Gutke 1

Joseph Gutke
Professor Nkenna Onwuzuruoha
English 1010
3 December 2014
The Need for Immigration Reform?
There are few issues facing the contemporary United States that tend to provoke a more
visceral reaction than immigration. However, when the discussion of immigration is brought up,
it usually invokes the images of illegal immigrants crossing the Mexican-American border.
There is another side of immigration that is rarely discussed during the talking points. That of the
difficulties faced by those that attempt to gain U.S. citizenship legally. Often theyre struggle
goes untold in the general discourse. I wanted to try and look at this issue that I have a strong
bias about from an unbiased point of view.
First a little history of immigration. Contemporary U.S. immigration is governed by the
Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952. For 50 years, U.S. immigration was governed by the
Immigration and Naturalization Service. In 2003, following the 9/11 Terrorist attacks, the
agency functions were transferred into three new government agencies, all under the oversight of
the Department of Homeland Security. They are the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
(USCIS), U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and U.S. Customs and Border
Patrol (CBP).
The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, also known as the McCarren-Walter Act,
was enacted on June 27, 1952. It was initially vetoed by President Harry Truman. He considered
the Act as un-American and discriminatory. (Truman 1). His veto was overridden by a vote of

Gutke 2

278 to 113 in the House and 57 to 26 in the Senate, ensuring passage of the Bill. The Bill
removed racial restrictions from the U.S. Immigration System. The Bill expanded the definition
of the United States to include Guam, thus giving immediate citizenship to those born in Guam
under the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. The Act defined three types of immigrants: those
with special skills or relatives of U.S. Citizens that were exempt from quotas, average
immigrants and refugees. The theoretical limit set on average immigrants was set at 270,000
annually.
To apply for American Naturalization an immigrant has to file form N-400, Application
for Naturalization. The qualifications are as follows:

Be age 18 or older; and

Be a permanent resident for a certain amount of time (usually 5 years or 3 years,

depending on how you obtained status); and

Be a person of good moral character; and

Have a basic knowledge of U.S. Government (exceptions are made for physical or mental
impairment); and

Have a period of continuous residence and physical presence in the United States; and

Be able to read, write and speak Basic English. (Exceptions are made based on age or
physical or mental impairment.

The whole process should take between 6 months and 2 years from the time of application,
although, as well discuss, it often drags out far longer.
So is there a need for further reform of the immigration system in the United States?
Those that are for immigration reform think that the process is too lengthy, too costly and leads

Gutke 3

to many people taking the illegal path. They also feel that the current system leads to the breakup
of families. Those against immigration reform think that more relaxed immigration laws would
provide amnesty for those that are here illegally, allow more immigrants into the U.S. and cost
American Citizens jobs. This tends to be a politician party line issue. Republicans typically are
against changing immigration laws, while Democrats tend to want to reform the system.
First let us examine employment for skilled immigrants. The main argument made
against immigration reform is based on employment. The argument is generally that more
immigrants will mean less jobs for American Citizens. However, a 2008 study conducted by
Harvard University, Duke University and the University of California at Berkley studied this
very subject in depth. It examined 30,000 American companies founded between 1995 and 2005.
It found that more than 25% of the companies examined had at least one immigrant as a key
founder. The authors concluded that firms founded by skilled immigrants during the survey
period contributed significantly to wealth and job creation in the United States. (Killie 2009).
Further, immigrant entrepreneurs tend to be more motivated than their American counterparts.
On average, U.S. born entrepreneurs started companies sixteen years after completing their
studies. Immigrants did so after only thirteen years in the U.S. To be sure, there is no definitive
answer to this question. However, data tends to suggest that immigrants contribute significantly
to the U.S. economy, and therefore overall job creation.
I wanted to also examine the more personal issues from immigration. To that end I
interviewed two people that have gone through he naturalization process, one successfully and
one unsuccessfully.
The first person I interviewed was Fatima Gangotena-Bernard. Fatima first came to the
United States in 2004 from Ecuador to further her studies as a physician. She entered the United

Gutke 4

States on a student visa and completed her education in 2010. She completed her residency in
2012 and is now an emergency room generalist in Utah. During this time, Fatima met James
Bernard, a local haunted house owner. They were later married and had a child in 2012. It was at
this time that Fatima sough permanent residence in the United States. She started the process
after getting married in 2009 and before having their child. She completed the application for
naturalization and found herself in an uphill battle. In the end, she and James had to spend over
$30,000 in legal fees to get her permanent residency. During the process, the two of them found
a common myth with U.S. immigration. They discovered that it actually tends to be more
difficult and costlier to get permanent residence after being married. The common myth is, that
if you marry a U.S. citizen, it is a fast track to naturalization. However, due to the rampant abuse
of this over the last 50 years, the U.S. Government has adjusted the requirements extensively.
Now you have to prove that you married for love, not for residency. Fatima said she felt like she
was treated worse, because she married an American citizen. During her interviews and legal
battles, she frequently felt mistrust. In the end, it would have been far easier for her to apply for
residency as a skilled worker and then get married. They estimate they would have spent a
fraction of the cost that they did.
The second person I interviewed for this research paper was Adrien Draper. Adrien, or
Ado to his friends, moved to the United States from the United Kingdom in 2002. He initially
came over sponsored by his company on a work visa. During this time, he met and fell in love
with an American Citizen, Melanie Williams. The two were wed in 2008 and now have a seven
year old daughter together. Unlike Fatima, Ado was denied permanent residence. Their best
estimate is that they have spent over $50,000 in legal fees to try and keep their family together.
The main reason for the denial for Ado was a history of marijuana use in the U.K. He was never

Gutke 5

convicted of a crime. However, he made the mistake of not mentioning the marijuana use during
his initial work visa application as he was afraid he would be denied. In an attempt to keep the
slate clean, he owned up his past use when he applied for permanent residence. This put him at
odds with the Person of Good Moral Character requirement of the current law. As a result his
application was denied. He has unsuccessfully appealed his case twice. Finally, in 2014, he gave
up the fight. His lawyer warned that if he were to appeal again, and likely lose, the government
would probably initiate deportation proceedings. He would be forced to leave his wife and 7 year
old daughter and return to the U.K. Due to Melanie having children from a previous marriage,
moving back to Britain isnt an option for her. In the summer of 2014, Ados work visa expired
for the final time and he was summarily dismissed from his job. He has spent the last six months
unemployed as a stay at home father. This led to incredible hardships on the family. In the end,
they actually had to resort to state assistance to make ends meet. One of the myths of illegal
immigration is that often times, illegal immigrants take state and federal assistance. However, in
truth, his family was actually forced to take the assistance due to the problems with the system.
This is their frustration. Ado is a good person. He isnt a criminal. He doesnt even smoke
marijuana anymore. He wants to, and is very capable of working. However, he is unable to, due
to the current laws. So his choice is to live here illegally off state assistance, or abandon his
American wife and American child and leave the country. This is a prime example of how the
law can tear families apart.
There is hope on the horizon for families like the Drapers. In November of this year,
President Barack Obama, tired of the gridlock in Congress, issued an executive order that will
alleviate the threat of deportation for millions of illegal immigrants. The executive order ignited
a firestorm of debate, on both sides of the aisle. The Executive Order has been called illegal and

Gutke 6

tyrannical by most opponents. However, as noted in one article on the subject, Republicans
procedural and constitutional objections to Obamas executive order are a smokescreen for
opposition to the substance of the policy. (Lichtman 2014). Executive Order have been issued
many times over the years on immigration. In 1930 Herbert Hoover, decided that his
administration would only issue visas only to persons with the means to support themselves
independently in the United States. Unlike Obamas Executive Order, Hoovers was in
contradiction to the law of the land at the time. In 1985, Congress passed a bill that shielded 3
million immigrants from deportation. However, in an oversight it did not include family
members. Reagan responded to this by issuing an Order that halted the deportation of their
children while waiting for Congress to fix the issue. So the order has precedent in history and is
likely to stand, although ultimately, with multiple states now suing the President, the Courts will
have to decide the issue.
In the end, we have an immigration system that has remained largely unchanged in sixty
years. The issue of immigration in the U.S. needs to be addressed in a substantive non-partisan
way. The system needs to be examined and streamlined. When it comes down to it, the United
States is a melting pot of cultures. It was that longstanding policy of open borders for so many
decades that helped us to become the world power we are today. Whether people like it or not,
immigrants will always be here. The only just, legal and compassionate thing to do is address the
issue with real goals in mind. If we cant stop people from coming to the country, and frankly
why would we want to, we need to fix the system so those people have a reasonable path to legal
naturalization. That is the only true cure to illegal immigration.