Search

The apparent debordering of the Western under the aegis of economic globalization has been systematically associated with a parallel process of rebordering against global migrations. Border enforcement policies and administrative detention across Europe and the United States are seen here as elements of an increasingly globalized strategy of categorial control aimed at the selective criminalization of migrants. Following a materialist approach, this paper suggests that these punitive strategies should be viewed in light of the current transformations of the economy: the criminalization of migrations appears to be functional to the "subordinate inclusion" of immigrants thus contributing to the reproduction of an ontologically insecure population whose social, political, and economic vulnerability makes it a crucial segment of the post-Fordist labor force. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

People around the world are on the move, pushed by external events such as civil war, political upheaval, and increasingly environmental disasters and pulled by the lure of a better life, a better job, a better way to provide for their families. The United States has created an inconsistent legal framework for responding to the exploitation of immigrants, dependent on the degree of victimhood, with the label of victim only frugally bestowed upon those who are also viewed as essential to sustaining the US economy. US law would suggest that trafficked persons are not useful to legitimate US businesspersons, and are accordingly protected. Agricultural and factory workers are very useful to businesspersons whom we regard as legitimate, and so these migrants go unprotected.Part I of this paper looks at the psychology of migration, migration theory, and the human rights framework as a protection tool designed for migrants. Part II explores the notion of exploitation, and in particular the extent to which people in transit, migrants, are particularly vulnerable due to the very human nature that drives them to wish to improve their circumstances. It looks at the characteristics of exploitation, from the perspective of the exploiter and the exploited, and proposes that part of the reason migrants are so vulnerable to exploitation is the private sphere nature of the movement through and into new cultures and legal systems in which the migrant lives and works on the fringes of society, not fully embraced by it. Part III looks at two specific forms of exploitation, human trafficking and the abuse of agricultural laborers and "guestworkers", and the international and domestic US legal responses to exploitation in those two contexts, theorizing that Americans and countries adhering to free market economies have very mixed feelings about exploitation. On the one hand we believe that exploitation is morally, and past a certain degree even legally wrong, but on the other accept it as a necessary characteristic of doing business in the global market. Part IV digs more deeply into principles of democracy and capitalism to search for answers, suggesting that legal responses to exploitation alone will never be sufficient, and that civil society, wielding human rights arguments and tools may be the most effective counterforce to exploitation. Part V offers a prescription for change, recommending that civil society and immigration law responses be bolstered to protect against exploitation in particular. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The contemporary form of refugee policy in Canada and the United States emerged from the post-World War II era, when policymakers confronted growing displaced persons populations in Europe, as well as increased refugee dislocations around the world with the advent of the Cold War. This paper will begin by briefly reviewing the development of postwar policy in both countries up to the Hungarian Refugee Crisis in 1956, and will then discuss refugee politics in the context of 1960s legislative reform. Worldwide refugee crises forced legislators to rethink their entrance requirements and were partially responsible for the liberalization of immigration law in the United States in 1965, and in Canada in 1967. Still, while refugee politics could be mobilized to press for more expansive immigrant rights, legislators seized upon this moment of reform to divorce humanitarianism from immigrant admissions, relegating it solely to the refugee arena. This shift allowed leaders in both countries to define only those arriving as refugees in terms of their individual need, and to select immigrants instead by their possible contribution to the nation. The relegation of humanitarianism to refugee admissions would in turn shape the debates over future immigration policy in both countries. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Supreme Court has determined Congress' authority over immigration policy to be one of its plenary powers. Classifying immigration as a plenary power effectively precludes any external involvement and/or interference from any other entity. From the early 1900s and into the 21st Century, Congressional plenary authority over immigration had come to be expected and desired in the United States. However, one event changed this, essentially rendering that power over immigration unconstitutional when taken in light of other doctrines the Court has iterated. The event that brought about this transformation was the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The attacks transformed the political and legal landscapes of immigration and security policy in the United States, and forced the citizenry to rethink the traditional roles of the state and federal governments. In the post-9/11 era, the states are precluded from creating and enacting immigration legislation, while being held accountable by residents for how they (the states) address their constituencies' immigration demands. It is in this way, Congress is overstepping its bounds and violating the Court's modern federalism doctrine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The current debate in the United States over undocumented immigrants, the controversy over a Spanish version of the national anthem, and congressional proposals declaring English the "national" or "unifying" language all point to a growing identity crisis sweeping the country. The media abound with public intellectuals and political pundits pondering, "Who are we?" For a nation built in large part on immigration, the language question in particular has been a recurrent lightening rod in the movement toward ongoing compulsory nationalization. An often overlooked yet important factor is the critical role that public schooling has played in that effort. In recent years, transnationalism and globalization have added distinct challenges both here and abroad to a new wave of mass migration across the globe. This paper uses language policy and schooling as the prism for exploring how these trends have given rise to "dual identities" and attachments, and what the potential consequences might be for educating and integrating the children of "new immigrants." It suggests that the United States, as a nation, reassess the prevailing assimilation ideal, and that policy makers and educators consciously reshape policy on language and culture in the schools, for both native-born and newcomers, to reflect the changing demographic, political, and economic landscape. It further compares and contrasts the United States experience, both in the past and the present, with immigration problems now confronting western European nations like France, Germany, and the Netherlands, where different historical circumstances may demand unique educational solutions. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the United States, legislative changes to immigration law over the past two decades increasingly have resulted in the criminalization of migration. The trend is visible in three ways. First, Congress has attached harsh criminal sanctions to acts of migration outside of authorized channels and to related activities such as document fraud. Second, Congress has radically expanded the category of criminal offenses that will render a noncitizen - including a lawful permanent resident - subject to removal provisions under immigration law. Finally, immigration enforcement efforts have been expanded, both at the border and in the interior of the country. The expanded enforcement efforts have conflated criminal law and immigration law enforcement.As Congress debated immigration reform proposals in the 2006 legislative session, both chambers of Congress developed proposals that would have further expanded the category of "criminal aliens." Both chambers included provisions that would have resulted in the increased enforcement of immigration laws through the use of criminal sanctions. In short, the criminalization of migration has become the default strategy for dealing with the perceived immigration crisis in the United States.My paper will challenge this default strategy of increasingly criminalizing migration as a means of achieving improved regulation of migration and "border security" in the United States. I argue that effective border regulation and sound social policy requires large-scale decriminalization of migration. I explain why the decriminalization of migration is desirable even in a society that rejects an open borders approach to migration. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Immigration is a politically, economically, and socially charged topic in the United States (U.S.). While much of the debate in the political and media circles has raged around the issue of illegal immigration, a smaller group of immigrants remained ignored until recently. This group comprises highly educated and skilled immigrants who enter the US legally. This study critically analyzes the U.S. print media discourse surrounding immigration by foreign highly skilled workers (HSWs) into the U.S. Through an inductive thematic analysis informed the grounded theory method of analysis, I show how the economic agendum of manipulating of the availability of immigrant labor is reflected in the print media discourses that surround the debate on immigration in industrialized nations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this essay, we explore the discourses of immigration in 478 articles in The New York Times. In exploring these articles we were able to find the dominant articulations of immigration in the U.S. mainstream media. The media plays a key role in constructing public discourses of immigration both in the United States and abroad. Through a close reading of these articles, we found that the immigrant is constructed as the Other in order to serve hegemonic goals. The New York Times articles illustrated how negative the dominant discourse of immigration continues to be in our society today. We found that the undocumented immigrant is still being framed as a criminal, violent, a security issue, a sore on the economical structure, and an outsider. Most powerful among the discourses presented in The New York Times is the narration of state violence as a method for controlling the immigrant. After presenting immigration in a criminal framework, several forms of state control are suggested as methods for monitoring illegal immigration, and controlling the flow of illegal immigrants. The dominant discursive spaces of the media continue to legitimize the structural violence enacted by the state in its control of illegal immigrants and the threats to society placed by them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this study was to use a multilevel analysis to learn how individual and contextual factors affected the acculturation processes of undocumented immigrants in the United States. It relied on Berry's (1990) and Kim's (2005) theories of acculturation, which have not been previously applied to undocumented immigrants. The findings validate the use of Berry's theory. In addition, several other key findings related several individual-level variables to various acculturation patterns. In addition, certain contextual factors may have moderating effects on the relationships between factors of communication and acculturation patterns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We seek to better understand how US Immigration Court judges render decisions in political asylum cases. We argue first, that judges will use a variety of cues based on the country and cultural characteristics of the individual asylum applicant as part o ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As the size of the foreign-born population in the United States has climbed, political scientists have directed more attention to the forces that encourage or impede immigrant incorporation into the party system. Using a large two-wave panel survey of Mexican immigrants administered in the fall of 2008, we examine whether candidate-centered campaign ads targeting Latinos can foster partisanship among Mexicans. We find strong evidence for this, but over the long-term these effects vary considerably based on regional contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A well-known finding in the political science literature is the association between negative racial attitudes and opposition to welfare. Research in this area provides important insights into the relationship between racial stereotypes of blacks, racial context, and welfare benefit levels, but little is known about how attitudes towards Hispanics and immigrants influence opposition to welfare. I use a multi-level model to examine how changes in the demographic patterns of blacks, Hispanics and immigrants in the American states influence individual welfare spending preferences over time. I also investigate how individual-level factors (e.g., economic self-interest, racial stereotypes, principled individualism) condition the relationship between racial context and welfare attitudes. To address these questions of theory, time, and space, my study combines U.S. census data with survey data from the General Social Survey from 1973 to 2006. During this thirty-four year timeline, the United States shifted from a black-white paradigm to a multi-racial paradigm with dramatic increases in both the Hispanic and immigrant populations. I find that states with larger black populations initially prefer more restrictive welfare spending policies than states with smaller black populations, but this relationship varies for both Hispanic and immigrant populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Thanks in great part to advancements in the technology of transportation and telecommunication, today's immigrants find it much easier than did past immigrants to take part in a wide variety of transnational political activities. Recent studies, however, show that relatively a small subset of the immigrant population in the United States is involved in transnational political practices. Why are some immigrants involved in cross-border political activities, while others are not? Drawing on data from a survey of 1202 Latino immigrants, the proposed study intends to identify the characteristics of those who participate in cross-border political activities and explain why they do so. To address the questions, this study focuses on two observations. First, immigrants in general are in need of extra encouragement to help offset their lack of resources so as to participate in transnational political activities. Mobilization efforts by governments of the sending countries are expected to play an important role in increasing the level of involvement in immigrants' transnational activities. Second, research reveals that transnational political activities are gendered and primarily carried out by male immigrants, who wish to compensate for their loss of status in the host country. This suggests that transnational political activities are largely an instrumentally motivated adaptation strategy immigrants employ to promote their sense of self-worth facing the loss of status in the host society. The proposed study will build on those observations to better explain why immigrants participate in cross-border political practices. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study uses a recent data set from the China International Migration Project to analyze the latest wave of undocumented migration from China to the United States. I focus on examining these migrants' smuggling trips, including their departure methods, transit places, entry into the U.S., as well as their smuggling costs and payments. The findings from this study are largely in accordance with those from the few earlier studies on this topic, that is, undocumented migration from China to the U.S. continues to involve sophisticated transit routes and entry methods. This study also reveals some new patterns in this migration movement. Although Mexico remains as one of the most important corridor points to smuggle Chinese migrants into the U.S., Hong Kong and East Asia have become more important in playing this role in recent years. The smuggling fees for the Chinese migrants in the 2000s have reached a point that it can hardly make any economic sense, which can have significant implication for these migrants' incorporation in the years to come. The smugglers' sophisticated smuggling methods, especially their exploitation of the U.S. asylum programs, have rendered the U.S. border control largely ineffective in stopping undocumented migration from China. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Immigration discussions most often revolve around illegal immigrants and their types of employment. Little emphasis is placed on the legal side of immigration even though the United States provides hundreds of thousands of visas each year for immigrants to study, reunite with family, and work. Most of the work/study visa immigrants enter with or obtain within the U.S. a college degree. These immigrants largely work in the upper tail of the labor market. We study how the 1990 immigration reform and the diffusion of computerization across the labor market influenced the difference in wages between these college-educated immigrants and their native counterparts. We do so by measures of human capital as traditionalized by level of education, specialized human capital as defined by occupational field types (IT, health, etc.), and citizenship/visa type. The 1993 and 2003 surveys of the National Survey of College Graduates (NSCG) provide the data. Preliminary results show that returns to education vary by occupational field with health and economics/psychology workers realizing the greatest gains. In general, naturalized citizens, the 1.5 generation, permanent residents, and temporary residents all gain in salary compared to their native counterparts, yet those with foreign degrees actually become more disadvantaged across the decade. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Studies of Mexico-U.S. migration indicate that decisions to migrate typically are made by men. Males either begin working in the United States just after marriage during the early phases of family formation, or they are initiated into migration as adolescents by migrant fathers. Wives and daughters generally begin migrating only after male relatives have accumulated substantial foreign experience. Such a pattern is not intrinsic to migration, however, but reflects Mexico’s patriarchal kinship system, which is characterized by universal marriage, low rates of cohabitation and marital dissolution, child rearing within nuclear households, and asymmetrical power between men and women. Other countries of Latin America have different systems, however, and need not follow a male-centered pattern. In the Caribbean, for example, the family system is matrifocal, characterized by low rates of marriage, high rates of cohabitation and union dissolution, a high degree of non-marital childbearing, and more balanced power relations within a matrilineal system. We show that in such societies, independent migration by females is common and that the female migration substitutes for male migration. We argue that migration cannot be understood fully without embedding migratory decisions within the system of family-gender relations characteristic of the sending culture. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study uses 1990 Census data to examine inter-metropolitan area migration of the Mexicans in the United States. The goal of the research is to explore the relationship between secondary migration and the assimilation experiences of Mexicans through the investigation of group movement patterns and the examination of their affecting factors at individual level. The analyses of this study are carried out at both macro and micro levels. At macro level, I examine the average contextual mobility patterns of secondary migration through compilation and comparison of the general social and economic profiles of migration origins and destinations. At micro level, I examine the probabilities of the participation of secondary migration. It is hypothesized that migration is in general a privileged action that favours the ethnic group members with more advanced social and economic achievements. The results reveal that in general secondary migration is indeed predicted by favorable individual attributes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Does the ethnic and immigrant composition of a community and existence of immigrant enclaves influence community level lethal violence as measured by race/ethnic specific homicide and suicide? This study explores the relationship between these and other factors in city of Miami census tracts. We employ data about the distribution of Cubans, Central Americans, and Haitians, controlling for social and economic influences of homicide versus suicide. We also analyze the impact of various waves of immigration and immigrant communities to understand the circumstances under which ethnic-specific violence occurs or is limited at the census tract level. The findings lend some support to the positive and negative aspects of Portes and Rumbaut?s (2001) segmented assimilation hypothesis in Miami neighborhoods. The strength of this conclusion varies and is contingent on ethnic composition, new versus old immigration and the all encompassing effects of economic deprivation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper traces the effects of the refugee rights movement on workings of the U.S. asylum system, focusing on the processes used in the initial adjudication of asylum claims. It offers an institutionalist explanation for the increased proceduralism in U.S. asylum adjudication, despite changes in the tenor of U.S. immigration politics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Immigration laws and policies, like other nation- and state-building activities, have helped to determine the racialized character of the United States. This paper examines the interplay between race, gender, immigration, labor needs, and reproduction in nation-state building projects, illustrating processes of gender construction, racialization, and ethnic differentiation. I consider how notions of race and gender are used in aiding and abetting nation-building claims and projects. Specifically, I question why the United States banned nearly all Chinese immigrants with passage of the Page Law in 1875 and the Chinese Exclusion Act in 1882 though it permitted Japanese immigration, in particular Japanese wives, with the Gentlemen's Agreement of 1907 and 1908. Though the U.S. eventually excluded Japanese immigration in 1924, the differential treatment, albeit short, was hugely consequential. Whereas many Chinese were unable to form families and settle permanently, the Japanese did, which led to a sizable Japanese American community. Using archival evidence, I explain that geopolitics, competing tensions between labor needs and permanent settlement, along with state and national fears over miscegenation and desires to maintain the imputed racial purity of a 'white' national identity, led to differing responses. This research suggests that nation-building is not simply the 'imagining' of a community but is instead a negotiated process between geopolitics, economic development, politics of immigration, and cultural meanings of gender, race, and reproduction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is an emerging notion of 'citizenship by fate' in recent discourse over the status of undocumented immigrants. The traditionally strong liberal notion of citizenship in the United States was one in which citizenship was recognized by contract. If one matched a series of criteria established by existing citizens, one was eligible to be admitted to citizenship. A contrasting notion is communitarian citizenship, where citizenship is generally not 'tradable'- it is acquired only through long-standing ties with the community. However, the massive number of undocumented immigrants in the United States has pushed accepted notions of citizenship to its limits. The American society has particularly struggled with the question, 'are undocumented immigrants who were brought here when they were only young, still illegal and deportable?' Increasingly there are signs that people are unwilling to treat individuals, who by no choice of their own had come to live in the United States since their youth, simply as 'illegal aliens'. For example, recent debate over the DREAM Act, granting in-state tuition to high school graduates who are undocumented, shows that this notion has become significant enough to influence national policy. Even the Supreme Court cases, analyzed under this light, seem to reflect this emerging notion. For example, in Plyler v. Doe, the Court held that the exclusion of undocumented children from support for public education was unconstitutional. In its opinion, the Court expressed the notion that children could not be held responsible for the decision of their parents to come to the United States. In this paper, I will examine the development of this discourse through primary sources including legislative and judicial transcripts, and consider the implication of the emerging notion on existing immigration law and policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper is interested in the legal regulation of low-skilled undocumented migration to the United States. Taking Mexican migration as a case study, I will examine 'remittances' (i.e. money that the immigrant earns in the U.S. and sends to his or her home country) and the market's institutional response to remittances. I will argue that there is an economic and social basis for conceiving of a category of 'undocumenteds' rights' under the U.S. immigration laws, and I will explore how this membership might be reflected in specific policy initiatives [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a model capstone exercise designed to internationalize the political science curriculum by incorporating a global perspective into core General Education American Government courses through examinations of immigration policy. This exercise has been tested in both classroom and online offerings, and a marked increase was measured in the theoretical understanding of geopolitical, nationalistic and sociological forces, as well as an increased appreciation of the causes of waves of immigration and of domestic nativist responses.

This article proposes a framework to analyze cross-national variation in immigration policy-making in the U.S. It argues that immigration policy consists of multiple, distinctive issues and it can be disaggregated by applying intersectionality approach. It proposes that in context of disaggregating immigration policy, the country needs to identify the different causal mechanisms behind each type of policy, which encompasses relevant actors and political contexts.

Abstract: This research provides an empirical assessment of the relationship between places of socialization and ethnic self-identity preferences among Asian immigrants in the United States from separate parts of a politically divided homeland. Does place of socialization influence the (sub)ethnic self-identity of Chinese Americans growing up in China, Taiwan, and Hong Kong? How do socialization context and transnational political concerns, among other factors, help structure the relationship? Benefitting from recent advancements in targeted ethnic sampling and telephone survey methodology, this essay examines results of the 2007 Chinese American Homeland Politics survey to study the contour and sources of ethnic identity preferences among Chinese in the United States from separate homeland origins. We test the usefulness of a theoretical framework that contrasts primordial ties with transnational political ties in understanding the structuring of identity preferences at the subethnic level. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article looks at the immigration policy of the U.S. regarding illegal Mexicans living in the country. Presented are the theoretical frameworks identified as relevant to establish if there is a perception gap in U.S. immigration policy. It stresses that as long as there is a perception gap, the illegal immigrants will keep on entering the U.S., and suggests engaging U.S. foreign policy process with an informed Latino perspective in order to close this perception gap.

The article examines why Latinos are more trusting of the U.S. federal government as compared to Anglos and African Americans. The importance of discrimination and generational status in predicting the levels of Latinos' political trust is noted. It is argued that the heavy flow of immigration by Latinos has changed their population in such a way that the views of the foreign-born are disproportionately represented in survey questions concerning government trust.

The article presents a discussion about the media coverage of illegal immigration in the U.S. It is noted that lives of people residing in state along the U.S.-Mexico border are affected by incidents of illegal immigration. Gallup public opinion data from January to December 2006 revealed that the public sees illegal immigration as a significant problem in the country.

Intense debates in the United States over immigration often coincide with each wave of mass immigration. The last two decades have witnessed the largest number of immigrants admitted to the US. In addition to increases in legal immigration, there has been a dramatic increase in undocumented immigrants, which by some estimates has grown to over 11 million. The increase in "legal" and "illegal" immigration has predictably resulted in a backlash toward immigrants and current US immigration policy which many consider to be broken. In response to this backlash, in 2005 the House of Representatives passed HR 4437, which sought to create a 700 mile fence along the U.S.-Mexico border and criminalize undocumented immigrants and persons assisting them. Politicos and media elites were taken by surprise when in the spring of 2006 over a million immigrants and immigrant-rights advocates took to the streets in protest of these draconian measures. In light of these dramatic events, this study seeks to examine the factors shaping American public opinion toward undocumented immigrants and US immigration policy. Current studies on attitudes toward immigration largely consider the role of economic motives, inter-group contact, affect, and symbolic orientations (Pantoja 2006a, 2006b; Binder, Polinard, and Wrinkle 1997; Hood and Morris 1997; Citrin, Green, Muste and Wong 1997; Espenshade and Hempstead 1996; Espenshade and Calhoun 1993). Each of these studies has advanced our understanding of the factors underlying opinion formation toward immigrants and US immigration policy. However, given data limitations, most have not examined how media framing influences immigration attitudes. Furthermore, since many studies were conducted pre-9/11, we know little about how national security concerns influence attitudes toward immigration. This study overcomes these issues by proposing an experimental design to test the effects of differing frames (Druckman 2004) in shaping public opinion toward undocumented immigrants and immigration policies. Subjects are assigned to one of six conditions: a control group, a national security frame, an economic benefit frame, an economic cost frame, a social instability frame, and a historical tradition frame. We hypothesize that those who receive a positive frame (economic benefits and historical tradition) will have more favorable views towards undocumented immigrants and be more supportive of progressive immigration reform relative to those who receive a negative frame (economic cost, social instability, and national security). We treat each frame separately to see whether some frames carry a stronger effect than others in influencing the ingredients of evaluations and opinions on immigration. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This preliminary study analyzed occupational mobility among immigrants based on the New Immigrants Survey 2003 data. Previous studies explain that immigrants to the United States experience decline of occupational level and have lower earnings than natives with compatible education levels. Results are consistent with previous studies; declines of occupational categories have been seen most of the occupational level, except for Computer and Mathematics related professions. Years of education abroad and better English proficiency explain upward mobility among immigrants for the first job and current job in the United States. Marital status has significant impact for the first job in the United States but less significant than year of education and English proficiency. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The problem addressed by studies of political culture, illuminated from a new angle through historical reconstruction here is that the practical constitution of the so democratic universal, unitary public sphere, depended historically on the domestication of the political, the normalization and social control of elements deemed foreign and strange, through the imposition of what Zygmunt Bauman describes as the soldier's "jackboot" which tramples "on the human face" of those transgress the normative boundaries of the state. My aim is to show how the introduction of new public health institutions, particularly the post-revolutionary hospital with its new medical wing for the mad---necessary to confine the once revolutionary, designated rebellious Irish--quelled the political fervor of the French revolutionary influence by reframing madness in medical discourse that ironically squeezed "the strange out of the human." It shows that post-revolutionary Enlightened medical discourse collapsed political difference as it equated health an cultural homogeneity. My historical representation has a tripartite focus on (1) the interpretation of medical and political discourses , (2) describing the Pennsylvania Hospital and (3) recapturing the "early nationalist" identity of citizens in the Philadelphia and the Pennsylvania Frontier. Recognizing, on the one hand, that theoretical praxis may be counter to the grain of historical fact and, on the other, the limited extent that historical contingencies yield to theory, this work in progress gives the public sphere-related issues in debate a new historical contour for strengthening conceptual framework of democracy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

: The concept of an "American Dream" emerged post World War II expressing the notion that immigrants can arrive to the United States penniless and get rich through hard work. This central pillar of the social ideology of U.S. society insists that everyone can achieve material success if they work hard. For some (particular those of European descent), this was the case as rapid industrial growth and expanding global power initially provided jobs, the Federal Housing Act provided access to suburban homes, and the GI Bill opened the door to higher education. These rewards however were disparately allocated. This notion of infinite possibilities for those who work hard provides justification to adhere to narratives of national origin and development without questioning the structure of society, because the reason for inequality and for lack of success is deemed a weakness of the individual.At this time the proportional wealth of those at top grows the rest of the population increasingly struggles. Expanding numbers of people who are hungry and homeless throughout the U.S. testify to national priorities that contradict the notion of the "American Dream" and dramatically demonstrate the connection between the global and the local. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examines the "boundaries of belonging" in a small U.S. city where large numbers of immigrants have radically transformed its ethnic and racial makeup over the past decade. For most of its history, Danbury, Connecticut has welcomed "white ethnic" groups, but today most migrants arrive from non-European, non-"white" nations, especially Latin America. With somewhere between 12,000-15,000 undocumented residents, municipal officials estimate that the foreign-born represent nearly 40% of the city's population. Like other "new immigrant gateways," Danbury's civil sphere is a hotbed of debate concerning "illegal immigration." Data collected from fourteen months of participant observation focused on three sites in Danbury, one-on-one qualitative interviews, and written and electronic texts point to the significance of three particular categories - "immigrant," "alien," and "American." A cultural sociological analysis of the structures of meaning associated with these categories reveals how individuals draw symbolic boundaries between U.S. and foreign-born city residents. Although they draw upon similar symbolic representations, some invoke formal and procedural criteria for inclusion or exclusion within the privileged (pure) categories of "American" or "immigrant" (in other words, legal boundaries), while others embrace a more substantive, humanistic standard (moral boundaries). Most often, they call upon both. But even when similar criteria are invoked, the foreign-born end up on different sides of the boundary for different people. The legal term "alien," transforms into a signifier for the polluted, those not worthy of inclusion - neither as "Americans" nor as "immigrants." It is not a simple dichotomy that posits "Americans" against "foreigners" or U.S. citizens and legal residents against "illegals." Rather, the civil codes for inclusion and exclusion traverse a contested terrain of belonging, with the boundaries of who really belongs in Danbury (or in the country, for that matter) constantly shifting. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This research examines differences in insurance coverage of Hispanic subgroups of the United States. Particular attention is paid to the impact of the immigration status- including nativity, duration in the United States, and citizenship status - and its affect on insurance coverage. Data are pooled from the National Health Interview Survey for 2002-2003 and multinomial logistic regression models are estimated to compare Mexican American, Puerto Rican, and Other Hispanics with non-Hispanic Whites and Blacks. All Hispanic subgroups are much more likely than non-Hispanic whites to report Miscellaneous Insurance Coverage or No Coverage than Private Insurance Coverage. There are wide differences in insurance coverage across racial and ethnic groups in the United States. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In many countries outside of the United States recent immigrants are more likely to report high levels of drug use and abuse that decline with acculturation, but research examining patterns of substance use by Hispanics in the United States has found acculturation to result in increased rather than decreased drug use. This study contributes to the growing literature on acculturation and Hispanic drug use by analyzing the effect of acculturation on Hispanic substance use in Washington State. Analyses include several measures of substance use and abuse, including "bender drinking" and DSM-IV drug and alcohol use disorder, while controlling for a number of factors that might otherwise affect the relationship between acculturation and Hispanic substance use. Findings reveal acculturation to have a strong positive effect on levels of substance use, abuse and dependence among Hispanics. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Housing in the United States constitutes the largest expenditure for many households, while the value and equity held in owned-housing represents a substantial source of wealth for families. Rising housing costs, recent changes in the home mortgage industry, and the emerging dominance of immigrants in the U.S. housing market make it important to explore how immigrants are faring in these domains. The current project employs data from the New Immigrant Survey to examine three areas of housing that have lacked sufficient empirical study: the proportion of household income allocated to housing costs (shelter cost burden), the present value of homes, and home equity. The analyses document more positive housing outcomes for Latin American immigrants than observed in previous scholarship. However, the results also indicate that significant differences by country/region of origin and race persist after controlling for variation in individual and household characteristics, migration history, housing characteristics, and location. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Details a study which examined the association between contemporary citizenship politics in democracies, migration flows and voting rights in the U.S. Theories governing the voting rights of citizens and aliens; Comparison between the nationalist and postnationalist views on the voting rights of resident aliens; Description of the study population; Methodology and results.

Over the past twenty years, there has been an increase in research on hate crimes committed in the United States; however little research has focused specifically on what Levin and McDevitt (1993, 2002) have categorized as defensive hate crimes. As a result, we know little about the conditions under which defensive have crimes have been prosecuted. This study aimed to determine changes in various characteristics of defensive hate crimes between 1991 and 2005. Defensive hate crimes, as defined by Levin and McDevitt (1993), are "[crimes in which the] offenders are provoked by feeling a need to protect their resources under conditions they consider to be threatening." This study's primary method of data collection was a content analysis 101 defensive hate crimes and their 197 defendants as reported in the major circulated newspapers of each geographical region of the United States. The two time periods examined and compared were 1991-1995 and 2001-2005. The main characteristics investigated include: offender age, the number of offenses committed prior to prosecution, the precipitating event of the crime, motivational biases, court rulings, and effectiveness in eliminating the victim. Since the 1990s, the prevalence of defensive hate crimes has increased, rising from 47% to 54% of all hate crimes, presumably due to increased immigration in the United States and fear of another terrorist attack. Results indicate that responses to the 9/11 terrorist attacks have helped shape the nature of defensive hate crimes since 2001, specifically in the characteristics of their precipitating events and their bias motivation. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Literature suggests that black immigrants earn less than U.S.-born blacks shortly after arrival, but earn more than U.S.-born blacks after residing in the United States for at least 11 years. Utilizing data on U.S-born and black immigrant men from the 1980-2000 U.S. Census and the 2000-2007 American Community Surveys, I evaluate whether selective migration, both international (across countries) and internal (within the United States) accounts for the documented earnings crossover. I show that all arrival cohorts of black immigrants earn less than U.S.-born blacks when they first arrive in the United States. However, many cohorts, particularly those from the West Indies, begin to surpass the earnings of U.S.-born blacks (collectively) after 11 years of U.S. residence. In contrast, most immigrants never surpass either the earnings of U.S.-born blacks who have moved across states since birth or the earnings of U.S.-born whites. Region of birth variation in assimilation also exists among black immigrants. While every arrival cohort from the West Indies earns more than African immigrants when they first arrive in the United States, the earnings of African immigrants grow faster than those of West Indian immigrants. The overall findings suggest that selective migration explains the earning crossover between black immigrants and U.S-born blacks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Immigrant groups arrive in the United States with different socioeconomic and linguistic backgrounds. This study reveals the roles played by several key pre-migration characteristics of immigrant parents in children's cognitive development. We find that pre-migration SES contributes significantly to post-migration SES, albeit in different directions for different indicators. The level of cognitive stimulation in the post-migration home is significantly related to parents' pre-migration education and English skills. The amount of test score variance explained by pre-migration parental characteristics is similar to the amount explained by post-migration parental attributes. Consistent with past research using national sample of young children, our study shows Latino children having lower cognitive test scores than non-Latino children, with Mexican children having the lowest test scores. Our results extend previous work on immigrant selectivity. We use individual-level pre-migration parental characteristics instead of group-level-premigration characteristics to explain the achievement gaps. Cognitive stimulation at home does not explain the associations between children's cognitive achievement, on the one hand, and pre- or post-migration parental SES and English language proficiency, on the other. We find that general human capital acquired from formal schooling abroad has as much impact on children's cognitive home environments as formal schooling acquired in the United States. Pre-migration education may have a low value in the U.S. labor market, but it pays off quite well in terms of children's cognitive achievement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dominicans form the 4th largest Latino ethnic group in the U.S., yet have received little attention in the burgeoning health disparities research agenda. Explanations of Latino health disparities focus either on the selectivity hypothesis (the immigrant stream is healthier than either the return migration stream or the nonmigrant population of the country of origin) or on the acculturation hypothesis (the loss of health-protective cultural buffers with acculturation). Bicultural data are necessary to better understand the role of migration and settlement in shaping Dominican health, and thus a more clear view of levels, causes and solutions to emergent health disparities. I pool the 2002 Demographic and Health Survey data from the Dominican Republic with five years (2000-2004) of the National Health Interview Survey data from the U.S. to analyze differentials in chronic disease epidemiology. Immigrants to the U.S., return migrants to the D.R., and internal D.R. migrants are compared with nonmigrant Dominican women. Second generation Dominicans in the U.S. provide evidence for the acculturation hypothesis. The results of analyses of medical conditions are consistent with the selectivity hypothesis. Results of analyses of impairment and disability, however, are contrary to it. Results of the analyses of medical conditions are suggestive of support for the acculturation hypothesis, yet the results of the impairment and disability analyses tilt evidence toward a healthier second generation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]