National Public Radio’s All Things Considered is running a three part series this week that takes a look at the 1965 Immigration Act. As mentioned at various times on SM, this is the law which is responsible for many of our parents being allowed to legally enter the U.S., as well as the reason many of us are born citizens. The series by NPR is particularly relevant because one can draw comparisons between the immigration debate then and now. There are three to four million people standing in line waiting to get into America legally right now.
The FULL story is an audio story (and contains rich detail in the form of short interviews-12 min long). I am excerpting the abridged transcript below, although you are much better off listening to the whole story. First, one must remember the immigration laws before the 1965 Act:
“The law was just unbelievable in its clarity of racism,” says Stephen Klineberg, a sociologist at Rice University. “It declared that Northern Europeans are a superior subspecies of the white race. The Nordics were superior to the Alpines, who in turn were superior to the Mediterraneans, and all of them were superior to the Jews and the Asians.”
By the 1960s, Greeks, Poles, Portuguese and Italians were complaining that immigration quotas discriminated against them in favor of Western Europeans. The Democratic Party took up their cause, led by President John F. Kennedy. In a June 1963 speech to the American Committee on Italian Migration, Kennedy called the system of quotas in place back then “nearly intolerable…” [Link]
So Kennedy and the Democrats saw the political advantages to updating the racist laws in order to give an equal shot to everyone in the world, but Kennedy died before the ’65 act was passed. When Lyndon Johnson signed it into law he went out of his way to state that he didn’t think anything would come of it. Neither Johnson, nor most of the government, thought that people would really line up to come to the United States:
“This bill that we will sign today is not a revolutionary bill. It does not affect the lives of millions,” Johnson said at the signing ceremony. “It will not reshape the structure of our daily lives or add importantly to either our wealth or our power.”
Looking back, Johnson’s statement is remarkable because it proved so wrong. [Link]
<
p>Congress was after two things. First, they wanted to re-unite American families with their extended family in the old world. This was a popular notion and would be sure to drum up votes. You could almost consider this immigration based upon a system of nepotism. An additional motivation of Congress is that they wanted to crack open the door for highly skilled labor. This is another area where they miscalculated.
“Congress was saying in its debates, ‘We need to open the door for some more British doctors, some more German engineers,'” Klineberg says. “It never occurred to anyone, literally, that there were going to be African doctors, Indian engineers, Chinese computer programmers who’d be able, for the first time in the 20th century, to immigrate to America…” [Link]
<
p>
Among the most interesting parts of the NPR story is a re-enactment of a Congressional committee interview of Secretary of State Dean Rusk (at the 4min20sec mark). A Senator asks Rusk about what he thinks will be the result of the Immigration Act. In particular he asks if a lot of people from India might use the law to come to America. Rusk replies:
“The present estimate, based upon the best information we can get, is that there might be, say, 8,000 immigrants from India in the next five years. In other words, I don’t think we have a particular picture of a world situation where everybody is just straining to move to the Unites States…” [Link]
Wrong again.
So is it bad that legal immigration in this country has been based upon what one may view as a system of nepotism (in the form of “chain-migration”) for the last 40 years? It depends on where you are standing. You might think that an egalitarian system would better serve the U.S. but chain-migration has a distinct advantage that I am sure many South Asians living in America know well:
… the Asian American Justice Center’s Narasaki thinks the family focus makes sense. She notes that in the Asian community, extended families often function as a close-knit unit. Parents will help raise children, while siblings will pool their money to buy homes and businesses together and to help finance college for the younger generation.
“A family is very important not just to the social and emotional well-being, but also to the economic well-being of these communities,” she says. [Link]
Abhi,
I also read somewhere that there was quite a bit of debate on chain-migration back then. As you said, they under-estinated that feature totally and flood of Asian immigrants.
It is slipping my mind – How much is primary immigration (job, education)? How much is chain immigration. What fraction? Chain immigration is more tied to vote banks.
Another trivia: Catholic lawmakers were very keen on diversity lottery (when it was passed) since it included a lot of countries from behind the iron curtain, and quite a few of them are Catholic.
Also,Kennedeys are Catholics.
Abhi:
Also, remember that this era (circa 1965) was the Cold War era. Sandhya Shukla and Vijay Prasad point out that there was a high demand for highly skilled labor, particularly in leading research institutions and science fields, in the attempt to beat the USSR. Furthermore, in the mid 1960’s to the 1970’s, there was a major restructuring of the global economy. Shukla and others note that the American economy was expanding and was in need for professionals. In America, there had been a shortage of “native” (White) Americans who could occupy professions such as medicine, the natural sciences, engineering, academia, and so on. The selected professional immigrants came to fill in these spots. Vijay Prasad states that “between 1965 and 1977, 83% of the [Indian] migrants came with advanced degrees”.
So is it bad that legal immigration in this country has been based upon what one may view as a system of nepotism (in the form of “chain-migration”) for the last 40 years?
too much of a good thing is bad. pooling $$$ to buy houses is fine, but asian americans aren’t doing badly enough that i’d justify it on those grounds. on the one hand people praise the 1965 for breaking out of the same-old-same-old mentality of only/mosty NW europeans. but now the status quo tends to favor a few big countries like india, china and mexico who gotz a big base to start from same-old-same-old.
you all know my opinion, 83% advanced degree holders is not a bad thing!!!
p.s. i believe lotz of irish were hanging around illegally around 1965, and ted kennedy wanted them in.
I beleive as far as desis go majority of late 70’s/80’s arrivals were chain immigration family reunification. Then by the 90’s were skilled labor became the majority. A lot of them skilled labor has opted to stay, a lot doesnt want to anymore.
One reason why western European immigration dried up in 60s.
Vietnam War and draft, apart from high standard of living in western Europe (as NPR points out). Everyone should listen to NPR snipet.
I know somebody who as a young bloke was offered MIT faculty but stayed in Cambridge, UK because was concerned of being drafted.
Yes, Razib. Back then it was John-Robert-Ted K. team working for Irish cause (later Reagan and Senator Mitchell). Back then, Catholics were Democratic Party vote back.
Back then it was John-Robert-Ted K. team working for Irish cause
What is this “back then” business? 🙂 With Remaining Ted, it happened with the diversity lottery bill and will probably happen again this year if they manage to pass a bill.
What is this “back then” business?
Just figure of speech and boredom, I didn’t mean anything profound. Yes, Ted Kennedy was a leading proponent of diversity lottery.
Razib:
you all know my opinion, 83% advanced degree holders is not a bad thing!!!
Of course it’s not, silly. What’s bad is when people (both Indians and non-Indians)argue or think that the community is affluent and has a high socio-economic status by virtue of being Indian. This is what is problematic. The Indian Diaspora in the US is wealthy and highly educated because the Indians that had been let into this country were chosen for the very fact that they were highly educated,not because Indians somehow have it in their DNA to be the brightest and the best in science and technology. So I am disagreeing with the “cultural explanation” as to why Indian Americans are wealthy; there is a reason why the community’s composition is this way.
or perhaps desi culture isn’t homogenous and the socio-economic top tier have certain “cultural traits” (study hard, save, work hard, focus long term, etc.) that outperformed the others…
just wanted to call out the classism in #10’s statement — the socio-economic top tier have certain “cultural traits” makes it sound like only the rich/higher caste people work/study hard, plan for the future, etc…that somehow only these desis from the top socio-economic tier hold these values…in essence poor/lower caste people are lazy, think about the present only…so naturally the former outperform the latter…or, i wonder, do you think it is possible that social and institutional access to resources is what enables people from a certain socioeconomic tier to outperform the others..
just wanted to call out the false dichotomy in #11’s statement… or, i wonder, do you think it is possible that both access and individual effort are required…
sc, I think you got vinod all wrong. saying that socio economic top tiers have a certain trait does not equate to saying that others don’t have those trait. The fact is that some one who is successful in india is most likely to be even more successful in US. Even with all the institutional access that someone might have, you have to work 20 times as hard in India just to survive.
The immigrants from the 60s and 70s might have been let in for their education but the 80s saw a huge influx of immigrants that weren’t as educated but were simply hard working and believed in the dream of making it big in America. There are 1000s of all American stories out there especially in the Punjabi and Gujarati community where people came here with nothing, but by sheer hardwork have built substantial businesses for themselves, diamond, apparel, grocery/desi services, hotel/motel. They came with neither money nor education. And that speaks to the point Vinod makes below.
CAD: Please see Thomas Sowell’s interpretation of culture.
But many of the new immigrants came with relatives who were well educated, and so they had resources to draw upon.
What’s bad is when people (both Indians and non-Indians)argue or think that the community is affluent and has a high socio-economic status by virtue of being Indian. (see #9)
Indians in American are not wealthy because they are Indian. There are other factors that are responsible for their socio-economic success. For those who are going to claim that there is something unique about “Indian culture” which has played an important role in influencing and molding a person’s socio-economic status, I have to disagree (also because if we are going to use cultural explanations as to why people succeed, one could easily veer into describing other groups as somehow having a “culture” that does not place an emphasis on education, long term investment, etc). There are members of other ethnic communities who have “done well” (socio-economically speaking) too, and they are not Indian. It is true that Indians are the wealthiest and most educated ethnic group in the US, but look at the fact that 83% of them came here with advanced degrees. What do you expect from them and their offspring?
Jane of all Trades:
The immigrants from the 60s and 70s might have been let in for their education but the 80s saw a huge influx of immigrants that weren’t as educated but were simply hard working and believed in the dream of making it big in America. There are 1000s of all American stories out there especially in the Punjabi and Gujarati community where people came here with nothing, but by sheer hardwork have built substantial businesses for themselves, diamond, apparel, grocery/desi services, hotel/motel. They came with neither money nor education. And that speaks to the point Vinod makes below.
No one is discounting the undeniable fact that the Indian American community is not homogenous. As of yet, these immigrants from the 1980’s do not constitute the majority of the Indian American community, which is why I did not draw attention to them (but I have in my other posts under “A South Asian American Day”.) Not to say that we should only focus on the majority, since the whole point is to underline the diversity within the Indian American community itself. But those who attract the attention of most- both Indians and non-Indians – are those of the top tier. These are the ones who embody the “model minority” myth ( I have numerous problems with this myth – racially, socially, economically– but I won’t go into that) that get Americans hot all over: “Look, here’s colored people who aren’t looking for government handouts!! They work hard and don’t bitch and whine!”). Yes, but that is because most of them already came from priveleged positions.
No one is discounting the undeniable fact that the Indian American community is not homogenous. As of yet, these immigrants from the 1980’s do not constitute the majority of the Indian American community, which is why I did not draw attention to them (but I have in my other posts under “A South Asian American Day”.)
Sorry, should have addressed this in my comment above. Jane of All Trades, the immigrants of lower socio-economic status who work in hotels and small businesses came here via the “Family Reunification” clause of the Immigration Act. That is, they had to be sponsored by relatives already living here. And those relatives already living here were of the highter socio-econimic strata. Thus, as Ennis points out:
But many of the new immigrants came with relatives who were well educated, and so they had resources to draw upon.
Comment # 18 is mine, I accidentally put “sorry” instead of my name, which is Cheap Ass Desi.
CAD points noted. I do agree that making blanket statements about cultural tendencies can get lame even if they are positive but you can’t discount the general environment of “family helping family” that exists among the Asian (including Southeast Asian) population.
It’s funny how location makes a huge different. In Queens NY where I grew up and still live almost the entire desi community is made up of the above immigrants. The immigrants of the 60’s and 70’s moved out to suburbia ie Long Island or Westchester or Jersey a long time ago.
I don’t know why there are so many people in favor of merit-blind immigration via “family reunification” (in places with bad birth certificates, this could be basically anyone).
Merit based immigration = good. There are millions of doctors and engineers who want to come to the US. Why we are privileging illiterate migrant workers from one country over the scientists and PhDs of the rest of the world is beyond me. Favoring illegal immigration of the poorest and least educated from Mexico is irrational from both a diversity promotion and an economic standpoint.
Yes, but that is because most of them already came from priveleged positions.
It’s not that they were born with silver spoons in their mouths. Many of those who came here faced casteist quotas in India that prevented them from taking professional jobs despite high scores on tests. The Indians who came were intelligent and they worked hard. They passed those attributes on to their offspring. IQ strongly impacts economic performance and IQ is strongly heritable. You select for high IQ immigrants, and like magic, their kids have high IQs as well. It’s that simple and has nothing to do with “privilege”. You can take dirt poor Vietnamese fleeing communism and watch them kick ass in the US…because they have high IQs and a strong work ethic.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/asia/jan-june00/vietnam_6-19.html
Same thing happened in Russia with the Chinese:
You can’t neglect DNA when talking about politics, particularly about the likely outcomes of selective vs. merit-blind immigration policy. But most of you will, so carry on…
Oh cmon. The mere access to having immigration as an option is “privilege” in India. How many 100s of millions cant even dream of having “immigration” as an option.
.
How is the above any different from the below as quote in the NPR story.
hahaha as if that mattered. the merit of the white settlers in any continent outside europe is questionable. There is a hindia saying “Haath Utha ke thaam lo, to Jaam Tumhara hai.” => grab the drink and its yours. The mexicans grabbed it and its theirs. They embody the american spirit just as arnold. They came here for economic oppurtunity pure and simple.
The mere access to having immigration as an option is “privilege” in India. How many 100s of millions cant even dream of having “immigration” as an option.
And if youre one of the gene ppl, good luck to them, for according to them, the average brown (South Asian) man has an IQ of 80, the average black man a little lower, the average white man around 100, and the average yellow man (east asian) around 105. The gene ppl want the braniac browns (largely upper castes, according to them) who’ll marry “white christians” within two generations and melt into this great great great country. They call this quick assimilation. Lil brown men will bring down the quality of the stock here. And I aint lying, thats really about the jist of it.
GC:
You can’t neglect DNA when talking about politics, particularly about the likely outcomes of selective vs. merit-blind immigration policy. But most of you will, so carry on…
Yes you can, you can neglect DNA. Your reasoning and “proof” for why some races succeed is specious is based on opinion. This is the kind of stuff scientists in the last century were coming up with so as to justify racism. And excuse, how is it that you are making a logical connection between immigrants en masse and IQ? Intelligence is hereditary. Duh, we know that. So is high socio-economic status, in that generally, children will have a socio-economic status similar to their parents. This is NOT exclusive to Indians, it is appicable to every race*. So given that most (not all) Indian Americans are wealthy, their children will tend to be so as well. Post 1965 Indian Americans (who make up the majority of the Indian Diaspora in the US) are wealthy because of selective immigration.
If Indians had it in their DNA to be so bright and the cream of the crop, please explain the current socio-economic realities in India and how you account for that (and no, your whining about high caste Indians facing caste reservation quotas isn’t a reasonable explanation).
Yes, “most of us will carry on” neglecting DNA because it is a simplistic and stupid explanation to describe why groups are in the social and economic stations that they find themselves in.
*”Race” is a social construct, and has been a discredited theory in science. Ethnicity however, despite the fact that it is also a social construct, is more accurate in describing groups.
RC: I second you.
i dont know – we can argue stats – but the ends justifying the means is a logic that i find abhorrent – operation paperclip is one example where rules were broken so america could win the space race and where i think your argument fails the gut test – and everything cited abotu mexicans today is as true as it was for other people before them – i’m not american – my knowledge of amreican history is from popular fiction and if one were to take passages from the grapes of wrath or birth of a nation and slap a ‘mexican’ label to the people being buggered, the lines could be taken from the debates of today.
Jane of All Trades:
CAD points noted. I do agree that making blanket statements about cultural tendencies can get lame even if they are positive but you can’t discount the general environment of “family helping family” that exists among the Asian(including Southeast Asian) population.
One slight modification in your statement: The “family helping family” mentality is not unique to South and Southeast Asian populations (Arabs is one example; southern Europeans is another; Latin Americans also; etc..). Moreover, especially when speaking of immigrants, “family helping family” is a phenomenon pervasive in many other communities, including, yes, the Mexicans. In all migration studies, scholars and researchers point out that once a sizeable immigrant community is established, the “social and familial networks” continue to facilitate and strengthen immigration flows; this trend is particularly conspicuous when discussing Mexican immigration. Ever wonder why immigrant communities tend to aggregate in certain areas? So even though you are trying to not make “blanket statements” about cultures, you are.
ok. i think i missed your point. if your point was that the doors should be opened to scientists and phd’s as opposed to migrant workers – i read your concern as arising through your perception of a scientist etc being more valued than a migrant worker – the fundamental question is the measure of a man – i disagree with you on the metrics you are applying and i dont think there is a middle ground
RC
I think the 2 are different arguement. The 1st law change was basicaly that we will be fair with in the white racial grouping. But the end result was something different wrt Indians.
The arguement put forward by gc is correlation of IQ scores with something more important. Its american ajoobaism and nothing more.
IQ is considered to be important b/c for some reason US has economic interest pushing WAIS and SAT Another claim by the pushers of standardized testing is that its something you cant change its inate Repeat SAT test takers have routinely increased their scores so its doubtful that its measuring any inate ability.
Howard gardners view on intelligence is closest to mine. and lets not forget mr golemans contribution (Emotional Intelligence) EI was more important in determining financial success and who will finish a degree on time vs who will bum around? Even alcoholism and emotional intelligence were more closely related than IQ.
I probably would be a good case study for this. As i am getting older i dont even like to do this kind of puzzle, I used to be good in my teens and now at 29 i will probably score less at that kind of stuff then what i would have as a teen. Tastes and interest change and i dont enjoy that kind of stuff any more so i wouldnt even engage my self. How many people were sort of not tuned in that kind of game ? 10 years ago I did not enjoy reading history now i do. The level of engagement is totaly different.
IF you were to create a test for reading docs and generating hypothesis, I would probably do a lot more of them correctly today than 10 years ago.
If you wanted me to look for numerical, spacial patterns i would have done that faster 10 years ago. How many people would probably score poor on that section of IQ test b/c simply put it doesnt arouse anything. Sure maybe if you put me on 3/4 cups of coffee i would be jacked up and would go throught the whole thing but ow i wouldnt even bother completing it.
But the culture as a whole beleives in that being an important metric, so its something that we are going to see over and over again. And i do hope that other cultures would be careful when copying this aspect
You are right because unfortunately I only have the inside view of Indian culture. Other cultures though visible aren’t that close to me for me to truly understand the depth of help offered within families to each other. Yes it is a phenomenon common among new immigrants, but there is a level of help I see desis offer to their own kind that I haven’t seen with other immigrant communities at least in NYC. But again I’m making assumpions from a lopsided POV.
I see desis offer to their own kind that I haven’t seen with other immigrant communities at least in NYC
I knew some Bulgarian immigrants who came to USA through diversity lottery. Some of them were not even relatives (or same home town) but when they arrived in USA, they acted like extended/ joint family to help each other out in a new country, new culture, new rules, and new language. They had somehow in the home country found about each other’s existence just prior to departure.
I also know Chinese immigrants through family-reunification.
Korean churches gives loans to new immigrants.
Just look carefully.
KT I know I’m not disregarding it. My assumption about Asian communities in general is from an inside view, not just desi but Chinese/Korean/Vietnamese etc. I do know the Russian Jewish community in Forest Hills where I live is very tight and they have a community center where they try to reach out to new immigrants in the community and help them out. But yes my view is myopic based on my own personal experience.
It’s not that they were born with silver spoons in their mouths. Many of those who came here faced casteist quotas in India that prevented them from taking professional jobs despite high scores on tests. The Indians who came were intelligent and they worked hard. They passed those attributes on to their offspring. IQ strongly impacts economic performance and IQ is strongly heritable. You select for high IQ immigrants, and like magic, their kids have high IQs as well. It’s that simple and has nothing to do with “privilege”. You can take dirt poor Vietnamese fleeing communism and watch them kick ass in the US…because they have high IQs and a strong work ethic.
Ugh, GC, you really need to read The Mismeasure of Man by Stephen Jay Gould. You won’t agree with any of it since it debunks your entire line of reasoning, but if any of it sinks in, it will help.
Guru Gulab Khatri: # 31
Even alcoholism and emotional intelligence were more closely related than IQ.
I probably would be a good case study for this.
Tastes and interest change and i dont enjoy that kind of stuff any more so i wouldnt even engage my self.
How many people were sort of not tuned in that kind of game ? 10 years ago I did not enjoy reading history now i do. The level of engagement is totaly different. Sure maybe if you put me on 3/4 cups of coffee i would be jacked up and would go throught the whole thing but ow i wouldnt even bother completing it.
But the culture as a whole beleives in that being an important metric, so its something that we are going to see over and over again. And i do hope that other cultures would be careful when copying this aspect.i>
Have you been drinking?
Guru Gulab Khatri: # 31
Even alcoholism and emotional intelligence were more closely related than IQ.
I probably would be a good case study for this.
Tastes and interest change and i dont enjoy that kind of stuff any more so i wouldnt even engage my self.
How many people were sort of not tuned in that kind of game ? 10 years ago I did not enjoy reading history now i do. The level of engagement is totaly different. Sure maybe if you put me on 3/4 cups of coffee i would be jacked up and would go throught the whole thing but ow i wouldnt even bother completing it.
But the culture as a whole beleives in that being an important metric, so its something that we are going to see over and over again. And i do hope that other cultures would be careful when copying this aspect.
Have you been drinking?
The reason I say the 2 are the same is this. The law before 1965 claimed that Nordics are superior to the Jews (what a bunch of BS !!!.. Einstein, Heisenburg, Oppenheimer ….. But this is what religion does ..makes you f@#$ing stupid ) The law didnt say why superior as it doesn need to.
The other argument of Asians being higher IQed (supposedly) also makes a similar claim, that Asians are “superior” to others as they supposedly have higher IQ. Thus its just as racist categorization as the Law prior to 1965 did.
Dammit!! I can’t get GGK’s quote in italics. Here it goes again:
Even alcoholism and emotional intelligence were more closely related than IQ.
I probably would be a good case study for this.
Tastes and interest change and i dont enjoy that kind of stuff any more so i wouldnt even engage my self.
How many people were sort of not tuned in that kind of game ? 10 years ago I did not enjoy reading history now i do. The level of engagement is totaly different. Sure maybe if you put me on 3/4 cups of coffee i would be jacked up and would go throught the whole thing but ow i wouldnt even bother completing it.
But the culture as a whole beleives in that being an important metric, so its something that we are going to see over and over again. And i do hope that other cultures would be careful when copying this aspect.i>
Have you been drinking?
No its not friday, 🙂
have u
I dont think GC meant Asians have higher IQ, just the subset he wants here. b/c in his viewpoint a higher IQ indian wouldnt bother staying in india vietnam etc… I agree w/ you that its wrong, but i dont know if its racist.
I dont think GC meant Asians have higher IQ, just the subset he wants here. b/c in his viewpoint a higher IQ indian wouldnt bother staying in india vietnam etc… I agree w/ you that its wrong, but i dont know if its racist.
If this is Godless Capitalist from Gene Expression, then I am sure he believes East Asians in East Asia, on average, have a higher IQ (by a couple of points) than whites, who have a higher IQ (by a large measure) than South Asians and Arabs, who have a higher IQ, on average, than Sub-Saharan Africans, and that IQ is an important -perhaps the most important – factor explaining the relative wealth and poverty of nations.
Eddie:
If this is Godless Capitalist from Gene Expression, then I am sure he believes East Asians in East Asia, on average, have a higher IQ (by a couple of points) than whites, who have a higher IQ (by a large measure) than South Asians and Arabs, who have a higher IQ, on average, than Sub-Saharan Africans, and that IQ is an important -perhaps the most important – factor explaining the relative wealth and poverty of nations.
Eddie, BE CAREFUL!! Someone might just believe your sarcastic explanation. Insert a disclaimer next time. Don’t you know, some will actually take this as objective science. I wouldn’t be suprised if someone quoted you on this so as to validate and back up their claim that intelligence, wealth, and a high socio-economic status is based on your race.
I wonder if you have any first hand exposure to the sub-continent before the recent tech boom with its gleaming commericial complexes. And it’s wild that no one else had a problem with the above quote and its tone except for another extremist (i.e. GC).
I am sure we could use a little more debate on immigration reform.The following link to the video of a personal immigration story I told to a live audience in Greenwich Village, NYC, explains ( well not really due to time constraints ) why I am sympathetic to illegal immigrants from Latin America. The subtexts of the story that uses my parents’ maiden visit to America as a backdrop are : the growing alienation of a Republican leaning immigrant from that party and the shallow intellect of Lou Dobbs and his ilk.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TAIGxuFq0nk
http://khaleejione.blogspot.com/
Scroll down and read what this Emirati has to say about a new law in UAE granting citizenship to “asians” who have lived most or all of their lives there. The subsequeant comments regarding “culture”, Bollywood, etc, are telling.
this is crazy
As was mentioned above the American people were opposed to the immigration changes passed into law in the Hart-Cellar act but the political elites passed the law anyway. The United States is in bad shape now because of this immigration law and the solution is to repeal Hart-Cellar and nullify the citizenship of everyone who has become a naturalized citizen since. Our population is out of control at about 315 million and getting worse. All immigrants and they’re offspring and sponsored family who have come here should be deported at they’re own expense. Our population should be returned to 200 million asap and there will be an improvement in the lives of all true Americans by doing so. When I say True Americans I mean those who were here and citizens before 1968 and they’re decendents. The quality of life for the average American citizen has declined as a result of the 1965 Hart-Cellar act. This country has become so PC that it’s OK to descriminate against white males to give an advantage to anyone else. English should be the offical language of the USA! E-Verify should be used to check everyone employed in the country not just new hires. Puerto Rico should be declared an independent nation and every person of Puerto Rican descent should be deported there. “Soon a real storm is going to come and wash all the trash away” Travis Bickle. Ted Kennedy is gone but his elitist anti American middle class mentality lives on and we need true top to bottom reform that will cleanse this nation and restore the true American dream.