border: Tangled Histories and Contemporary Realities

Marc Belanger, Marc Belanger is an Associate Professor and Chair in the Department of Political Science at Saint Mary's College in South Bend, Indiana. His research has focused on the political impact of globalization and his published articles include Democratization, Civil Society and Latin American Social Movements, in UNCIVIL SOCIETIES: HUMAN RIGHTS AND DEMOCRATIC TRANSITIONS IN EASTERN EUROPE AND LATIN AMERICA (Rachel May & Andrew Milton eds. 2005). He is also contributing a chapter on Guatemala to a forthcoming volume on democratization in post-conflict societies. I would like to acknowledge with gratitude: Sarah Alden, for initiating my participation in the Symposium in October 2005; Amy Dollash and the other conference organizers for creating such a stimulating and welcoming environment; Katie Dingeman, for research and discussion that helped the initial development of this article; Sarah Staley, for learning and then carrying out the initial conversion to law journal citation format; Roseanna Castillo, for superb multiple readings of the manuscript and suggestions that improved the Article's substance and organization. Special thanks to Roseanna and her staff for their patience while I learned the citation and footnote practices of law journals.

In a congressional hearing, a U.S. representative from Colorado explained the continuing need for labor from Mexico: "The American working people will not get down on their hands and knees in the dirt and pull weeds and thin these beets and break their backs doing that kind of work . . . [n]o matter how much they are paid, they cannot and will not do it."1 In response, a Texas Chamber of Commerce official asserted that:

The competition of Mexican labor in every walk of life . . . is so intense that no room or opportunity exists for the American who wants to work for sufficient wages to support himself and his family. This is resulting in this country´s being almost taken over by the Mexican citizens because the American cannot compete with the low wages of the Mexican.2

These statements were made with a bluntness that might indicate to the reader that they were made during the 1920s. In the decades since, the language has grown more nuanced, and anti-immigration forces generally have expressed less overt racism.3 The basic terms of the debate, however, have not changed significantly. Advocates of more restrictive policies decry the loss of jobs by U.S. citizens and the social costs of ineffective border- control.4 There are also concerns expressed about the dilution and fragmentation of a common national and cultural identity.5 This perspective is challenged by arguments that new immigrants bring work skills and ethics that strengthen the workforce and contribute to lower prices for consumers in a variety of areas including food, construction, and food and hotel services.6

With recent attention on the intensified conflict along the U.S.-Mexico border, as well as post-9/11 anxieties about terrorism, immigration reform is once again a source of lively policy debates.7 These debates occur in the wake of several recent efforts to "fix" immigration policy, including the 1986 Immigration and Control Act and later amendments.8 Why have immigration policy debates remained stagnant and the policy outcomes proven so ineffective?

This Article will offer a partial explanation by analyzing the historical roots and contemporary consequences of a persistent contradiction, which is well explained by Peter ...

If you are already a vLex customer, Access Here