Immigration Politics

A growing literature has documented the displacement effects of tougher interior immigration enforcement measures; yet, we still lack an understanding of where the displaced populations are choosing to relocate. In this paper, we address this question using Arizona as a case study. Specifically, we examine the destinations of Mexican noncitizens leaving Arizona for other states in the union following the adoption of tougher enforcement measures using two different groups of control states: one consisting of all states that had not adopted similar measures and another one derived using the synthetic control method. We find that Mexican non-citizens who migrated from Arizona to other US states went, primarily, to New Mexico and California. Other destination states differed with the control group being used, underscoring the sensitivity of this type of analysis to the choice of control group. Furthermore, the trajectories of Mexican non-citizens leaving Arizona overlapped with those of non-Hispanic natives, hinting on the role that socioeconomic and political factors, in addition to potential complementarities between immigrants and natives, might have played in explaining the destinations of Mexican non-citizens leaving Arizona after 2007.

We propose a reflection on the role that the Capeverdean immigrant associations have towards the intensification of transnational practices in the Capeverdean community. We consider that transnationalism as a characteristic per excellence of the contemporary Capeverdean migration creates a change in the goal set by associations which are traditionally involved either by defending the origin of the identity or by social inclusion from the place of destiny.

I was one of the first people to win at your board game (the final last chance roll went my way) during the evening of play at the Flying Star, in Albuquerque. When Jason and I thought about possible contributors to this issue, your game and your project came to mind. So, we would like to invite you to share anything materials you are able to in this forum, but also we would like to interview you about the game, the project, and its outcomes. A: Of course I remember you-you were very excited to win! Great hearing from you and I really appreciate your offer-what do you say if we start with showing you the website related to the games I've designed? Here it is: http://ludoztli.com/ Q: Thanks. My first question is regarding Frasca's idea of simulation and whether or not games are a suitable venue for making a political point. He's a little bit pessimistic. What is your take? A: Ohhhhh-ho ho ho-right to the point. I love this question. I feel that what Gonzalo Frasca is missing is the understanding that games ARE political and used as political tools…say, an indirect form of propaganda. They are, after all, intellectual opinions presented in a peculiar medium.

We investigate the effectiveness of Arizona's omnibus immigration law SB1070, which made it a misdemeanor crime for an alien to not carry proper documentation and asked police to determine the immigration status of any person suspected of being an illegal alien during a lawful stop. We find that SB1070's enactment coincided with the stalling to slight recovery of the share of non-citizen Hispanics in Arizona 3 years after the enactment of an employment verification mandate to all employers. Yet, its effectiveness in reducing the share of likely unauthorized immigrants has been minimal and questions the merit of the law. (JEL J61, J1)

In April of 1998, members of the Sierra Club overwhelmingly defeated a proposal that would have had the organization adopt a policy in favor of limiting immigration into the United States. This project is concerned with the initial Sierra Club debate over Alternative B as a substantive communication controversy. Using the strategies identified by Teun A. van Dijk in Elite Discourse and Racism is particularly important as a response to those anti-immigration advocates who are concerned about the stifling effects of racist labels. Van Dijk specifically argues that his focus is not upon "white supremacist ideologies of race" or "overt blatant discriminatory acts" (5). Racism, he claims, also involves the "everyday, mundane…that directly or indirectly contributes to the dominance of the white group and the subordinate position of minorities" (5). Examining the rhetoric of the SUSPS through the material available at their website and those websites with which it is hypertextually alligned. I examine how the debate over Alternative A embodies the elements of elite political discourse identified by Van Dijk, and it's implications for an understanding of the conflict within the Sierra Club and enhancing the substantive and procedural quality of the discussion of immigration.

In April 2006, a 16 year-old Mexican-American boy named David Ritcheson was savagely beaten, sodomized with a patio umbrella pole and burned repeatedly with a cigarette. 2 One of the attackers, a skinhead, attempted to carve a swastika in his chest. 3 This occurred at a party in a private home in a small town in Texas as a result of a disagreement over David kissing the sister of one of his attackers. 4 The story sounds like a modernday Emmett Till tragedy-and it is. Though David miraculously

Democracy is about the power of people and women are majoritarian in society, therefore, they have been claiming for more rights and more representativeness in politics for a long time. After running for office, some have become political representatives only by merit and constant struggle. Others got their chance after the legalization of female quotas and targets. The system has gone a long way since ladies were recognized the right to vote. The evolution of women’s empowerment is the focus of this paper that tries to analyze the main characteristics, causes and effects of this process, based on theory and world references or statistics. Portugal was chosen as a case study for not being much researched or not sufficiently so far.

The global partnerships for development are an important incentive to local growth as joint efforts are made to assist developing countries. We emphasize actions in the field of education, as they constitute a catalyst for local development, with a special focus on HE since empirical evidence shows that this level of education represents an important factor in local, national and global economic progress. It is important to mention that this type of education plays a central role in an increasingly globalized and internationalized world where knowledge and innovation are part of the most developed and most competitive societies. In this sense, we have the objective of analysing the opinions given by the different Actors gathered through an inquiry, and confront them with the conceptual framework in order to see if their opinions meet the expected attitudes of the established partnerships. For this purpose, the CATWOE methodology is used to trace the route and to characterize the Con...

A growing literature has documented the displacement effects of tougher interior immigration enforcement measures; yet, we still lack an understanding of where the displaced populations are choosing to relocate. In this paper, we address this question using Arizona as a case study. Specifically, we examine the destinations of Mexican noncitizens leaving Arizona for other states in the union following the adoption of tougher enforcement measures using two different groups of control states: one consisting of all states that had not adopted similar measures and another one derived using the synthetic control method. We find that Mexican non-citizens who migrated from Arizona to other US states went, primarily, to New Mexico and California. Other destination states differed with the control group being used, underscoring the sensitivity of this type of analysis to the choice of control group. Furthermore, the trajectories of Mexican non-citizens leaving Arizona overlapped with those of non-Hispanic natives, hinting on the role that socioeconomic and political factors, in addition to potential complementarities between immigrants and natives, might have played in explaining the destinations of Mexican non-citizens leaving Arizona after 2007.

The Tea Party is an interesting political movement in contemporary America.  Combining populist fervor with elements of the mainstream Republican establishment, such as support for the War on Drugs and opposition to immigration, and some elements of libertarian ideology such as opposition to the unionization of workers, they form a political nexus that has not been seen before in American political history. From the movement’s “birth” in 2009 to today, the Tea Party has had an active role in changing American politics, particularly in the 2010 congressional elections. In this paper, I will analyze the factors that led to their rise, their political ideology and stances, the makeup of their voting bloc, their connection to organizations that are openly bigoted and hostile to the federal government, an analysis of several of prominent Tea Party politicians, and how they are contributing to the popularity surge for 2016 Republican candidate Donald Trump.

Drawing on Charles Tilly’s seminal work on citizenship, I propose that we refocus our approach to immigration by combining in one single view the historical development of nation-state membership (termed “citizenship”) and internal and international migration.  I argue that the characterization of newly arriving outsiders (“immigrants”) only makes sense in contrast to the gradual definition and clarification of insiders (“citizens”).  I am thus critical of social, economic, and political accounts that focus only on immigrants or only on citizens, without seeing them as outcomes of simultaneous if contrastive processes.  These social positions are partly a result of the gradual rise of nation-states, which is obvious, but they are also affected directly and indirectly by capitalism, including the attraction of immigrant populations into growth centers, the movement of capital to new sites of production (sometimes glossed as globalization), and the decline of old sites of capital investment.  State formation is likewise funded by revenues from the capitalist economy.  I thus suggest we need to envision three interweaving processes: human migration, internal and international; nation-state consolidation and the rise of citizenship regimes; and capital mobility, accumulation, and withdrawal.

My argument has four parts:
(1) Immigration (in particular the targets I frame here, immigration politics and host-immigrant relations) should not be considered mainly in terms of immigrants and their effect on the receiving society.  We also should consider the long-term development of citizenship, both generally and in specific national histories.  We should define the core subject as the dual emergence of insiders and outsiders across social and political history.
(2) Polities (states and political arrangements) aim to stabilize around particular formations of who is included as citizens. Yet these formations are continuously disrupted by capital's abandonment of older, better established labor with stronger rights and organizations, and by the recruitment of new pools of migrant, relatively exploitable labor.  Neither of those are directly political processes, but the former pressures existing citizens' sentiments and behaviors, while the latter brings new populations into the societal mix. 
(3) Internal and international migration need to be viewed together, in a single processual history.  Only over time does the internal/international distinction emerge, as bounded nation-state identities strengthen.  The dynamic capitalist search for new labor sources and new production sites stimulates both internal and international migration.
(4) My inquiry aims not at immigration or international borders alone, but at inside-outside boundaries (Tilly 2005) in modern states.  This includes citizenship and host/newcomer distinctions, which intersect other social boundaries such as race, internal region, and so forth (Fassin 2011).  My immediate agenda within insider/outsider politics is how the frame of contention “immigration politics” emerges and evolves over time, and the processes and results of demands for inclusion by immigrants and especially their descendants as citizens.
To illustrate these points, I begin with an ideal-type model of the interactions among the three processes of capitalism, labor migration, and state formation.  With this simplification, it is easier to envision the complex dynamics.  I then explore this approach more deeply with a case study of United States internal and external migration history.  The U.S. case has a rather complicated history, with reversions between internal and external labor sources, and likewise internal and external relocations of capital investment.

... Day in 1970. Paul Ehrlich had just published his groundbreaking book The Population Bomb in 1968 and was a repeated guest on The Johnny Carson Show. ... Unpublished Empirical Paper, Department of Sociology, University of Southern California. Perea, Juan (Ed.). 1997. ...

A pdf is available by request from [email protected] .  Argues for a historical, social struggle based approach to Marxist analysis of borders and migration (in the case of the U.S.-Mexico border) rather than a capitalist-functionalist kind of Marxist analysis.  Covers three topics: differential and unequal mobility through borders in unequal class-nationality settings (addressing in this section the concept of global apartheid); border enforcement as a mechanism of labor disciplining and control; and militarization of the border as a means of social control.  In each case, it argues for an emergent and complex rather than abstract systems logic analysis of these topics.  It concludes by pointing out that the relation between capitalism and the state remains incompletely understood.

This synthetic chapter addresses the causes of the massive escalation of border immigration enforcement at the U.S.-Mexico boundary since 1994 (and in some ways, since the early 20th century).  It argues that hierarchical citizenship in which Mexican origin people are slotted as commodity-migrant laborers (though resisted as such) now is interacting with a national and global political economy in which there are increasing sources of conflict and anxiety (economic and social inequality worsening, capitalist driven insecurity and globalization, continual failures of the United States as a militaristic global hegemon) to result in scapegoating of feared subordinate servant populations: immigrants.  It looks at the specific symbolic role of borders (as a boundary between purity and danger) in this cultural-political economy.  It argues that the current immigration and border policy conjucture is emerging from a three sided struggle between capitalist managerial elites (favoring managed subordinate labor flows), xenophobic populist right wing sectors (as analyzed above), and human/labor rights coalitions battling under difficult circumstances.

A pdf is available by request from [email protected] .  Chapter is in Spanish.  Argues for a historical, social struggle based approach to Marxist analysis of borders and migration (in the case of the U.S.-Mexico border) rather than a capitalist-functionalist kind of Marxist analysis.  Covers three topics: differential and unequal mobility through borders in unequal class-nationality settings (addressing in this section the concept of global apartheid); border enforcement as a mechanism of labor disciplining and control; and militarization of the border as a means of social control.  In each case, it argues for an emergent and complex rather than abstract systems logic analysis of these topics.  It concludes by pointing out that the relation between capitalism and the state remains incompletely understood.

This chapter looks at the important role of the barrier at and passage through the heavily enforced U.S.-Mexico border in creating and intensifying illegality not only in the region but forward into the U.S. interior and even backward into sending areas.  It first reviews the development of an increasingly massive enforcement apparatus at the border since late 1993, and effects such as deaths, smuggling prices/organizations, and rights abuses.  It then examines three perspectives on why this occurs (that are not mutually exclusive): border enforcement serving the functional needs of the capitalist economy; border enforcement responding to xenophobic and racist politics in the receiving society (but in the context of recent capitalist and imperialist history); and strengthening of state power, including internal state interests and the logic of the territorial state, interests of homeland security industries, and forms of knowledge in a Foucaultian perspective.  It then reviews the literature on how the border passage has effects at a distance, such as debts, arrangements, and psychological scars, and also reviews the literature on illegality and its effects ("entrapment") in the settled communities of the border.  The chapter then turns to how the border apparatus is resisted, both informally and by social movements and organizations, including a review of different kinds of organizations and their methods and goals in the El Paso/southern New Mexico region of the border.  It concludes by identifying emerging trends and needed lines of research.  A copy of this item can be obtained by email from [email protected]