The Bracero Program to Operation Wetback

Brittany Bower History 083T Dr. Grace Delgado December 16, 2010

1

In the United States, the Bracero Program, 1942-1964, and Operation Wetback, 19531954, addressed Mexican laborers entering the country. While the Bracero Program brought Mexican contract laborers to work on farms, Operation Wetback was a mass deportation of illegal Mexicans in the United States. From the Bracero Program to Operation Wetback, the attitudes towards Mexican immigrants entering the country greatly changed. The Bracero Program originally welcomed Mexican laborers in the United States. Throughout the years, however, the influx of illegal Mexicans in the country caused social unrest that resulted in Operation Wetback.1The Bracero Program was a bi-national agreement between Mexico and the United States. The two counties worked together to bring agricultural workers to the southern parts of the United States.2 When the Bracero Program was originally established, there were mixed feelings throughout the United States regarding it. The American government supported the Bracero Program when it was first established, but many farmers faced the Bracero Program with adversity. The Mexican government also held some hostility towards the Bracero Program because it took laborers from their country and placed them in the United States.In addition,Mexicos people were also forced to work in unsatisfying conditions when they were employed in the United States through the Bracero Program.3 By the 1950s, however, the government looked towards reforming the Bracero Program and the Mexican government did as well because of the unsatisfactory conditions that the bracero laborers worked under. Many Americans also felt that the bracero workers were being treated poorly within their country.Kelly Lytle Hernandez, The Crimes and Consequences of Illegal Immigration: a Cross Border Examination of Operation Wetback, 1943-1954, Western Quarterly 37, no. 4 (Winter 2006),http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/whq/37.4/hernandez.html (accessed October 22, 2010). 2 Kelly Lytle Hernandez, Migra! A history of the U.S. Border Patrol (Berkley, CA: University of California Press, 2010), 101. 3 Otey M. Scruggs, Texas and the Bracero Program, 1942-1947, ReviewPacific Historical 32, no. 3 (August 1963): 251-264, http://www.jstor.org/sici?origin=sfx%3Asfx&sici=00308684(196308)32%3A3%3C251%3ATATBP1%3E2.0.CO%3B2-G (accessed October 22, 2010).1

2

American farmers,however, supported the Bracero Program because of the cheap labor it provided for them.4 Over time, however, the braceros acquired a tarnished reputation in the United States. This tainted reputation occurred because of the influx of Mexican workers entering the United States through the southern border. Many of these workers were illegal, however, which placed a bad stigma on all Mexican laborers, even if they were legal contract laborers.5 In an article published in the New York Times by David K. Webster in 1953, this tarnished reputation was evident when many Americans claimed that the Bracero Program was taking away jobs from many native American farmers and that around 500,000 Braceros were working in the country. These small farmers were very angered by the large amounts of Mexican laborers doing agricultural jobs in the United States.6Even the braceros became angered with illegal Mexican workers entering the country because of the stereotypes they were facingas a consequence of them. Many Americans, as well as the American government, were angered by the influx of illegal Mexican workers. Therefore, the American government implemented Operation Wetback in 1954 because they felt threatened by the influx of illegal Mexican workers.7Other forces that were behind the deportation of illegal Mexican immigrants through Operation Wetback were nativist feelings from Americans regarding Mexican immigrants, the United States governments fear of national security, and the fact that many unions believed

4

R. Robinson, "Taking The Fair Deal to the Fields: Truman's Commission on Migratory Labor, Public Law 78, and the Bracero Program, 1950-1952," Agricultural History 84, no. 3 (July 1, 2010): 381 402, http://proquest.umi.com/pqdlink?Ver=1&Exp=10-25-2015&FMT=7&DID=2122175471&RQT=309 (accessed October 25, 2010). 5 Kelly Lytle Hernandez, The Crimes and Consequences of Illegal Immigration: a Cross Border Examination of Operation Wetback, 1943-1954, Western Quarterly 37, no. 4 (Winter 2006), http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/whq/37.4/hernandez.html(accessed October 22, 2010). 6 David K. Webster, Importing Farm Labor, New York Times, 9 September 1959, 40, http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=4&did=83687438&SrchMode=2&sid=1&Fmt=10&VInst=PROD&VType=P QD&RQT=309&VName=HNP&TS=1288156994&clientId=70665 (accessed October 25, 2010). 7 Kelly Lytle Hernandez, The Crimes and Consequences of Illegal Immigration: a Cross Border Examination of Operation Wetback, 1943-1954, Western Quarterly 37, no. 4 (Winter 2006), http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/whq/37.4/hernandez.html (accessed October 22, 2010).

3

American jobs were being stolen by Mexican laborers.8Many Americans felt and though there was an illegal invasion due to the amount of illegal Mexican immigrants in the United States.9The Bracero Program continued until 1964 when the controversy over the bill was no longer debated between the House of Representatives and the Senate. By this time, primarily only farmers agreed with the Bracero Program.10Throughout the course of the Bracero Program and Operation Wetback, there were many political, economic, and racial factors that impacted the establishment of these programs. Over time, the Bracero Program gained and lost support from the Mexican government, the United States government, American farmers, and the general American population. These changing feelings from the American public and politicians and adversity ultimately led up to Operation Wetback on June 17, 195411 and the end of the Bracero Program in 196412. The Bracero Program was a bilateral agreement between the United States and Mexico that was passed on August 4, 1942. This contract allowed Mexican laborers to work in the United States, predominantly in the northwestern and the southwestern farms.13Most of these workers received employment in California and there were a significant amount of braceros who

Paul Allatson. Key Terms in Latino/a Cultural and Literary Study(Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing Press Ltd, 2007), 184. 9 Ronald L. Mize and Alicia C.S. Swords, Consuming Mexican Labor: From the Bracero Program to NAFTA (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2011), 32. 10 Gilbert Paul Carrasco, Bracero Program, The Oxford Encyclopedia of Latinos and Latinas in the United States, http://www.oxfordreference.com/views/ENTRY.html?entry=t199.e99&srn=1&ssid=551883154#FIRSTHIT (accessed October 15, 2010). 11 John Dillin, How Eisenhower solved illegal border crossings from Mexico, Christian Science Monitor(6 July 2006), 9, http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/lnacademic/ (accessed October 15). 12 Gilbert Paul Carrasco, Bracero Program, The Oxford Encyclopedia of Latinos and Latinas in the United States, http://www.oxfordreference.com/views/ENTRY.html?entry=t199.e99&srn=1&ssid=551883154#FIRSTHIT (accessed October 15, 2010). 13 Kelly Lytle Hernandez, Migra! A history of the U.S. Border Patrol (Berkley, CA: University of California Press, 2010), 101.

8

4

were employed there. They were substitutes for the domestic farm workers.14The Bracero Program permitted Mexican laborers to migrate to the United States for a short-term contract and allowed the Mexican contract laborers to move between Mexico and the United States.15Originally, this program was instated because many farmers, as well as the United States government, feared that there would be a lack of agricultural labors to harvest crops during the war that was taking place at this time. This war was World War II. For this reason, the Department of Agriculture became the administrators of the Bracero Program.16 In addition, many white laborers in the United States were becoming frustrated with the low wages and grueling conditions that agricultural jobs provided. For this reason, thousands of Americans sought out wartime industrial jobs instead.17 Even though the Bracero Programwas originally released as a war time effort, the program ultimately lasted until 1964. Over this period of time, around five million bracero contracts were used and over two million Mexican laborers filled these positions.18The thousands of Mexican workers, known as braceros, would be imported annually for farm work and a few other industries. The United States government would be their employer. The Bracero Program involved only men, not their families. It was also highly

N. Ray Gilmore and Gladys W. Gilmore, The Bracero in California, Pacific Historical Review 32, no. 3 (August 1963), http://www.jstor.org/stable/4492181?&Search=yes&term=bracero&term=program&list=hide&searchUri=%2Facti on%2FdoBasicSearch%3FQuery%3Dbracero%2Bprogram%26gw%3Djtx%26acc%3Don%26prq%3Doperation%2Bwe tback%26hp%3D25%26wc%3Don&item=1&ttl=1123&returnArticleService=showFullText (accessed October 24, 2010). 15 Kelly Lytle Hernandez, The Crimes and Consequences of Illegal Immigration: a Cross Border Examination of Operation Wetback, 1943-1954, Western Quarterly 37, no. 4 (Winter 2006), http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/whq/37.4/hernandez.html (accessed October 22, 2010). 16 Otley M. Scruggs, Texas and the Bracero Program, 1942-1947, ReviewPacific Historical 32, no. 3 (August 1963): 251-264, http://www.jstor.org/sici?origin=sfx%3Asfx&sici=00308684(196308)32%3A3%3C251%3ATATBP1%3E2.0.CO%3B2-G (accessed October 22, 2010). 17 Justin Akers Chacon and Mike Davis, No One is Illegal: Fighting racism and State Violence on the U.S.-Mexico Border (Canada: Haymarket Books, 2006), 140. 18 Kelly Lytle Hernandez, Migra! A history of the U.S. Border Patrol (Berkley, CA: University of California Press, 2010), 101.

14

5

regimented because the braceros were supervised by the U.S. government and grower associations throughout their movement in America.19 When the Bracero Program originally passed, the United States government and many farmers were accepting of the Bracero Program and the influx of Mexican contract laborers entering the United States. Many American farmers were afraid that the war that was occurring at this time would limit the amount of laborers that could work on their farms. If this occurred, there would not be enough workers to harvest the crops on these farms and the crops would go bad. The Bracero Program was established in order to combat the lack of farm workers. However, there were mixed feelings among the farmers when the Bracero Program was established and many farmers greeted the undertaking with undisguised hostility. The farmers had hoped that the Bracero Program would mirror a similar program that occurred after World War I in which America reduced the amount of limitations put on contract laborers and granted the farmers a large hand in the operations. However, Mexico no longer played such a submissive role in the affairs of Mexican contract laborers. One of the greatest fears that stemmed from the Bracero Program was that the safeguards guaranteed to the Mexican laborers, including a minimum payment of thirty cents an hour, were part of an effort to bring all farm labor, domestic as well as foreign, within the orbit of existing federal labor legislation. Because of this fear, few farmers utilized the Bracero Program upon its passing in 1942.For this reason, when the Bracero Program was released, there were mixed opinions about the program. The U.S. government saw a need for the Bracero Program because of the threat that farm labor in the country would be insufficient. Farmers also saw a need for the Bracero Program because they needed workers to harvest their crops. However, many feared it as well because of the safeguards19

Juan F. Perea, Immigrants Out!: the new nativism and the anti-immigrant impulse in the United States(New York: New York University Press, 1997), 235-236.

6

set in place by the Bracero Program. For this reason, farmers in the United States were not completely happy with the Bracero Program.20 In the 1940s, when the Bracero Program was originally established, the Mexican government did not fully support the bilateral agreement between the two countries. During the 1940s, Mexico was attempting to rebuild its agricultural sector through industrialization. However, there were many factors that contributed to the large amounts of Mexican braceros that traveled between the United States border and the Mexican border to find work. Some of these factors included a large increase in the population in the country of Mexico and also a scarcity of food. In addition, land privatization, mechanization, and the export orientation of agricultural production also contributed to many Mexican laborers traveling between the borders to earn money to survive.21 There were over 200,000 Mexican laborers traveling north to the United States for work throughout the course of the Bracero Program, and the Mexican government wanted to limit these numbers.22 Not only was the country losing one of its major national resources, a cheap labor supply, but Mexico was embarrassed by their failed attempt in the Mexican Revolution, which aimed to provide economic wellbeing to all Mexican citizens. The Mexican government feared this illegal migration and agreed upon the Bracero Program as a

Otey M. Scruggs, TEXAS AND THE BRACERO PROGRAM, 1942-1947, ReviewPacific Historical 32, no. 3 (August 1963): 251-264, http://www.jstor.org/sici?origin=sfx%3Asfx&sici=00308684(196308)32%3A3%3C251%3ATATBP1%3E2.0.CO%3B2-G (accessed October 22, 2010). 21 Kelly Lytle Hernandez, The Crimes and Consequences of Illegal Immigration: a Cross Border Examination of Operation Wetback, 1943-1954, Western Quarterly 37, no. 4 (Winter 2006), http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/whq/37.4/hernandez.html (accessed October 22, 2010). 22 James F. Creagan, "Public Law 78: A Tangle of Domestic andInternational Relations," Journal of Inter -- American Studies 7, no. 4 (September 1965), 541-556, America: History & Life, http://www.jstor.org/sici?origin=sfx%3Asfx&sici=0885-3118(196509)7%3A4%3C541%3APL7ATO%3E2.0.CO%3B2-Y (accessed October 26, 2010).

20

7

means to control the international mobility of poor Mexican campesinos.23 In addition, the Mexican government was also reluctant to send their laborers to work in the United States because of what happened in the past due to the Great Depression. Prior to the Great Depression when World War I occurred, there was a need for workers in the United States which was filled by many Mexican laborers. Additionally, there wasa great deal of violence due to a revolution in Mexico, which also caused many Mexican workers to migrate to America. However, when the Great Depression hit, there was a lack of jobs available in the United States, which, in turn, left many Mexican laborers without money and stranded in America. This event caused the Mexican government to pay millions of dollars in compensation to these individuals working in the United States. For this reason, the Mexican government and the country as a whole were reluctant to send their laborers to work in the United States after World War II even though there was a high demand for jobs. Furthermore, it was argued that these Mexican workers would be needed in their native country to sustain the production demands of World War II.24 Although the Mexican government was against the migration of its people into the United States, they agreed on the Bracero Program in order to attempt to regulate the migration from their country.25 In what was known as Trumans America in the early 1950s, migrant Mexican farm workers faced many challenges in the United States. Many of these workers were contract workers who were employed by the Bracero Program and they legally worked in the United

Kelly Lytle Hernandez, The Crimes and Consequences of Illegal Immigration: a Cross Border Examination of Operation Wetback, 1943-1954, Western Quarterly 37, no. 4 (Winter 2006), http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/whq/37.4/hernandez.html(accessed October 22, 2010). 24 James F. Creagan, "Public Law 78: A Tangle of Domestic andInternational Relations," Journal of Inter -- American Studies 7, no. 4 (September 1965), 541-556,America: History & Life, http://www.jstor.org/sici?origin=sfx%3Asfx&sici=0885-3118(196509)7%3A4%3C541%3APL7ATO%3E2.0.CO%3B2-Y (accessed October 26, 2010). 25 Kelly Lytle Hernandez, The Crimes and Consequences of Illegal Immigration: a Cross Border Examination of Operation Wetback, 1943-1954, Western Quarterly 37, no. 4 (Winter 2006), http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/whq/37.4/hernandez.html (accessed October 22, 2010).

23

8

States.26 The Bracero Program was also known as Public Law 78. In this bill, the guidelines for the Bracero Program were addressed. The Bracero Program allowed for laborers from Mexico to supply needed agricultural labor in the United States. The bracero laborers were recruited and sent to reception centers near the American-Mexican border which housed them while arrangements were being made for their employment in America. They were also provided transportation to these reception centers from the recruitment centers. In addition, the Bracero workers were guaranteed subsistence and emergency medical care during transportation or at the reception centers. Furthermore, under Public Law 78, farmers were allowed to hire other workers who were not under contract to other employers for agricultural work.Farmers could not hire illegal Mexican workers to perform agricultural jobs, however, and the Braceros were only allowed to work in the United States under the contracts they were given. Any illegal workers in the U.S. were not guaranteed any of the rights that the legal Bracero workers were given. 27In addition, these contracts given to the Bracero workers were for a period of one year.28However, a greater percentage of the Mexican laborers who were working in the United States at this time were undocumented laborers. Unlike the Braceros who were legally documented workers, these undocumented workers were not legally allowed to hold employment in the United States. These undocumented workers seasonally moved to the southern part of the United States, like the Bracero workers, from Mexico every year. However, these migrant workers, legal or illegal, followed a migratory route seeking employment in different areas throughout the country in theR. Robinson, "Taking The Fair Deal to the Fields: Truman's Commission on Migratory Labor, Public Law 78, and the Bracero Program, 1950-1952," Agricultural History 84, no. 3 (July 1, 2010): 381 402, http://proquest.umi.com/pqdlink?Ver=1&Exp=10-25-2015&FMT=7&DID=2122175471&RQT=309 (accessed October 25, 2010). 27 nd U.S. Congress. Senate,Public Law. 82 Cong., 1951. S., http://library.uwb.edu/guides/USimmigration/65%20stat%20119.pdf (accessed October 24, 2010). 28 David K. Webster, Importing Farm Labor, New York Times, 9 September 1959, 40, http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=4&did=83687438&SrchMode=2&sid=1&Fmt=10&VInst=PROD&VType=P QD&RQT=309&VName=HNP&TS=1288156994&clientId=70665 (accessed October 25, 2010).26

9

southern parts of the United States. Most farmers and their families worked for seventy days on the farms and for thirty days engaging in other types of employment. During the 1950s, these workers earned an annual wage of $514. Because of the low wages that they received, this group was considered to be one of the most economically challenged groups in the United States. There was also international competition amongst Mexican workers for employment, which also caused hardship for this group.29 In addition, many of the legal Bracero laborers were angered by the influx of illegal Mexican workers for the reason that they were given a bad name because of them. Many Americans associated the illegal and Bracero workers as equals, and therefore showed much adversity towards both groups.30 Due to these issues faced because of the Bracero Program, President Harry S. Truman fought for the extension of federal rights for migratory farm workers. According to Taking The Fair Deal to the Fields: Truman's Commission on Migratory Labor, Public Law 78, and the Bracero Program, 1950-1952 by Robert S. Robinson, the Truman administration recognized that the bracero workers faced many challenges while they worked in the United States. For this reason, Truman advocated measures that were created to increase the border patrol and law enforcement between the United States and the Mexican border. He also supported the safeguard of domestic labor in the United States.His efforts took place in a two year increment and it involved two stages. In 1950, the President's Commission on Migratory Labor in American Agriculture was established. This group would gather information and make recommendations that would provide ammunition for the administration's legislative goals. At this time, theR. Robinson, "Taking The Fair Deal to the Fields: Truman's Commission on Migratory Labor, Public Law 78, and the Bracero Program, 1950-1952," Agricultural History 84, no. 3 (July 1, 2010): 381 402, http://proquest.umi.com/pqdlink?Ver=1&Exp=10-25-2015&FMT=7&DID=2122175471&RQT=309 (accessed October 25, 2010). 30 Kelly Lytle Hernandez, The Crimes and Consequences of Illegal Immigration: a Cross Border Examination of Operation Wetback, 1943-1954, Western Quarterly 37, no. 4 (Winter 2006), http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/whq/37.4/hernandez.html (accessed October 22, 2010).29

10

government supported reforming the original Bracero Program and aiding the bracero workers. The second stage of his efforts, which took place in 1951, presented his idea to Congress. Truman even recruited Mexican President Miguel Alemn Valdez to help in his battle to give migratory farm workers rights. However, the battle was lost due to insufficient support from Congress. There were also many Americans who agreed with Trumans ideas to help the Bracero workers and curb illegal immigration. However, the American farmers and agricultural labor employers were opposed to Trumans efforts. Many small farms relied on inexpensive Mexican labor and many large scale farms who engaged in large agribusinesses relied on this type of work.31According to an article published by David K. Webster in the New York Times in 1953, many small farmers did not support the Bracero Program in America. However, it was stated that there was a small amount of highly organized growers associations who supported the program. They had large farms and used the Mexican labor on these farms. Many small farms believed that these large farms were putting nearly two million American farmers out of work. They also believed that small family owned farms could no longer compete with these large organizations. However, these large farms supported the Bracero program and the Mexican labor they received because it benefitted their businesses.32For these reasons, particular groups of farmers were in opposition of the new efforts put in place to reform the Bracero Program. Throughout the 1950s, the Mexican government also played a strong role in the Bracero Program. At this time, according to Mexico United of Protest of U.S. Job Policy, published in The Chicago Daily Tribune in 1954, there werea great deal of problems surrounding the BraceroR. Robinson, "Taking The Fair Deal to the Fields: Truman's Commission on Migratory Labor, Public Law 78, and the Bracero Program, 1950-1952," Agricultural History 84, no. 3 (July 1, 2010): 381 402, http://proquest.umi.com/pqdlink?Ver=1&Exp=10-25-2015&FMT=7&DID=2122175471&RQT=309 (accessed October 25, 2010). 32 David K. Webster, Importing Farm Labor, New York Times, 9 September 1959, 40, http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=4&did=83687438&SrchMode=2&sid=1&Fmt=10&VInst=PROD&VType=P QD&RQT=309&VName=HNP&TS=1288156994&clientId=70665 (accessed October 25, 2010).31

11

Program between the United States and Mexico. Much of these problems stemmed from the wages that the bracero workers were guaranteed to receive. According to the article, The bracero controversy between Mexico and the United States over migratory farm labor has taken on serious nationalistic overtones which have created a hostile reaction among all Mexicans, with the possible exception of the economically self interested bracero himself. The Bracero Program sparked nationalism in Mexico spanning across of all types of people in the country. According to officials in the U.S., Mexicowanted to challenge the United States right to set their own wage minimum. One spokesman claimed that Mexico was attempting to exercise sovereignty in our country andthat they wanted to fix wages, which was something that the President of the United States was not even allowed to do. The United States felt as though Mexico was trying to run the affairs if their country and were opposed to this idea. 33 However, Mexico saw this situation in a very different light. Mexico felt as though they should be able to protect their citizens working in another country, which would include setting a wage minimum for their citizens working in the United States under the Bracero Program. In addition, many Mexican citizens felt as though their workers were being treated in a discriminatory manner, even though they recognized that the braceros earned more monetary value in the United States over their own country. This led the Mexican government and the United States to view the guidelines set in the Bracero Program differently and there was a great deal of controversy over how the braceros should be treated in the United States.34 In addition to the Mexican government feeling aversion towards the Bracero Program, many citizens in the

MarionWilhelm, Mexico United in Protest of U.S. Job Policy, Chicago Daily Tribune, 15 February 1954, http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=0&did=506129592&SrchMode=2&sid=1&Fmt=10&VInst=PROD&VType= PQD&RQT=309&VName=HNP&TS=1288157672&clientId=9874 (accessed October 25, 2010). 34 Marion Wilhelm, Mexico United in Protest of U.S. Job Policy, Chicago Daily Tribune, 15 February 1954, http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=0&did=506129592&SrchMode=2&sid=1&Fmt=10&VInst=PROD&VType= PQD&RQT=309&VName=HNP&TS=1288157672&clientId=9874 (accessed October 25, 2010).

33

12

country were unhappy with the program as well. In towns such as Irapuato where there was a contracting station, there were mass amounts of agricultural labors who tried to obtain bracero contracts. They came from neighboring cities in large numbers and would sleep in the citys parks or on the streets as they waited for a job. The influx of these workers in Mexican cities angered the citizens of these towns and created hostility towards America and anti-American feelings. Many Mexican governors called for help from the Mexican Federal government to assistin regulating the number of braceros entering their own cities in Mexico. Many Mexicans were also angered by the United States because of their alleged mistreatment of braceros, according to the article Mexicans Flocking to Legal U.S. Jobs in 1953. Rumors circulated throughout the country that the braceros were being treated poorly and that the United States Army gathered the bracero workers and sent them to Korea to fight in the war. These rumors were always denied by the United States.35 For these reasons, the Bracero program created tension between the two countries due to their opposing viewpoints. Although the Mexican government was not pleased with their workers immigrating to the United States for seasonal work in the early 1950s, they allowed the Bracero Program to continue. At this time, the influx of Mexican workers applying for bracero contracts was mainly caused by unemployment in Mexico. This unemployment stemmed from a five year agricultural drought in the country, which led to a loss of jobs. In Mexico, workers would typically earn under a dollar a day working on the farms. In America, they could earn around 40 to 60 cents an hour, even if they were not legal contract labors. They could earn a higher salary in the United States, which was a primary reason for migrating to America to work as agricultural laborers. A report showed that bracero workers remitted $70,000,000 to their families in Mexico and illegalMexican Flocking to Legal U.S. Jobs, The New York Times, 12 May 1953, 25, http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=0&did=84604345&SrchMode=2&sid=1&Fmt=10&VInst=PROD&VType=P QD&RQT=309&VName=HNP&TS=1289222574&clientId=70665 (accessed October 29, 2010).35

13

workers remitted around $100,000,000.36 The Mexican government wanted the Bracero Program to be instated for a limited period of time, yet they recognized the sociological and economic aspects arising in their country due to the Bracero Program that were not recognized since the program started in 1942. Mexico felt it was undesirable to have their agricultural workforce migrate to the United States, yet the braceros wanted to do so. These workers would abandon their families in Mexico to work in terrible conditions in the United States for the money that they could earn in their home country. As stated in Accord is Reached on Migrant Labor, which was published in the New York Times in 1951, When the worker returns, he can no longer accept the old rustic existence, so frugal and inferior in material gains, to the one he left behind. Mexico also questioned whether or not the United States was actually in need of Mexican agricultural needs. Many Mexicans questioned if Americans were able to do the work that they gave to the bracero workers and wondered if it was fact that certain priorities are preventing American workers from performing the tasks that are being assigned to our countrymen. Some believed that the American workers refused to do the hard labor that their country provided. Therefore, many Mexicans felt as though they should be economically independent from the United States and deemed the Bracero Program unnecessary.37 Even though the Bracero Program was also established to help curb illegal immigration, during this period of time, many illegal Mexican migrant workers were entering the United States. There were as many as three million illegal immigrants who traveled north into America

Mexican Flocking to Legal U.S. Jobs, The New York Times, 12 May 1953, 25, http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=0&did=84604345&SrchMode=2&sid=1&Fmt=10&VInst=PROD&VType=P QD&RQT=309&VName=HNP&TS=1289222574&clientId=70665 (accessed October 29, 2010). 37 Accord is Reached on Migrant Labor, New York Times, 21 July 1951, 23, http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=0&did=89805408&SrchMode=2&sid=4&Fmt=10&VInst=PROD&VType=P QD&RQT=309&VName=HNP&TS=1289225068&clientId=70665 (accessed October 29, 2010).

36

14

from Canada when President Eisenhower was first elected into office.38This influx of illegal Mexican immigrants migrating to the United States caused irritation in America as well as Mexico. Although throughout its course the Bracero Program brought in millions of legal Mexican workers to work on the farms of America, the program also brought an influx of illegal migrant workers. Many Mexican agricultural workers crossed into the United States for higher wages letting crops die out along the Mexican border. For this reason, many Mexican agribusinessmen and interest groups pressured their government representatives to endunsanctioned Mexican migration across the U. S.-Mexico border. They also pressured their military to guard the border to prevent Mexican workers from illegally crossing the border into the United States for employment. They originally opposed the Bracero Program and continued to do so.39 Also, according to Mexican Labor Ban Blamed for Flood of Illegal Entries published in the Chicago Daily Tribune in 1949, Mexico would not allow their agricultural workers to be employed in Texas because they felt that their workers were being discriminated against there. In addition, Mexico banned their workers from being contracted for labor in Texas because of large number of Mexican citizens who drowned in the Rio Grande and died while attempting to illegally enter the United States. For this reason, according to this article, there was a large increase of illegal Mexican agricultural labors illegally entering and working in the United States.40 The Mexican government also protested the illegal immigration of its workers because the country needed them to support their own economy. In addition to the Mexican governments protest to illegal

38

John Dillin, How Eisenhower solved illegal border crossings from Mexico, Christian Science Monitor(6 July 2006), 9, http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/lnacademic/ (accessed October 15). 39 Kelly Lytle Hernandez, The Crimes and Consequences of Illegal Immigration: a Cross Border Examination of Operation Wetback, 1943-1954, Western Quarterly 37, no. 4 (Winter 2006), http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/whq/37.4/hernandez.html (accessed October 22, 2010). 40 Mexican Labor Ban Blamed for Flood of Illegal Entries, Chicago Daily Tribune, 24 July 1949, B21, http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=0&did=489504362&SrchMode=2&sid=1&Fmt=10&VInst=PROD&VType= PQD&RQT=309&VName=HNP&TS=1291607740&clientId=9874 (accessed December 4, 2010).

15

immigration to the United States, Mexican braceros also opposed illegal Mexican immigration. The braceros felt bitter about undocumented Mexican workers because they believed that these illegal workers lowered their wages and made working conditions worse. This made life more difficult for the legal Mexican workers in America. Overall, many Mexicans resented these workers because they felt that they needed the labor that they provided in their own country.41 Although the Bracero Program was in effect in the United States in during the 1950s, in 1954, the United States government employed Operation Wetback, which was an intensive and innovative law enforcement campaign designed to confront the rapidly increasing number of illegal border crossings by Mexican nationals.42 Operation Wetback was a campaign that coexisted with the Bracero Program which brought in Mexican laborers to work for a set period of time on farms in the United States. Unlike the Bracero Program that brought in legal Mexican laborers to work in the United States, Operation Wetback was a wide-spread crack-down on illegal Mexican immigration.43 When the Bracero Program reached its peak number of labor contracts given, which was over 309,000 contracts, the United States began lessening the amount of labor contracts issued to Mexican braceros. As the amount of labor contracts given to Mexican workers decreased, the amount of illegal and undocumented Mexican workers increased in the United States. Also, there was a serious breakdown in bilateral relations between the United States and Mexico when the U.S. became concerned with acquiring laborers for growers and also managing what was referred to as an illegal invasion. If INS agents found illegal immigrants

Kelly Lytle Hernandez, The Crimes and Consequences of Illegal Immigration: a Cross Border Examination of Operation Wetback, 1943-1954, Western Quarterly 37, no. 4 (Winter 2006), http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/whq/37.4/hernandez.html (accessed October 22, 2010). 42 Kelly Lytle Hernandez, The Crimes and Consequences of Illegal Immigration: a Cross Border Examination of Operation Wetback, 1943-1954, Western Quarterly 37, no. 4 (Winter 2006), http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/whq/37.4/hernandez.html (accessed October 22, 2010). 43 Paul Allatson. Key Terms in Latino/a Cultural and Literary Study(Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing Press Ltd, 2007), 184.

41

16

in the United States, they were told to legalize these workers as bracero laborers at the worksites in which they were employed at. For this reason, growers were able to gain a Mexican labor force through the Bracero Program or by converting undocumented laborers into legal bracero workers. Because of the growers ability to gain Mexican labor legally or illegally, the United States government and farmers essentially created the illegal immigration issue in the United States by attempting to undercut Mexicos power in the Bracero Program. Mexico attempted to protect their citizens from discrimination in the United States, but their efforts were consistently eroded by an employment sector that directly recruited labor from Mexico through extra-legal means while the US government turned a blind eye.44In addition, according to Allatsons book Key Terms in Latino/a Cultural and Literary Studies, the main causes of Operation Wetback werethe fear that Mexican laborers were stealing jobs, nativists hadworriesabout the immigrants from Mexico, and that the United States was worried about national border security.45 In all, Operation Wetback stemmed not only from the fear of Mexican immigration, but also because of the rise in illegal immigrants due to the practices of the American government and American farmers. In the summer of 1954, Operation Wetback was implemented and around eight hundred Border Patrol officers traveled throughout the southern border of the United States. These officers used raids and road blocks to obtain and deport undocumented workers in the United States.46 The Border Patrol searched for illegal Mexican immigrants in border towns. Of all the

Ronald L. Mize and Alicia C.S. Swords,Consuming Mexican Labor: From the Bracero Program to NAFTA(Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2011), 25-32. 45 Paul Allatson. Key Terms in Latino/a Cultural and Literary Study(Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing Press Ltd, 2007), 184. 46 Kelly Lytle Hernandez, The Crimes and Consequences of Illegal Immigration: a Cross Border Examination of Operation Wetback, 1943-1954, Western Quarterly 37, no. 4 (Winter 2006), http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/whq/37.4/hernandez.html (accessed October 22, 2010).

44

17

states searched, Texas had the largest crackdown on illegal immigration.47The Border Patrol officers utilized around three hundred buses, jeeps, cars and also about 7 planes to search for illegal immigrants in America.48By June of 1954, according to Wetback Drive Slows Up in the New York Times, fewer wetbacks were being located for deportation in America. At this time, the term wetback was used to refer to the illegal Mexican workers in the United States. Operation Wetback, which was seen to go by faster than expected, was set in place to deport these illegal immigrants.49 Mexico was also involved in the deportation of hundreds of thousands of illegal Mexican workers through Operation Wetback.50 The government and community of Mexico were angered by the mass amount of its citizens traveling illegally to the United States to perform agricultural work.51 In addition, many Mexican Americans were angered with the influx of illegal Mexican workers entering the United States. These legal Mexican workers felt as though their jobs were in jeopardy due to the amount of illegal immigrants who would perform their jobs for a lesser salary.52In an attempt to end this illegal trafficking of immigrant workers who were not granted work under the Bracero Program, President Eisenhower used approximately 1,075 Border Patrol agents in total to detect and deport the hundreds of thousands of illegal Mexican immigrants that were entering American every year. Operation Wetback occurred on June 17, 1954. The originalPaul Allatson. Key Terms in Latino/a Cultural and Literary Study (Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing Press Ltd, 2007), 184. 48 Mae M. Ngai,Impossible Subjects: Illegal Aliens and the Making of Modern America(Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2004), 155-156. 49 Wetback Drive Slows Up, New York Times, 19 June 1954, http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=84123415&Fmt=10&clientId=9874&RQT=309&VName=HNP (accessed October 15, 2010). 50 John Dillin, How Eisenhower solved illegal border crossings from Mexico, Christian Science Monitor(6 July 2006), 9, http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/lnacademic/ (accessed October 15). 51 Kelly Lytle Hernandez, The Crimes and Consequences of Illegal Immigration: a Cross Border Examination of Operation Wetback, 1943-1954, Western Quarterly 37, no. 4 (Winter 2006), http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/whq/37.4/hernandez.html (accessed October 22, 2010). 52 Paul Allatson. Key Terms in Latino/a Cultural and Literary Study(Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing Press Ltd, 2007), 184.47

18

apprehension of these illegal Mexican workers took place in California and Arizona because there was less resistance there. Seven hundred and fifty Border Patrol agents traveled throughout these states in farm areas with the goal of apprehending about 1,000 illegal laborers a day. By the end of that July, more than 50,000 illegals were apprehended in Arizona and California by the Border Patrol and approximately 488,000 illegal Mexican workers had left the country due to the threat of being arrested. At this time, the Border Patrol agents were also moving into Texas, Idaho, Nevada, and Utah. In September, it was estimated that nearly 80,000 illegal workers were detected in Texas alone and between 500,000 and 700,000 illegal laborers freely left this state. Once these illegal workers were taken into custody, they were transported by bus or by train deep into Mexico so they could not freely reenter the United States by crossing the border. In addition, tens of thousands of these individuals were taken by boat back to Mexico.53The United States Border Patrol worked alongside the Mexican government in order to apprehend and deport illegals in the United States. Because Mexico and the United States worked bilaterally to establish the Bracero Program and curb illegal immigration between the two countries, the countries worked together to put Operation Wetback into action.54 Because of the anger that the United States shared with Mexico over the illegal immigration problem, the two countries were able to work together to establish Operation Wetback. By the late 1950s and early 1960s, many farmers in the southern part of the United States were very angered by the Bracero Program and the effect it was having on the country. In an article published in The Chicago Daily Tribune in 1961, Migrant Workers, the flaws of the Bracero Program wereaddressed. According to the newspaper article, the hundreds of thousands53

John Dillin, How Eisenhower solved illegal border crossings from Mexico, Christian Science Monitor(6 July 2006), 9, http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/lnacademic/ (accessed October 15). 54 Kelly Lytle Hernandez, The Crimes and Consequences of Illegal Immigration: a Cross Border Examination of Operation Wetback, 1943-1954, Western Quarterly 37, no. 4 (Winter 2006), http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/whq/37.4/hernandez.html (accessed October 22, 2010).

19

of Mexican braceros working seasonal jobs in the United States were causing problems for American laborers in the rural areas of the country. For instance, as claimed in The Daily Chicago Tribune, The situation of our own migrant farm workers, already Americas badge of infamy, has become worse because of the importation of labor. Many farmers at this time felt as though the braceros working on the farms were making labor difficult for American farm workers.One agricultural employer for the United States went as far as relating the bracero workers to slaves claiming that, We used to own slaves, now we rent them from the government.55 In addition, many American citizens question why millions of Mexican braceros were imported to the United States every year to work as agricultural laborers when there were around 5,000,000 unemployed American citizens in the United States.56 Overall, many agricultural employers, as well as Americans, were no longer pleased with the Bracero Program or its practices. In addition to the unpleasant outlook on the Bracero Program and its practices, in the 1960s, many Americans criticized many aspects of the Bracero Program. These critiques included the wages earned and how the government dealt with bracero labor. One major problem addressed in an article Migrant Workers printed in The Chicago Daily Tribune criticized the wages earned by migrant Mexican agricultural workers.The typical pay for one worker ranged between sixty cents and ninety cents an hour.Some of the Mexican laborers earned wages as low as thirty cents an hour. Since they worked seasonal jobs, typically only 143 days a year, the average annual income of one bracero worker was around $910. These workers were not entitled

55

D. W, Migrant Workers, Chicago Daily Tribune, 25 August 1961, 12, http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=1&did=592627972&SrchMode=2&sid=1&Fmt=10&VInst=PROD&VType= PQD&RQT=309&VName=HNP&TS=1288026075&clientId=9874 (accessed October 22, 2010). 56 Gladwin Hill, House Inquiry Set on Mexican Labor, The New York Times, 8 June 1958, 53, http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=1&did=89101301&SrchMode=2&sid=1&Fmt=10&VInst=PROD&VType=P QD&RQT=309&VName=HNP&TS=1287376204&clientId=70665 (accessed October 14, 2010).

20

to a minimum wage or unemployment insurance even though they were legally employed in the United States through the Bracero Program. In addition, the bracero workers faced many injustices in the United States. They were not entitled to the same social or legal protections that American workers were entitled to at this time. They did not have social security, workmens compensation, emergency public system, or even an education. Many Americans also criticized the Bracero Program because it forced Mexican laborers to work in conditions that repelled American works. Not only were the wages unappealing, but they worked in unsanitary conditions.57 Although there were certain standards set in place for the conditions braceros could work under, in reality, these workers were forced to work in very oppressive conditions. This mainly happened because the United States government and the growers ignored the conditions set in place.58Companies did not have to fix these problems because the braceros would take these jobs regardless. There was also evidence of child labor, some as young as six or seven years old, working on the fields to help earn wages for their families. The children were also subjected to these harsh conditions and were not offered an opportunity for education.59In addition, Americans were not just angered by the mistreatment of the Braceros. They also felt as though the braceros were taking labor jobs away from American citizens and that there was an illegal invasion60of Mexican immigrants entering the country due to the Bracero Program.61For57

D. W, Migrant Workers, Chicago Daily Tribune, 25 August 1961, 12, http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=1&did=592627972&SrchMode=2&sid=1&Fmt=10&VInst=PROD&VType= PQD&RQT=309&VName=HNP&TS=1288026075&clientId=9874 (accessed October 22, 2010). 58 Juan F. Perea, Immigrants Out!: the new nativism and the anti-immigrant impulse in the United States, (New York: New York University Press, 1997), 235-236. 59 D. W, Migrant Workers, Chicago Daily Tribune, 25 August 1961, 12, http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=1&did=592627972&SrchMode=2&sid=1&Fmt=10&VInst=PROD&VType= PQD&RQT=309&VName=HNP&TS=1288026075&clientId=9874 (accessed October 22, 2010). 60 D. W, Migrant Workers, Chicago Daily Tribune, 25 August 1961, 12, http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=1&did=592627972&SrchMode=2&sid=1&Fmt=10&VInst=PROD&VType= PQD&RQT=309&VName=HNP&TS=1288026075&clientId=9874 (accessed October 22, 2010). 61 Ronald L. Mize and Alicia C.S. Swords,Consuming Mexican Labor: From the Bracero Program to NAFTA(Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2011), 25-32.

21

these reasons, many Americans, as well as America farmers, criticized the governments lack of responsibility regarding the Bracero Program and its conditions. In 1963, the House of Representatives voted to put an end to the Bracero Program. There were mixed debates about the need for the Bracero Program at this time. At this moment in time, the Kennedy administration was pushing to extend the Bracero Program for a year and there was a bill that wanted to extend the bill to December 31, 1965.B. F. Sisk, a representative, argued that braceros were needed for stoop labor, which were jobs that American citizens refused to do. In the House, however, John Fogarty, a leading voice in the opposition, stated when referring to the Bracero Program, If there was ever a slave labor piece of legislation adopted by Congress, this is it. He went on to claim that the bill was immoral as well as unconstitutional. He felt that an extension would hinder the United States relationship with Mexico. Another representative, Henry Gonzales, according to the Chicago Tribune, claimed that Americans would do stoop labor if they were not paid the same low wages and that the program depressed the wages offered Americans for farm labor, undermining the law of supply and demand. They believed that the Bracero Program violated the free enterprise system that was set up in the United States.Another representative, Charles S. Gubser, claimed that American farm owners preferred to hire domestic workers for a higher pay to avoid the regulatory problems associated with hiring Mexican bracero laborers.62 During the beginning of the 1960s, there were many mixed opinions regarding the Bracero Program. Some individuals claimed that the Bracero Program was still necessary and supported by the public. However, in the House of Representatives, the government showed their adversity to the Bracero Program by not voting for an extension of the program.62

House Votes to Bar Import of Braceros, Chicago Tribune, 30 May 1963, A5, http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=29&did=572936952&SrchMode=1&sid=3&Fmt=10&VInst=PROD&VType =PQD&RQT=309&VName=HNP&TS=1288194525&clientId=9874 (accessed October 29, 2010).

22

The Bracero Program finally came to an end in 1964. At this time, it was mainly only farm workers who supported this system that had been set in place for over two decades. These workers wanted the system to continue, yet little support came from the American government or other American citizens. Many individuals were concerned by the mistreatment of the Mexican bracero workers due to the continuous complaints they heard,63 and the viewpoints of many Americans at this time were guided by the civil rights era.64In addition, a great amount of people believed that the Bracero Program was nothing more than a farm subsidy that was being used to depress wages. Congress was also discouraged because the development of the Bracero Program did not curb illegal immigration, which was one of the primary goals of the program. Many Mexicans were determined to receive a bracero contract, and if they did not do so, many would just enter the country illegally. Also, an economist, William H. Metzler who worked with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, argued that the Bracero Program took job opportunities away from Americans who were trying to find agricultural work. Another economist, Louis Krainock, stated that there were enough American workers available to fill the job positions taken by the braceros and that there was no need for them. There were many issues surrounding the Bracero Program in the 1960s because there were many individuals who fought for the protection of rights for the braceros and others who fought to protect American domestic farm workers. This caused disruption between the House of Representatives and the Senate. In 1961 and 1963, both sides of Congress compromised and the bill was extended. However, in 1964 an

Gilbert Paul Carrasco, Bracero Program, The Oxford Encyclopedia of Latinos and Latinas in the United States, http://www.oxfordreference.com/views/ENTRY.html?entry=t199.e99&srn=1&ssid=551883154#FIRSTHIT (accessed October 15, 2010). 64 Steven G. Koven and Frank Gotzke, American Immigration Policy: Confronting the Nation's Challenges (New York, NY: Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, 2010), 134.

63

23

agreement could not be made between the House and the Senate. Hence, the Bracero Program was terminated in 1964.65 Over the course of 1942 to 1964, Mexican agricultural workers have impacted American, as well as Mexican, society and government. The Bracero Program spanned for over twenty years bringing Mexican bracero contract laborers to work in the agricultural industry of the southwestern United States. Over this course of time, millions of legal contract workers were brought into the United States for work. During this time frame, not all groups of individuals in the United States or Mexico agreed with the Bracero Program or its practices. Many protests and efforts to revise the program occurred throughout its course. In addition, there was an influx of illegal Mexican migrants who also came to the United States for work. They were faced with adversity from the American population and even the Mexican and bracero population. Hence, Operation Wetback was implemented in 1954 to deport undocumented workers.66 In all, over this period of time, the terms subjected to migrant Mexican braceros were debated and changed due to economic, political, and racial unrest. These changes resulted in the creation on of the Bracero Program, Operation Wetback, and finally the termination of the Bracero Program in 1964.67

Gilbert Paul Carrasco, Bracero Program, The Oxford Encyclopedia of Latinos and Latinas in the United States, http://www.oxfordreference.com/views/ENTRY.html?entry=t199.e99&srn=1&ssid=551883154#FIRSTHIT (accessed October 15, 2010). 66 Kelly Lytle Hernandez, The Crimes and Consequences of Illegal Immigration: a Cross Border Examination of Operation Wetback, 1943-1954, Western Quarterly 37, no. 4 (Winter 2006), http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/whq/37.4/hernandez.html (accessed October 22, 2010). 67 Gilbert Paul Carrasco, Bracero Program, The Oxford Encyclopedia of Latinos and Latinas in the United States, http://www.oxfordreference.com/views/ENTRY.html?entry=t199.e99&srn=1&ssid=551883154#FIRSTHIT (accessed October 15, 2010).

65

24

Bibliography Primary Sources: Accord is Reached on Migrant Labor. New York Times, 21 July 1951, 23, http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=0&did=89805408&SrchMode=2&sid=4&Fmt=1 0&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=HNP&TS=1289225068&clientId =70665 (accessed October 29, 2010). Hill, Gladwin. House Inquiry Set on Mexican Labor. The New York Times, 8 June 1958, 53, http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=1&did=89101301&SrchMode=2&sid=1&Fmt=1 0&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=HNP&TS=1287376204&clientId =70665 (accessed October 14, 2010).

25

House Votes to Bar Import of Braceros. Chicago Tribune, 30 May 1963, A5, http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=29&did=572936952&SrchMode=1&sid=3&Fmt =10&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=HNP&TS=1288194525&client Id=9874 (accessed October 29, 2010). Mexican Flocking to Legal U.S. Jobs. The New York Times, 12 May 1953, 25, http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=0&did=84604345&SrchMode=2&sid=1&Fmt=1 0&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=HNP&TS=1289222574&clientId =70665 (accessed October 29, 2010). Mexican Labor Ban Blamed for Flood of Illegal Entries. Chicago Daily Tribune, 24 July 1949, B21, http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=0&did=489504362&SrchMode=2&sid=1&Fmt= 10&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=HNP&TS=1291607740&clientId =9874 (accessed December 4, 2010). U.S. Congress. Senate. Public Law. 82nd Cong., 1951. S. http://library.uwb.edu/guides/USimmigration/65%20stat%20119.pdf (accessed October 24, 2010). W, D. Migrant Workers. Chicago Daily Tribune, 25 August 1961, 12, http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=1&did=592627972&SrchMode=2&sid=1&Fmt= 10&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=HNP&TS=1288026075&clientId =9874 (accessed October 22, 2010). Webster, David K. Importing Farm Labor. New York Times, 9 September 1959, 40, http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=4&did=83687438&SrchMode=2&sid=1&Fmt=1 0&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=HNP&TS=1288156994&clientId =70665 (accessed October 25, 2010). Wetback Drive Slows Up. New York Times, 19 June 1954, http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=84123415&Fmt=10&clientId=9874&RQT=309& VName=HNP (accessed October 15, 2010). Wilhelm, Marion. Mexico United in Protest of U.S. Job Policy. Chicago Daily Tribune, 15 February 1954, http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=0&did=506129592&SrchMode=2&sid=1&Fmt= 10&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=HNP&TS=1288157672&clientId =9874 (accessed October 25, 2010).

Secondary Sources: Allatson, Paul. Key Terms in Latino/a Cultural and Literary Study. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing Press Ltd, 2007.

26

Burrows, Emily. "Cosecha Amarga/Bittersweet Harvest: The Bracero Program, 1942-1964." CRM: The Journal of Heritage Stewardship 7, no. 1 (Winter 2010): 93-94, http://vnweb.hwwilsonweb.com/hww/results/external_link_maincontentframe.jhtml?_D ARGS=/hww/results/results_common.jhtml.43 (accessed October 26, 2010). Carrasco, Gilbert Paul. Bracero Program. The Oxford Encyclopedia of Latinos and Latinas in the United States, http://www.oxfordreference.com/views/ENTRY.html?entry=t199.e99&srn=1&ssid=5518 83154#FIRSTHIT (accessed October 15, 2010). Chacon, Justin Akers and Mike Davis. No One is Illegal: Fighting racism and State Violence on The U.S.-Mexico Border. Canada: Haymarket Books, 2006. Creagan, James F. "Public Law 78: A Tangle of DomesticandInternationalRelations." Journal of Inter -- American Studies 7, no. 4 (September 1965): 541-556. America: History & Life, http://www.jstor.org/sici?origin=sfx%3Asfx&sici=08853118(196509)7%3A4%3C541%3APL7ATO%3E2.0.CO%3B2-Y (accessed October 26,2010). Dillin, John. How Eisenhower solved illegal border crossings from Mexico. Christian Science Monitor, 6 July 2006, 9, http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/lnacademic/ (accessed October 15). Garcia, Juan Ramon. Operation Wetback: The Mass Deportation of Mexican Undocumented Workers in 1954. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1980. Garcilazo, Jeffrey M. "McCarthyism, Mexican Americans, and the Los Angeles Committeefor Protectionofthe Foreign-Born 1950-1954."Western Historical Quarterly 32, no. 3 (September 2001): 273, http://www.historycooperative.org//journals/whq/32.3/garcilazo.html (accessed October 25, 2010).

Gilmore, N. Ray and Gladys W. Gilmore. The Bracero in California. Pacific Historical Review 32, no. 3 (August 1963), http://www.jstor.org/stable/4492181?&Search=yes&term=bracero&term=program&list= hide&searchUri=%2Faction%2FdoBasicSearch%3FQuery%3Dbracero%2Bprogram%26 gw%3Djtx%26acc%3Don%26prq%3Doperation%2Bwetback%26hp%3D25%26wc%3D on&item=1&ttl=1123&returnArticleService=showFullText (accessed October 24, 2010). Hamann, Volker. The Impact of International Labor Migration on Regional Development: The Example of Zacatecas, Mexico. Kassel: Kassel University Press, 2007. Hernandez, Kelly Lytle. Migra!: A history of the U.S. Border Patrol. Berkley, CA: University of California Press, 2010.

27

Hernandez, Kelly Lytle. "The Crimes and Consequences of Illegal Immigration: a Cross-Border Examination of Operation Wetback, 1943 to 1954." Western Historical Quarterly 37, no. 4 (Winter 2006): 421-444, http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/whq/37.4/hernandez.html (accessed October 22, 2010). Inda, Jonathan Xavier. Targeting immigrants: Government, Technology, and Ethics. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 2006. Koven, Steven G. and Frank Gotzke. American Immigration Policy: Confronting the Nation's Challenges. New York, NY: Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, 2010. Mize, Ronald L. and Alicia C.S. Swords. Consuming Mexican Labor: From the Bracero Program to NAFTA. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2011. Ngai, Mae M. Impossible Subjects: Illegal Aliens and the Making of Modern America. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2004. Olson, James S. "Operation Wetback: The Mass Deportation of Mexican Undocumented Workers in 1954." Journal of the West 22, no. 1 (January 1983): 80-81, http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=8&hid=104&sid=9d8b3b3c-8e1c-4e11-b22abe7cb6dc656f%40sessionmgr12&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=ahl &AN=48105593 (accessed October 24, 2010). Perea, Juan F. Immigrants Out!: the new nativism and the anti-immigrant impulse in the United States. New York: New York University Press, 1997. Robinson, R.. "Taking the Fair Deal to the Fields: Truman's Commission on Migratory Labor, Public Law 78, and the Bracero Program, 1950-1952." Agricultural History 84, no. 3 (July 1, 2010): 381 402, http://proquest.umi.com/pqdlink?Ver=1&Exp=10-252015&FMT=7&DID=2122175471&RQT=309 (accessed October 25, 2010). Scruggs, Otey M. "Texas and the Bracero Program, 1942-1947." Pacific Historical Review 32, no. 3 (August 1963): 251-264, http://www.jstor.org/sici?origin=sfx%3Asfx&sici=00308684(196308)32%3A3%3C251%3ATATBP1%3E2.0.CO%3B2-G (accessed October 22, 2010).