| Abstract: | ![]()
This paper analyzes similarities and dissimilarities in French and American efforts to come to grip with irregular migration. The symbolic importance of immigration reform is argued to be a key political concern in both nations, although the politics of immigration reform has assumed a more partisan flavor in France, particularly since the municipal elections of 1983. In France, the theme of control and security, associated with the notion of preventing "automatic" immigration which would endanger the cohesion of French society, was widely utilized for political ends prior to and after May 10, 1981 (the date of Francois Mitterand's investiture). The American government, on the other hand, is confronted with the unenviable task of obtaining a legislative consensus on legalization and employer sanctions through an approach seeking to harmonize and integrate the demands articulated by various groups: employers, unions, and alien and ethnic interest groups (principally Hispanic groups divided into a hierarchy along a recently arrived/established cleavage). The American situation most sharply differs from the French case in terms of the absence of a right/left political cleavage. The real effects of clandestine immigration are to be found at the local level. In France, as in the US, the ability of local actors to exert pressure raises the fear that legalization and sanctions will change little, except in terms of symbolic legitimacy. |
