Ellis Island Nation: Immigration Policy and American Identity in the Twentieth Century

Epilogue: ''How great to be an American and something else as well''

Epilogue ‘‘How great to be an American and something else as well’’ By the mid-1960s, contributionism had emerged as a central theme in public discourse regarding immigration in the United States. The acceptance of contributionism, the idea that newcomers strengthened the American economy and culture while also accepting certain American norms, represented a significant shift from the mentality of the early years of the century, when the benefits of immigration were hardly appreciated. Though contributionism borrowed elements from Horace Kallen, Randolph Bourne, and Israel Zangwill, it did not completely replicate any of these ideologies. A series of international events, starting with World War II and continuing through the Cold War, created a climate where policymakers contrasted the diversity of America with its totalitarian enemies. The civil rights movement helped the contributionist idea gradually gain acceptance during the 1950s and 1960s, and by the passage of the Immigration Act of 1965, intellectuals and policymakers routinely spoke of a ‘‘nation of immigrants’’ that included eastern and southern Europeans. Asians and Latinos, though, remained firmly outside the broader definition of American identity. In the decades after reform, immigration remained a controversial issue, in large part due to changes in immigration sparked by the reform itself. Though the supporters of the Immigration Act of 1965 said it would hold the level of immigration constant, the number of newcomers grew significantly after the law went into effect in 1968. Indeed, the total migration to the United States grew from a mere 3.3 million during the 1960s to 4.5 million in the 1970s to roughly 7.5 million in each of the next two decades.1 The percentage of foreign-born Americans grew from a low of 4.7 percent 192 Epilogue in 1970 to 13 percent in 2010, the highest level since the Ellis Island-era immigration.2 Initially, immigration grew from southern and eastern European countries like Italy, which had long backlogs of people who desired to come to America. Over time, though, significant immigration from Europe diminished . Most eastern Europeans were unable to enter the country before 1989 because of the restrictions imposed by the Iron Curtain. Furthermore, the family unification measures embodied in the 1965 bill limited the arrival of immigrants from the older sources of American immigration. For instance, few Irish emigrated because the family ties of Irish Americans had diminished over the years. This led some supporters of Hart-Celler, such as Ted Kennedy, to call for reforms to rectify this situation. Rather than hailing from Europe, the majority of this new wave of immigrants came from Asia and Latin America. This influx of racially diverse migrants altered the demographic face of the nation. Immigration from Latin America grew from 1.3 million during the 1960s to 1.8 million in the 1970s to almost 3.5 million by the 1980s.3 Immigration from Asia rose from a mere 400,000 in the 1960s to 1.6 million in the 1970s, reaching 2.7 million in the 1980s.4 By 2000, Latinos composed half the foreign-born population, from 10 percent in 1960. Asians grew from 5 to 25 percent over the same period.5 Why did this unexpected result occur? Congress did not foresee how cheaper transportation, along with advancements in jet travel, would enable Asians, free from the restrictive quotas of the pre-1965 era, to enter the United States in large numbers under the Eastern Hemisphere caps. Policymakers also did not anticipate how the family unification provisions would facilitate Latin American immigration. For instance, a legal immigrant from Mexico could bring his or her spouse and unmarried children under the second preference, become a citizen, and bring his or her brother and sister under the fourth preference. This process repeated itself in a series of chain migrations. Furthermore, the new citizens could bring their spouses, minor children, and parents outside the quota framework, causing immigration levels to exceed the hemispheric caps. Finally, administrations of both parties implemented measures admitting additional refugees during crises, such as the fall of South Vietnam in 1975 and the Mariel boatlift from Cuba in 1980. Illegal immigration also rose significantly in the post-1965 period and became a persistent source of controversy. The tremendous demand for E (2024-04-25 12:15 GMT) Epilogue 193 immigration from Latin America overwhelmed the slots available under the Immigration Act of 1965 as the Western Hemispheric caps caused more and more newcomers to...