by Michael Francesconi
Given the brevity of this report and the long history of political maneuvering tied to various immigration conversations, discussion is limited to anti-immigration conversations occurring from the mid-nineteenth century to now. In doing so, a pattern of anti-immigration policy can be discerned.
Immigration: Its Evils and Consequences was published in the 1850s by Samuel Busey during the height of an anti-immigration period. In his book, Busey sets forth several arguments as to why immigration is negative for the country. Firstly, Busey argues that large amounts of immigrants are poor, and that “The money thus expended is collected by taxation… The native population bear the burden of this tax” (Busey 121). He further states that while these costs are largely paid by merchants (and other upper-class members), these costs are transferred to the common man, and thus it is unfairly affecting them.
Busey also argues that immigrants are disease-ridden criminals, claiming that immigrants are repeat offenders and goes so far as to say “immigration is the source of crime” (Busey 126). He also claims that the parts of cities plagued by smallpox and similar diseases are inhabited exclusively by foreigners, who by then filling up hospitals, put an undue economic strain on the local populace.
Busey attaches these problems specifically to Irish immigrants. He designates them as the out group, contrasting them with previous groups of immigrants, noting “Formerly, the better class came” (Busey 126), By positioning these two groups of immigrants in this way, he creates an in group.
However, Busey’s arguments aren’t just unique to his time; in examining modern anti-immigration discourse, several similarities can be found. For example, in his recent 2023 Fox News article, Adam Shaw argues that the cost of programs that assist both legal and illegal is too high. Echoing Busey’s thoughts on trickle-down costs for the common citizen, Shaw implies the average American bears the brunt of these programs, stating that they “[cost] each taxpayer $1,156 a year” (“illegal immigration” para. 6).
Associating immigrants with crime was a main tenant of Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign, with Trump saying “When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. …They’re bringing crime” (Trump). Here, Trump parallels the accusations that Busey made, while simultaneously differentiating between an in group and out group.
In 2021 during the Coronavirus pandemic, Anti-immigration groups blamed migrants crossing the border for the spread of the disease. These crossings, they claimed, “endanger[ed] … people all across the country. (“Texas Border” para. 7)”
The concerns of both historical and modern U.S. anti-immigration movements have remained unchanged over the past 150 years. Both decry immigrants as criminals, carrying disease and being a great cost to the U.S., while focusing on how these costs impact the average US citizen. They both too seek similar solutions, an end to immigration and expulsion of immigrants from the U.S. Considering that the reactions by anti-immigration groups have remained consistent over well over 100 years, it’s unlikely that any new factor will come along that will radically change the position of anti-immigration groups. As such, it becomes possible to make the prediction that future antiimmigration groups will think and react in a similar way. This prediction breaks down when trying to determine how much influence these groups have, which depends on two factors.
The first factor is shifts in the social (the relation between the in and the out group), economic, and political landscape. As the in group expands, so too does the size, and by extension influence of anti-immigration movements. In Busey’s time, the Irish were the target of much of the anti-immigration rhetoric. This was, at least in part, due to the large number of Irish immigrants migrating into the country at the time.
Today, Mexicans and Latin Americans are the focus of anti-immigration conversation. Mirroring immigration patterns from Busey’s time, immigration from Mexico has rapidly increased over the past few decades. Thus, as more people from a new background immigrate, they become more likely to be the main component of the out group, while other ethnicities get folded into the in group. Some of the causes of these trends are discussed further in the economics section of this report. By reflecting on these causes, we will be able to predict the shift in anti-immigration politics.
The other is having individuals and/or groups to act as focal points to channel and direct these forces (e.g. Donald Trump). In his paper “American Public Opinion and U.S. Immigration Policy” Edwin Harwood argues that no matter how strong anti-immigration opinion is, it will not have any political ramifications unless “sentiment is effectively mobilized by organized groups” (Harwood 211). How and when these groups arise can be nebulous and cannot be used as confidently to predict future trends in immigration.