Track with the reality of how we have treated immigrants . Dr. Kraut the history of immigration in the u. S. Doesnt track at all with emma lazaruss wonderful quotation. It has been a lovehate relationship. In the 19th century, there was a popular immigrant saying, america beckons but americans repel. That is more accurate as to how our relationship with immigration has been in the United States. A great irony is that emma lazarus wrote the poem in 1883, and one year before, in 1882, the u. S. Passed the chinese exclusion law, excluding chinese laborers from coming to the u. S. In the years after that, increasingly restrictive legislation was passed. We want immigrants to calm, we beckon them with opportunity to take jobs as skilled, semiskilled, unskilled labor to build our country, construct our economy, but after they get here, frequently they are the object of scorn, they are discriminated against, they suffer some of the worst acts of prejudice imaginable. This is a very complicated relationship that america has with the foreignborn. Susan when there are large waves of immigration like over the past 20 years, when there are backlashes, what are they caused by . What triggers people . Dr. Kraut the backlashes are caused by a precipitating factor like an economic downturn, or a spike in the size of the migration, or the identity of who is coming at a particular moment. There are lots of Different Things that can cause an outbreak of the kind of nativism that we have seen quite recently. It is hard to identify one single thing, but we know that it operates cyclically. There are moments when the u. S. Is more welcoming and moments when the u. S. Is not welcoming at all. We watch this with great interest and try to identify the moments when these things are happening. Susan is the current period of turmoil and debate over immigration different in any important way from past times the country has gone through . Dr. Kraut i would argue the current ways of nativism, antiimmigrant sentiment, xenophobia is not different in what we have seen in the past. While it seems to us to be peppered with acts of violence and ferocity, there have been other acts of violence, antiimmigrant riots. Before the civil war, antiimmigrant riots in the 1880s. There have been lots of moments in American History when the antiimmigrant sentiment has been translated into true ugliness. It has brought great harm to the foreignborn. I would argue the current wave, as unpleasant and offputting as it is, is not all that unusual in the history of our country. Susan what causes congress to ultimately act during these times . Dr. Kraut Congress Acts most frequently when there is enormous pressure from one sector of the population to have revision. For example, the chinese exclusion law of 1882 was passed very largely because of pressure from the west coast of the United States. Workers who feared chinese competition, antichinese racism, all of that pressure kind of built up during the 1880s, the late 1870s and early 1880s and by 1882 you have the chinese exclusion law. In the case of one of the most restrictive Immigration Laws, the 1924 law, what went on was, the United States had had its fill of foreignborn labor. Our industries were fueled by foreignborn labor. We had had a peak period of immigration, and at the end of the first world war, there was the red scare of 1919. By the early 1920s, there was lots of bipartisan sentiment within congress to shut the door and to do so with the kind of law that would limit the arrival of those immigrants who were the least popular. That included southern italians, Eastern European jews, russians and so on. The law was structured to get, to keep those groups out. Susan starting in the 1880s to the present day, can you identify either major party with one stance or the other . Dr. Kraut i think the republicans over the course of time have been the party least sympathetic to immigration. But there were also a significant element within the Democratic Party that was antiimmigration, as well. For example, the early 20th century. To keep up wages of American Workers, they were antiimmigrant in sentiment. Many southern democrats had prejudices, racial prejudices and dont want large numbers of southern italians and Eastern Europeans coming to the United States. Both parties have groups within it that are antiimmigration, and they become part of an antiimmigrant bloc that is successful enough to pass legislation. Susan if the first major legislation was in the 1880s, was the country before that . How was Immigration Law handled . Dr. Kraut before the civil war, immigration is a state matter. The federal government has nothing to do with immigration. Each state has its own quarantine laws governing immigrants who might be sick upon arrival. They also have inspection procedures in place. The busiest port on the east coast is new york. In 1855, Castle Garden is opened as the new york state immigration depot. It is there that new york state immigration officers interrogate newcomers, and it is there that volunteer physicians examine newcomers to see that they are not bringing disease to the United States and they will be sufficiently robust to support themselves. It is strictly a state matter until the law of 1882. At that point, the Treasury Department takes over immigration, but does business with the states, in effect contracts with the states to enforce american Immigration Law and restrictions. Susan clearly a blanket of different laws. Dr. Kraut exactly. Susan lets get a snapshot of waves of immigration before federal laws. We have to acknowledge quite a large contingent of involuntary immigrants, africanamericans brought in through slavery. What percentage of the population were they prior to the civil war . Dr. Kraut prior to the civil war, there are 4. 5 million slaves in the United States. By virtue of a compromise of the constitutional convention, the International Slave trade was ended in 1808, but there was plenty of smuggling. 4. 5 million slaves by the time of the civil war. I have a problem with calling them involuntary migrants. They were slaves, a distinct category, not involuntary migrants, not the same as indentured servants or any other category we recognize. The first real Mass Immigration to the United States in the post revolutionary timeframe begins slowly at the end of the 1830s, and picks up in the 1840s and 1850s. That is the great migration of irish, germans, scandinavians coming to the United States. 4. 5 Million People between 1840 and 1860. Susan what would that be as a percentage of the existing population . Dr. Kraut in 1790, there were under 4 Million People in the United States. Susan so essentially it doubled the population. Dr. Kraut it was in that direction. It is extraordinary. Susan when we talk about the current time as the greatest immigration into the United States, history doesnt seem to bear that out. Dr. Kraut the history of the United States bears out that this is a country that is constantly hungry for newcomers. Because our own population simply will not sustain what we need to settle the land, and to produce prosperity, and once we enter the Industrial Revolution in the postcivil war period, the need for lowcost labor is essential to our capitalist direction. Where will we get that labor from . We will get it from abroad. Even prior to the civil war, we begin to see the irish, who are very often a source of lowcost labor, we see the germans, who are escaping the aborted revolutions of the 1840s and the german states, coming with their skills and crafts. We see the scandinavians, who are going to be farming the land in the northern part of the american middle west. This is an Extraordinary Movement of people onto the north american continent, and its going to have dramatic economic and cultural repercussions. Susan at the same time on the west coast, the first wave of chinese immigrants were coming. What brought them . Dr. Kraut they are coming from a certain province because of the gold rush. They heard gold has been discovered in california. They are coming to make their fortune. Of course, most of them dont discover gold, but they do find jobs working on railroads, working in the mines, servicing the working communities. They are cooks, doing laundry. They are also doing mining and railroad building. By the time of the chinese exclusion law in 1882, there were 300,000 chinese in the United States. Susan mostly in Northern California . Dr. Kraut mostly along the west coast. Some of them are going north and end up in wyoming and a variety of different places. Susan i want to learn a little more about you. How did you end up having this as your academic specialty . Dr. Kraut i started out my academic life as a civil war historian. I was trained in the civil war and the antebellum period. By the time i left graduate school, i realized that i had an increasing interest in how immigrant voters were casting their ballots with respect to issues like slavery and many other issues, as well. I was trained in voting behavior and came at it from that angle. Increasingly, i knew that i really wanted to work in immigration. And that would require, since i was done with my phd, it would require retraining on my own. I did a lot of reading and a lot of teaching of a preliminary immigration course and so on, and i published my first book in the early 1980s called the huddled masses the immigrant in American Society 18801921. That launched me into immigration history. Later in my career, i discovered i was interested in nativism that was particularly medical in content, the accusation that newcomers brought disease to the United States. But i had no background in the history of medicine. I had to retrain over a number of years in the history of medicine in order to do a book about the stigmatization of immigrants as disease bringers. Susan how many books have you done so far . Dr. Kraut if you included edited and coauthored books, nine. Susan all on immigration . Dr. Kraut except for one, which is devoted to the antislavery movement. The rest all deal with immigration. Silent travelers germs, genes, and the immigrant menace, which i published in the mid1990s, squarely addresses the issue of health, disease, and immigration. Susan some of the things i note on your biography include your tenure on the statue of liberty Advisory Board and ultimately chairing it. What was the mission of that group . Dr. Kraut back in the early 1980s, a young representative visited me in my office. Her name was heather. She had read my book as a graduate student and asked me if i would like to be part of a group of historians and designers and architects who were gathering in West Virginia to talk about, at harpers ferry, to talk about the possibility of a museum and the restoration of ellis island. Now, i said of course. Absolutely. I was fortunate enough to be part of an Advisory Committee that was formed, historians, who basically were a creature of the statue of libertyellis island foundation, the organization to raise the money for the restoration of the statue of liberty between 1984 and 1986, then the creation of the Ellis Island Museum and the restoration of part of ellis island so it could be a place for visitors to learn about the immigrant experience. In 2003, i was appointed chair of that committee and i have served in that capacity ever since. Our most recent victory is the opening of a new statue of Liberty Museum on Liberty Island at the opposite end of the island from the statue of liberty, which tells the story of the statue, its construction, its role as a political and commercial iconographic figure. We think it is very exciting. Susan you served as a consultant to a lot of contemporary media organizations, telling stories about American Immigration. What do you think of the American Media telling the immigration story . Dr. Kraut i think the media does a good job in telling the immigration story when they take the trouble to talk to people who can put it into a larger context. Whether it is historians, sociologists, cultural anthropologists. The immigration story is complicated. It is deeply entwined with the larger american story. When people ask what i do for a living, i say i write the history of a Great Republic but i write part of that history more than any other, and that is the part dealing with the peopling of america. If you want to understand that, it has to be contextualized. For me, i like to serve the media. I believe historians should do the same. It is important, this story, and to critical to our country to get it wrong. Susan lets return to our narrative and the 1882 chinese exclusion act. I want to start with a piece of video from our library. This act made its way to the Supreme Court. Lets show you a bit of an interview we did on the chinese exclusion act. They were very, very much the subject of discriminatory activities. I am reminded of the case of the people vs. Hall in 1854, a very early California Supreme Court case in which several chinese witnesses saw a murder. They testified that they saw it. The man was convicted, and his clever defense attorney appealed the case to the California Supreme Court and argued there is a law in california that says indians and blacks cant testify against a white man, and there are only three classes of people in the world, whites, blacks and mongolians. Indians included chinese, and chinese were mongolian, indians were mongolians and the California Supreme Court lost the argument. If we let them testify against a white man, the next thing you know, they will be sitting on a jury. They will run for the legislature. They will vote, they might even become judges. What a terrible thing that would be. Very racist type of decision. So it set the tone of california history for about the first 100 years. Susan the act did go to the Supreme Court. How did the Supreme Court treat this case . Dr. Kraut i think the Supreme Court treated it badly. In the sense that the chinese exclusion law lasted all the way until 1943, and it is only in 1943 that we finally abandon our efforts to keep chinese out of the United States and from becoming citizens of the United States. That was a great injustice. It speaks to another theme, which is important for us to explore, and that is the theme of racism within American Immigration policy. There are plenty of reasons why americans reject particular immigrant groups. Sometimes, it is on the basis of religion. Antisemitism, anticatholicism. Always on the basis of color. On the basis of prevailing racism in the american consciousness that governs the way we approach these things. The first dramatic example of that is of course the 1882 chinese exclusion law. The fact that it took from 1882 all the way until 1943, until the chinese were our allies in the Second World War, for that to finally abate. Susan you made reference to the 1882 chinese exclusion act, the same year immigration, the first major immigration act. In 1890, president harrison establishes ellis island. What is happening that necessitated these changes . Dr. Kraut immigration is a matter of pushes and pulls. Those who are going to be on the move are pushed by certain circumstances in their home countries, by poverty, by oppression, by religious this termination. And pulled by the promise of freedom, by the promise of Economic Opportunity and so on. If we think of these pushes and pulls, that is what pushed the irish and folks from the german states and scandinavians out of their countries in the precivil war timeframe, and pulled them towards the United States, the promise of opportunity and greater freedom and so on. Those forces were moving east into southern and Eastern Europe. The flow of migration to the United States was beginning to change in the 1880s, and while it was still germans coming and still folks from central europe, increasingly, there were folks coming from southern and Eastern Europe, where we had never gotten significant migration flow from before. It was fear, lots of anxiety about what that would mean. Were the states up to processing all of these newcomers . Did they have the power and organizational capacity to handle what was on the horizon . And the federal governments answer was no. So it became a matter of making immigration a federal issue, a matter that would be handled by federal officers at federal immigration depots, and even the medical inspection would be handled by the offices of the u. S. Marine hospital service, which can trace its roots to 1798 and a bill signed by john adams. They would be uniformed physicians of what would later become the u. S. Public health service. The entire mechanism, this federal mechanism, was created to deal with the issue of immigration. How did americans deal with immigration in the late 19th century . With fear and anxiety, and at the same time expectation, the expectation that the newcomers would provide labor as america industrialized. The fear and anxiety was, who are these people . Where they coming from . How will they affect the texture of American Culture and society . What are we going to do with them all . Where are they going to settle . What is the implication . This is a very dramatic and dynamic period in the peopling of america, between the late 1880s and the 1920s when restrictive legislation is passed. Susan how many people came into the u. S. During that time . Dr. Kraut 23. 5 million. A significant percentage of the population. Susan some Eastern Europeans, including European Jews, were fleeing religious persecution. Where does the concept of refugees or asylumseekers bubble up into Immigration Law . Dr. Kraut the word refugee is not used with any precision during this period. There is a great confusion over who is an immigrant and who is a refugee. We dont get any clarity to the term refugee until well into the 20th century. So yes, jews, especially after the pogroms of the earlier 20th century, are fleeing persecution in russia, and they are, for all intents and purposes, refugees. There is no definition of that, so they are part of the larger immigration experience. So you have all kinds of migration going on during this period. You have a seasonal Labor Migration of southern italians that come in march and april. They prefer outdoor work, they build the skyscrapers of manhattan, the federal triangle area of washington, d. C. , the stonecutters are experts in great demand. They go back during the winter months, and in the spring, they come again. It is this back and forth. The federal immigration officers refer to them as boats of passage, but they were labor immigration coming to take part in the jobs they liked best. The Eastern European jews, the Second Largest Group second to the italians during this time, have no intention of going back. They have come in part not just for Economic Opportunity but in flight from persecution. They are not going back to the tsar. They are not going back to that world. For them, it is a permanent oneway migration, or at least thats how they look at it. You have other groups, you have poles and slavs and greeks and so many different groups coming for a variety of reasons. It is a big job for the federal government to process these newcomers and inspect them and all the things that are necessary to make the country safe as the government understands it. Susan in 1917, they imposed a reading test for immigrants over the age of 16. What was that intended to do . Dr. Kraut there was an inclination on the part of some in congress to try and improve the quality of immigration and exclude those groups notoriously in view of congress, illiterate, undereducated, and so on. At the first thrust of restriction is in, there is an effort to pass literacy tests. They try it in 1896 and it failed, they tried in 1913 and 1915 and it failed. Woodrow wilson twice vetoed the literacy test. It was finally passed over a president ial veto. There was a tremendous amount of negotiation that went on before it was actually instituted. What constituted a language in which you could be literate . Was yiddish a language . It had a written form. It was a peculiar kind of merger of other languages. But the lobbying for yiddish, as one example, was such that it made the illiteracy test passable by many of those who were coming. Moreover, if a woman was married to a man who was literate, she neednt be. That cut down on the number of people who could be excluded. So the literacy test was, as an exclusionary implement, as a restrictive element, a failure, a tremendous failure. Susan after this wave, 23 Million People coming to the country, in the 1920s the emergency quota act passed in 1921, and another law in 1924. Susan after this big wave, two immigration acts passed. A National Origin quota system in 1924. What were the kind of quotas and what were they based on . Dr. Kraut the 1921 emergency National Origins quota act was passed in 1922 and 1923 as well. Every country was entitled to bring into the United States 30 of those already here, according to the 1910 census. The problem with that is that by the 1910, a lot of southern italians and Eastern European jews, who Many Americans wanted to exclude, were already here. So in 1924, in the immigration act, the most restrictive piece of legislation up until that point in American History, they used the 1890 census as a base. I think before i said 30 , i meant 3 . In 1924, it went down to 2 of those who are here in 1890. Calculate how many European Jews were here in 1890, how many seven italians in 1890, take 2 of that and it is the annual quota. It took between 1924 and 1929 to argue about this and figure out every countries quota. Susan where the numbers coming from ellis island . Dr. Kraut the statistics were kept at every American Immigration port. They were then compiled. Susan i wanted to move from the european migration and asian migration to talk about the southern border for a bit. It is interesting when you look at the 1930s, and we were talking about this before we began, there was the deportation of as many as 400,000 mexicans and mexican americans. In the 1940s, we began a program, and you referenced earlier, in 1954, something called operation wet back, a terrible name, rounding up people and sending them back to the native country, most often mexico. Im going to show a video, sort of a documentary produced at the time that talks about the program, and help us understand americanss in and yang on the immigration issue. [video clip] the term is also applied to many of the toughest and least desirable farm jobs. For example, no stooping here because citrus trees are thorny and more difficult to pick, most farmworkers avoid this kind of job. All such jobs that are tough, dirty, and unpleasant are generally referred to as stoop labor. Understandably, this type of labor is supplemented by mexican citizens, sometimes called nationals or mexican nationals. The term most commonly used is braceros. It means a man who works with his arms or hands. They are a tiny fraction of the labor used on our farms yet some americans feel even this tiny fraction should not be used. A typical dialogue pinpoints the issues. With americans on relief roles, why bring in foreigners to work our farms . It makes no sense. But it makes sense to the farmer, because they work for less pay. But he is cutting down on living standards. Why doesnt somebody do something about it . Dr. Kraut mexican labor in the United States has a long and rich history. We have to understand the mexicans did not migrate to the United States at first. They were engulfed in the 1840s after the mexican war and the treaty of Guadalupe Bay hidalgo, 1848. Thats when the mexicans living in the southwest become part of the United States of america. They children become citizens of the United States of america. There was, the most restrictive Immigration Laws of the 1920s, no bar on the hemisphere. Mexicans are moving back and forth across the borders easily. There is no barrier for them. During world war ii, it is clear that with so Many Americans going off to war, there is a need for extra labor. There is a need for planting, harvesting. There is a program which, as the film said, means working with ones arms and body. It goes from 1942 until 1964. In general, there were about 200,000 workers per year moving back and forth, during the entire period, approximately 4. 8 million. They performed critical functions in the american economy. They had other jobs as well. The reaction to them is not wonderful on the part of Many Americans who really resent them because they seem to be taking jobs away from a native born americans, although they really are not during this period. And for all kinds of racial reasons that have nothing whatever to do with the economy but a lot to do with attitudes, american anglo attitudes toward mexicans. Once they have served their purpose, many in the United States want them to leave. What we see happening is the deportation of mexicans, and it actually begins after the Second World War and picks up during the 1950s. By the 1960s, we are getting them out of the United States. Many americans will remember a song produced by Woody Guthrie and sung beautifully by joan baez called deportee, about a terrible plane crash in which a number of mexicans being deported were killed. There were 32 people on the flight and 28 of them were mexicans. What impressed Woody Guthrie is that the newspapers only reported the names of the white pilots and so on who were on the plane. Everybody else was referred to as a deportee and not named in the reports. In some ways, he dramatized what was going on. We had taken this labor and were using this labor and now we wanted to get rid of this labor. By the middle of the 1950s, during the eisenhower administration, there was an operation called unfortunately operation wet back, which was designed to dump even more mexicans out of the United States and across the border. In all, a little over a million were deported during operation wet back. This is the kind of lovehate relationship with labor from abroad that america had had for a long time. Here it was, with respect to our southern neighbor. We wanted them when we wanted them because we needed their labor, and when we did not need their labor anymore, we wanted them to go home. By 1964, the formal agreement between the two governments is ended and that is the end of the program. But it is not the end of migration of labor back and forth across the border by any means. Mexican labor is simply too important to american growers. In addition, it helps the american growers to keep the price of produce low. They are working the mexican laborers way below what you would have to pay American Workers to do the same job. Susan that was 1964. This next video is from 1965, it is at ellis island, Lyndon Johnson signing a major bill. [video clip] those who contribute most to this country, its growth, its strength, its spirit, will be the first admitted to this land. The fairness of this standard is so selfevident that we may well wonder that it has not always been applied. Yet the fact is that for over four decades, the immigration policy of the United States has been twisted and distorted by the harsh injustice of the National Origins quota system. Under that system, the ability of new immigrants come to america depended upon the country of their birth. Only three countries were allowed to supply 70 of all of the immigrants. Families were kept apart because a husband or wife or child had been born in the wrong place. Men of needed skill and talent were denied entrance because they came from southern or Eastern Europe or one of the developing continents. This system violated the basic principle of american democracy, a principal that values and rewards each man on the basis of his merit as a man. Susan i think we have a chart i want to add to the discussion done by the Pew Organization that looks at American Population after the 1965 legislation. As we are getting this ready to put up you can see what happened here from 1965 when the act passed, until the projected population in 2065. The foreignborn population would grow from 9. 6 back then to 45 million in 2018 and ultimately 78 million. The three major aspects of this legislation, as president johnson was talking about, families kept together, skillsbased system, and repealing the quota you talked about. Which had the most impact on the numbers changing . Dr. Kraut certainly family reunification has a tremendous impact, as it is described in the legislation, but also skillsbased as well. The idea was to get rid of a system that had become very ethnocentric and ugly, the National Origins quota system. The idea for reforming American Immigration policy came out of the kennedy administration, and john kennedy wrote a book about immigration and was pushing very hard for it. It is doubtful he would have been able to get it through congress, but Lyndon Johnson did get it through congress. In the same time period he was getting three pieces of civil rights legislation through, he was also getting through this very important act of 1965 called the hartcellar act. It substituted hemispheric quotas. 120,000 for the western hemisphere, 170,000 for the eastern hemisphere. It changed the immigration flow for the United States significantly. Instead of the flow coming primarily from europe, it really opened the door to many more people coming out of asia and ultimately africa and other parts of the world. Also, it imposed a quota on the western hemisphere, and that meant the movement of Latin Americans and especially mexicans that had once been unencumbered now was subject to a quota system too. By the early 1970s, the world is a very different place in terms of migration. There is great Economic Hardship and political turmoil in latin america. The end of the vietnam war brings southeast asians and greater numbers to the United States, including Ethnic Chinese that had been in vietnam and cambodia and laos who also wanted to come to the United States. And it is a moment in which our current dilemma over undocumented or unauthorized immigration is born big time. There has always been undocumented immigration to the United States, ever since there was documented admission. But now it was growing in numbers because there were so many from Central America and so many from mexico who wanted to come into the United States. Moreover, there were folks in the United States who were all only to anxious to hire them for their low wages and so on. The entire immigration seen, the policy scene, changes after 1965. In part of the speech, Lyndon Johnson says this legislation not change much but he could not have been more wrong. It changed everything. It opened the door for folks who had been unable to get to the United States before and it changed the flow of immigration to the United States and created the current problem we talk about a great deal, and that is how do we treat and how should we envelop all of those who are unauthorized in our midst . Susan the policy debate from the 1980s forward focuses on undocumented or Illegal Immigrants as a policy issue. Dr. Kraut it is certainly one of the major issues of confrontation and engagement in the policy world, no question. Susan lets move to 1986 when Ronald Reagan and congress tried to create legislation to address some of the issues surrounding that. This was the Simpson Mazzoli bill. [video clip] this bill that i will sign in a few minutes is the most comprehensive reform of our Immigration Laws since 1952. It is the product of one of the longest and most difficult legislative undertakings in the last three congresses. Further, it is an excellent example of a truly successful bipartisan effort. The administration and allies of Immigration Reform on both sides of the capital and both sides of the aisle worked together to accomplish these critically important reforms to control illegal immigration. In 1981, this administration asked congress to pass a comprehensive legislative package including employer sanctions, other measures to increase the Immigration Laws and the act provides these essential components. Distance has not discouraged immigration to the u. S. From around the globe. The problem of immigration should not be seen as a problem between the u. S. And its neighbors. Our objective is only to establish a reasonable, fair, orderly, and secure system of immigration into this country and not to discriminate in any way against particular nations and people. Susan we hear a lot of criticism of that legislation, with the word amnesty tagged to it, and saying it encourages additional waves of migration from the Southern Hemisphere and mexico. What is the reality . Dr. Kraut the reality is there were so many millions, estimates vary between 8. 5, 9 million, 11 million unauthorized immigrants in the United States, some who had lived here a very long time might their children here, who were citizens by birthright. Ronald reagan did something very pragmatic, he issued an amnesty to some of those folks in order to quiet the problem before the rest of the legislation addressed the problem. The legislation tried to shift the onus from those who were trying to cross our borders to those who were feasting on their labor and exploiting them terribly. From the migrant to those who hired and knowingly hired unauthorized immigrants in the United States. And there were efforts to do this in a systematic kind of way. It never succeeded in the way that those who crafted the legislation envisioned. In part because it became very unpopular from a political perspective to prosecute Small Business owners, or big business owners. And so the government did not zealously pursue those hiring undocumented immigrants, and the emphasis continued to be on trying to police the borders and send people back when you intercepted them at one border or another, the coast guard operating off the coast of cuba, and intercepting haitian immigrants, searching for people who had overstayed student or work visas. In short, the legislation did not do the job it had been intended to do in an effective way. Thats one of the reasons why we continue to debate immigration policy and continue to feel very badly about the problem we have, which is good people who want opportunity for their children, safety for themselves and their children, who cross our borders, but in doing so break our laws. How should we treat that . We are a nation of laws. On one hand, the inclination is to enforce our laws, on the other hand the humanitarian aspect cannot be ignored. How should we treat this . We continue to debate it. We desperately need a solution. One of the things i do besides teach at an American University is i am a nonresident fellow at a immigration policy institute, and one of the things we do is debate what a good immigration policy would be. What would that look like . One possibility is it would involve advanced planning. What are the countrys Economic NeedsGoing Forward . When we create a fiveyear plan, 10year plan for who we invite into our country. What kind of skills they would have, and how with the skills of incoming immigrants mesh with our desire to be humanitarian and except the relatives of those already here, the family reunification element of previous legislation. A tremendous number of very hard questions for our country to answer. Clearly we are enmeshed in a ferocious debate which, because of the contemporary spirit of nativism and xenophobia, has become very embittered and angry. Americans are furious about this issue, and in many of the polls that has been taken when americans are asked what is the most important issue for you in the next election, a remarkable number say immigration. Susan what is the reality in the 40 years since Ronald Reagans legislation . How many undocumented immigrants have come from the southern border of the u. S. . Dr. Kraut we cant count them and we dont know with any great precision how many people are in the u. S. In an unauthorized fashion at any given moment. We know that during the period of the recession, after 2008, the number went down. We believe it went from approximately 11 million down to below 9 million. And then it has buoyed back up again as the economy improved. One of the things about migration is it is not a casual decision, it is a very serious decision that people are making to put their lives at risk to try and go to another country and break the countrys by breaking the countrys laws by entering the country. At a time when a country is in the economic doldrums, you are less likely to take the risk van at a time when jobs are plentiful. You can get a job working in construction, on lawns, a more skilled position depending on your skill set. It is not surprising in the least to see that as the economy has recovered, the number of undocumented has increased. In addition, we are living in a world with a lot of political chaos in various parts of the world. Whether we are talking about refugees coming out of the middle east or talking about people fleeing Gang Violence in guatemala, honduras, el salvador. People are on the move. Susan and there are fears about terrorism in the United States post 9 11. Dr. Kraut immigration and refugee policy is a National Security issue. This is not the first time it was regarded as a National Security issue. It was regarded that way in the 1930s and 1940s, many times. But since 9 11, immigration is a National Security issue and that cannot be ignored either. Susan very quickly, just to get it on the record, a snapshot of the debate we are having, nancy pelosi and president donald trump. [video clip] every president in recent memory has understood the value of immigration to our nation. In his last speech as president of the United States, president Ronald Reagan said i have an Important Message to the country i love. He went on to say, thanks to each wave of new arrivals to this land of opportunity, a nation forever young, forever bursting with energy and new ideas, always on the cutting edge, always leading the world to the next frontier, this quality is vital to the nation. President reagan went on to say, if we close the door to new americans, our leadership in the world would soon be lost. Our country is doing great, unemployment is very low, we just came out with 224,000 new jobs, the numbers are unbelievable. That is bringing people up like they have never come up. Border patrol and ice have done a great job. People are being removed from the country, we are removing them. We are starting with ms13. We have taken out thousands of them. We have never had an onslaught the reason they came up and they come up is because the country is doing well and they want jobs. Susan the tenor of much of the discussion in the country. During the 1990s and 2000s, it seemed like Immigration Laws were incremental and all of the politicians who say we need a fundamental revisiting of Immigration Law, lets finish where we started what will it take in this country to enact holistic revision or change the immigration to policy that we need is a nation . Dr. Kraut it would return to a cooperative bipartisanship, to agree that immigration is an important part of our country, has been, is, will be in the future, and that it behooves everyone involved to put aside the pettiness and the anger that is underpinning the current debate and try to act constructively in creating new policy. Will there be a sudden moment, a precipitating factor, a moment of illumination from on high . I doubt that very much. But several times in recent decades, whether it was the mccainkennedy discussions, or discussions by other politicians willing to cross party lines, there have been constructive debates about what a rational immigration policy would be. I would like to see, many of us would like to see, a return to that kind of across the aisle, bipartisan discussion in order to create a rational immigration policy, whether it takes the form of an Immigration Commission with representatives of labor, manufacturing, ethnic communities, creating five or 10 year migration plans. There are lots of different proposals out there. The one thing that is absolutely crucial is that we not continue with of the current chaos of american policy. And so, i wait for that moment, i anxiously wait for that moment as many others do as well, a moment of illumination and politicians on both sides of the aisle will step forward and say this is too serious of a problem not to solve this policy discussion. Susan alan kraut, a historian of American Immigration, thank you for the conversation. Dr. Kraut thank you. [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2019] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] all q a programs are available on our website, or as a podcast at cspan. Org. Next week on q a, a wall street journal columnist talks about her book, resistance at all costs. She argues that president trumps critics have become a threat to democracy. That is next sunday at 8 00 p. M. Journal,s washington live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. Monday morning, we will preview the week ahead in washington with roll call. Member of president trumps reelection Advisory Board discusses the impeachment inquiry and a 2020. Be sure to watch cspans washington journal, live at 7 00 eastern monday morning. Join the discussion. Washington journal mugs are available at cspans new online store. Go to cspanstore. Org. See all of the cspan products. This week in british politics began with a speech from Queen Elizabeth at the state opening of parliament and ended with a vote to delay president Boris Johnsons plan to leave the european union. Here is a look at some of the highlights, starting with the queens speech addressing the house of commons and the house of lords