Fictive Kinship: Family Reunification and the Meaning of Race and Nation in American Immigration

Chapter 2: “The Fabric of Our Civilization as We Know It”: Family in Research and Policy

Chapter 2 “The Fabric of Our Civilization as We Know It”: Family in Research and Policy On the floor of the House of Representatives on April 11, 1924, Rep. Victor Berger from Wisconsin, the first Socialist Party member elected to the House, offered an amendment to a bill that would provide non-quota status to spouses, minor children, and parents of immigrant residents who stated their intention to become citizens. He boldly declared: The basis of our present civilization is the family. The tribe and the Nation are only enlarged families. If you destroy the family you destroy the fabric of our civilization as we know it. If you let an alien come in to make this country his home you ought to make it possible for him to bring in his wife and children, especially after he has declared his intention of becoming a citizen. The amendment is humane and necessary.1 In making his argument, Berger emphasized the centrality of family for a growing nation and the importance for a civilized nation of humanity in uniting family members. Even during debates on limiting immigration through a policy of national origins quotas, lawmakers such as Representative Berger articulated the importance of family unity and struck the theme of humanity, which became so crucial for reform efforts after World War II. Unfortunately for Berger and his supporters, the amendment was defeated, and it would take several more decades before permanent residents could unite their families beyond the quota system.2 Sixty-five years after Berger’s speech in defense of family on the House floor, the Senate debated a bill that would have changed which family members were eligible for sponsorship. On the Senate floor, Sen. Kent Conrad (D-ND) spoke against the bill, stating: “Family immigration must continue to be the mainstay of this country’s immigrant flow—our culture , our economy, and our national character have been shaped by the diverse and vital communities who make up the fabric of this country.”3 Senator Conrad reminded his colleagues that family immigration was the FICTIVE KINSHIP 20 cornerstone of American immigration policy. Arguing that family was central to the nation’s history and identity, he linked the uniquely American narrative of “a nation of immigrants” to the idea of diversity and national vitality and to the work done by families. These examples highlight the varying ways in which family has been used to articulate what is at stake with respect to immigration. Family is both the focal point of immigration policy and the lens through which immigration policy can develop. That is, policymakers have made family the object of regulation in immigration policy in addition to discussing what family means or should mean as a way to frame the contours of the debates over immigration. These policy and discursive acts speak to the ability of family to represent and mean so many things to so many people and to serve different goals and ideas. Often implicitly, immigration stakeholders have relied on family to achieve cultural, social, and political goals, invoking it as a way to say as much about the larger social or political context as about family itself. This seemingly fungible quality is part of the story about the significance of family in the making of immigration policy. In this chapter, I explore how policymakers and researchers have conceptualized family by examining what family has meant in research on families and migration and in immigration policy. In addition to discussing the major U.S. immigration policies and their impact on family reunification throughout the history of immigration control, I provide statistics on the use of family provisions for entry and their effect on the changing demographics of immigration. I conclude with a brief international look at family reunification provisions. There is an obvious reason for why we link family and immigration in political discourse and public media. As mentioned in the previous chapter, family immigration now represents, in sheer numbers, the most significant group of immigrants.4 This does not include immigrants entering as family members accompanying immigrants who entered with visas such as the employment H-1B visa. There are currently about three million temporary workers and their families in the United States on this and other work-related visas.5 The policies affecting such immigrants are beyond the scope of this book. Nonetheless, their arrival and stay in the United States contribute to the growing importance of family reunification as a goal and method by which...