Changes

Immigration has been a political, socialDebates about immigration policy, including recent discussions about how documented and economic hot-button issue in almost every decade since undocumented workers fit into the U.S. became its own country. Whether they American labor system, are Italian, Irish, Asian, or Middle Eastern, immigrants have made reminders of the United States their home and have introduced new and influential cultures to States’ biggest experiment with guest workers: the countrybracero program. Unfortunately Named for migrantsthe Spanish term meaning “manual laborer, there are usually enormous issues facing them from their initial decision to migrate to ” the program was initiated through a series of bilateral agreements between the U.S. United States and even years after they arriveMexico in 1942 because of farm labor shortages caused by American entry into World War II.

Within the past century, Mexican migrants have seen some of the worst treatment and political hostility when it comes to migrant worker and immigrant history. Although there is no comparison agricultural workers were brought to other groups of individuals immigrating to the U.S., Mexican migrant farms to replace American workers have a fascinating history because of dislocated by the Uwar.S. – Mexico border and The program was intended as a temporary wartime solution, but American farms’ growing dependence on Mexican labor kept the political and economic policies and programs that Mexico and program active for two beyond the Uwar’s end.S. have created within Over the life of the last century. One program, in particularbetween 1942 and 1964, nearly 5 million Mexican men came to the United States on temporary, short-term agricultural contracts. The bracero program is the focus historically controversial, prompting scholars to debate whether it was an opportunity for migrant workers or exploitation of this article, the Bracero ProgramMexican labor. It’s significance It continues to the current issues surrounding immigration are paramount shape discussions of modern trade agreements and will continue color ideas about how, and whether, to provide an example of the violent process and discriminatory cycle that Mexican citizens go through as utilize migrant laborers in the U.Slabor.

====Problems In Mexico Pre-Roots of the Bracero Program====There was a slew of factors that lead to the creation of this program, but the The bracero program would not have never been either viable as easily implemented or necessary as popular without the economic and cultural relationship established between Mexico and the United States since the late nineteenth century and if Mexico Mexican citizens could have made a living in Mexico. The key factors are: First, nation’s economy had been uprooted by the Mexican Revolution. Second, the leadership of Profirio (1910–1920); President Porfirio Diaz who had opened up Mexico’s economy to the United States. Third, other countries began in the early 1920s; railroad building railroads across Mexico had created passageways to and from the United States creating the passageways for future migrants to travel. Fourth, north; and the Mexican government and companies based in the U.S. United States had bought land in Mexico. Eventually, most for the building of maquiladoras (cotton factories) throughout the land 1910s. Land originally owned by farmers and the working poor were was swallowed up by these companies. Without this land, leaving these Mexican citizens who used to farm had with no other means to provide for their families. Finally, new ‘’maquiladoras’’ or factories (mainly cotton factories) being built in Mexico, many Mexicans would flood to those The economic circumstances and begin to migrate towards the railroads and factories internallyinfrastructural possibilities were set for a culture of migratory labor.<ref> Deborah Cohen, ‘’Braceros: Migrant Citizens and Transnational Subjects in the Postwar United States and Mexico’’, (Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 2011), 35-37. See also Deborah Cohen, ‘’Braceros: Migrant Citizens and Transnational Subjects in the Postwar United States and Mexico’’, (Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 2011), 37.</ref>

In 1910Whatever the circumstances, many Mexico has long been a source of cheap temporary labor for the workers employed by United States. Until the cotton ‘’maquiladoras’’ and Communist Party members joined establishment of the ranks U.S. Border Patrol in 1924, citizens of Pancho Villa as both countries crossed the Mexican Revolution began. These workers continued to fight for workers rights border at will, and better wages within farmers in the ‘’maquiladoras’’ over the next three decades. Their efforts were hampered because they didn't own any land and southwestern United States recruited seasonal workers from Mexico's economic growth was lackluster after Diaz’s reign endedwithout government oversight. Even though the Mexican working poor had helped workers also maintained the government come to power, they had no real choice but to head to productivity of American agriculture after the U.SUnited States entered World War I. The bracero program, at least on paper, was an extension of this type of labor arrangement—a more formal and more tightly supervised agreement to improve their financial conditionsprovide an adequate labor force during another global military conflict. <ref>Deborah CohenGonzalez, ‘’Braceros: Migrant Citizens and Transnational Subjects in Gilbert G. Guest Workers or Colonized Labor? Mexican Labor Migration to the Postwar United States and Mexico’’. Boulder, (Chapel HillCO: The University Paradigm, 2005. Study of the state of North Carolina Press, 2011), 37Mexican labor immigration to the United States into the early twenty-first century.</ref>

The Bracero Program, officially named the Labor Importation Program, was created for straightforward economic reasons. In the 1930s, white Anglos In mid-1941, as it became clearer to U.S. leaders that the nation would have to enter World War II, American farmers began raised the possibility that there would again be a need, as had occurred during the First World War, for foreign workers to migrate maintain agricultural productivity. The United States looked south for that labor, requesting that the Mexican government provide workers to more urban address the ongoing demands of the American agribusinesses supporting the war effort and to replace the poor white, black, and industrial cities Latino Americans were leaving farms to find occupy jobsin better-paying industrialized factories [Cohen, 111]. As a big chunk of Mexico was initially hesitant, owing to strained racist cultural relations that had been brewing through the 1930s. The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in December 1941 ultimately pushed Mexican leadership into providing workers for the United States population shifted from rural as a way to actively contribute to urban areasthe Allied war effort. The Mexican government also believed that participation in such a program would modernize their country, transforming it into a modern nation-state. Even so, before Mexico would enter into a cooperative labor program with the United States government realized it needed , the nation demanded that four major issues be addressed: # No Mexican workers would serve in the American military# Mexican workers would not be subject to discrimination# Mexican workers would be given transportation to bring in labor and from outside their jobs, would be provided with decent living conditions, and would be repatriated at the country end of their contracts# Mexican workers would not be used to replace domestic servants or to help pick reduce wage levels Those concerns were addressed, and the final agreement that established the cropsbracero program was signed on August 4, 1942.<ref>Edward Kosack, “The Bracero Program and Effects on Human Capital Investments in Mexico, 1942–1964,” 2013, http://eh.net/eha/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Kosack.pdf</ref>

As Regardless of complaints or violations, the Korean War came program was renewed in 1947, with Mexicans expanding their work to railroads. The agricultural aspects of the surface agreement were also renewed in 1951, during the 1950s, many UKorean War.S. citizens had once again felt that Aware of the ‘’illegal’’ migrants were getting out checkered history of control and were a threat to the U.program, in the early 1950s President Harry S. economy in Truman established a volatile time. This time commission to study the ‘repatriation’ had a nameagreement, Operation Wetback. Under President Eisenhowerevaluate complaints and violations, this operation would successfully deport over one million Mexican and U.Ssuggest reforms. citizens Any recommendations made by 1954. <ref>Deborah Cohenthe commission were ignored, ultimately, ‘’Braceros: Migrant Citizens and Transnational Subjects in because the Postwar United States and Mexico’’, program was economically popular among growers (Chapel Hill: The University because of North Carolina Press, 2011cheap labor), 212and consumers (who paid lower prices for bracero-213harvest crops).</ref> At this point, legislation had fallen through two years prior under President Truman, who tried to reinstate some kind of rights for the migrant workersJohn F. Unfortunately, Kennedy finally ended the big agricultural companies bracero program in 1964 after his own commission determined (and their lobbyists would thwart any efforts he had tried to make in order to come up with humane laws convinced Congress) that the growers had to follow in order to keep migrant laborers safe and well-paid. <ref> Robert S. Robinsonagreement was negatively affecting wages, “Taking The Fair Deal to the Fields: Truman's Commission on Migratory Labor, Public Law 78employment opportunities, and the Bracero Program, 1950–1952.” ‘’Agricultural History’’ 84, no. 3 (2010): 399working conditions of domestic laborers. </ref>

====Conclusion==== The migrant worker population Bracero Program had major effects on both the Mexican economy and the U.S. agricultural business and immigration policies. Mexico would further destroy Mexico’s economy because never truly recuperate from all of mass migration out the migrants that were lost and the implementation of NAFTA only exacerbated the economic issues that it faced. Small farmers in Mexico would continuously have to compete with no money returningU. With Operation Wetback in full effect directly in the middle of the Bracero Programs existenceS. imported produce that was ironically being picked by Mexican migrant workers. Additionally, the simultaneous need for labor United States would continuously rely on Mexican and need Latin American migrant workers while calling for scapegoats more border reinforcement. NAFTA would not help Mexico’s situation economicallycontinuously allow products to flow through the border but would police the bodies that would cross. In the Finally, NAFTA would cause enormous job losses for U.S. the anti-Mexican sentiment citizens to new ‘’maquiladras’’ that would push migrant workers in the Southwest continue to organize for their rights flourish with the help aid of organizations such as the United Farm Workersnew trade agreement.<ref> Bill Ong Hing, the United Cannery‘’Ethical Borders: NAFTA, AgriculturalGlobalization, Packingand Mexican Migration’’, and Allied Workers of America(Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2010), and League of United Latin American Citizens. Such organizations were pivotal in creating the momentum for a larger Chicano Movement or ‘’El Movimiento’’ in the Southwest5.</ref>

====Conclusion==== The Bracero Program is still a relatively unknown historical event. Needless to say, the program had major affects on both the Mexican economy and the U.S. agricultural business and immigration policies. Mexico would never truly recuperate from all of the migrants that were lost and the implementation of NAFTA only exacerbated the economic issues that it faced. Small farmers in Mexico would continuously have to compete with U.S. imported produce that was ironically being picked by Mexican migrant workers. Additionally, the U.S. would continuously rely on Mexican and Latin American migrant workers while calling for more border reinforcement. NAFTA would continuously allow products to flow through the border but would police the bodies that would cross. Finally, NAFTA would cause enormous job losses for U.S. citizens to new ‘’maquiladras’’ that would continue to flourish with the aid of the new trade agreement. <ref> Bill Ong Hing, ‘’Ethical Borders: NAFTA, Globalization, and Mexican Migration’’, (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2010), 5.</ref> Essentially, the Bracero Program is important for U.S. and Mexican history because it is a as part of a larger pattern that the U.S. constantly involves itself in and of migrant labor practices, whether considered opportunity or exploitation; only when we acknowledge this pattern can we begin to change the way that migrant labor is handled in the future.