Analyzing Immigration ‘Amnesty’

Considering Immigration ‘Amnesty’ Past and Present

By Evan Wyloge

Over the years, immigration policy has has produced a fierce, ongoing debate. The subject remains at the center of our national conversation.

Since his campaign, President Obama has pledged to achieve what he calls comprehensive immigration reform. A huge question at the heart of any reform effort is what to do about the estimated 12 million undocumented — mostly Hispanic — people currently living in the United States.

Some call for a “legalization” or “amnesty” program, arguing that it’s impractical and unrealistic to deport 12 million people, most of whom are a part of the country’s workforce. Others say amnesty only encourages more illegal entry, and rewards those who have broken the law.

Arguments over amnesty are not new. During the mid-eighties, President Reagan signed a bill that provided amnesty for millions of undocumented immigrants and spelled out methods for controlling future illegal entry into the U.S.

So did that bill achieve its goals? How do those who were most affected view the program now? What were its strengths and weaknesses? And how can the answers to these questions inform the discussion that’s currently taking shape?

By focusing on Albuquerque, N.M., a community where the 1986 amnesty bill had a significant impact, and Culpeper, Va., a community where a similar bill would have a large impact today, the answers to those questions will be explored.

Our reporting will not end the debate. But we hope to help people discuss the issue intelligently. You are invited to take part in a real-time conversation on these issues via Twitter. Instructions are on the pages that follow.

A note on language: The word “amnesty” itself has become politically charged. Our use of the word is simply meant to convey any program or law that provides a path to legalization for immigrants who are currently in the country illegally.