Abstract:Why did the United States move from having nearly open borders from the 1840s to the 1870s to passing the Chinese Exclusion Act in 1882, the first law in American history to ban people from entering the United States solely based on race? We argue that the standard story of nativist backlash based on wage pressure explains the demand for immigration restrictions, but not their timing or their racial focus. The demand for immigration restrictions was largely inchoate until the political restructuring that followed the Civil War. Finding themselves uncompetitive in much of the country, the Democrats seized on immigration restrictions, most notably in growing California, as a wedge issue. Chinese residents were unable to vote, thus making restrictions on Chinese entry an especially effective strategy in political economy.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?
### The problems the paper attempts to solve
This paper attempts to explain why the United States shifted from an almost open - border policy between the 1840s and 1870s to passing the Chinese Exclusion Act in 1882, which was the first law in American history to ban people from entering the country based on race. The author believes that the traditional story of nativist backlash based on wage pressure can explain the demand for immigration restrictions, but it cannot explain the timing of these restrictions or their racial focus.
Specifically, the paper explores the following issues:
1. **Why there is a long lag**: Although a large number of immigrants entered the United States in the 1840s, and the perception of the negative impact of immigration emerged in the 1850s, it was not until the 1880s that anti - immigration policies at the federal level emerged. What are the reasons for this lag?
2. **Why the policy reversal was so rapid**: The Burlingame Treaty in 1868 aimed to relax restrictions on Chinese immigrants and protect the rights of settled Chinese, but just 14 years later, the Chinese Exclusion Act was passed. What are the reasons for this rapid change?
3. **Changes in political incentives**: How did the Civil War change political incentives, making the immigration issue a key issue in swing states?
### Main arguments
The author believes that the Civil War changed the structure of political incentives, making the immigration issue an important means for the Democratic Party to win voters in key swing states (especially California). Specifically:
- **The electoral disadvantage faced by the Democratic Party**: After the Civil War, the Democratic Party faced a significant electoral disadvantage in northern states (such as Michigan, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Wisconsin, Illinois, Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Massachusetts), which accounted for about one - third of the electoral college votes. The Republican Party continuously reminded voters of the federal soldiers who sacrificed in the Civil War through the "wave the bloody shirt" strategy, which put the Democratic Party at a disadvantage in elections in these states.
- **The importance of California**: The rapid growth of California after the Civil War made it an important swing state. The main foreign - born population in this state was Asian immigrants from China, accounting for about 10% of California's population, and was strongly resented by white residents. Since Asian residents could not vote, the Democratic Party could use anti - Chinese policies to win voters without risking losing some voters.
- **Policy convergence of the two parties**: Realizing the success of the Democratic Party, the Republican Party also began to adopt similar anti - Chinese policies in the 1870s. By 1880, the anti - Chinese stances of the two parties were very close, ultimately leading to the passage of the Chinese Exclusion Act.
### Empirical strategy and data
To verify this argument, the author used the presidential election results in California counties between 1868 and 1880 to construct an econometric model. The key variable in the model is the Chinese/White ratio, assuming that counties with a higher ratio are more competitive in elections. In addition, the model also controls for other socio - economic variables, such as the logarithm of population, the logarithm of manufacturing wages, the logarithm of per capita manufacturing output, or the ratio of the manufacturing and agricultural sectors.
Through the analysis of these data, the author found:
- **The influence of the Chinese - to - white ratio**: In all elections, counties with a higher Chinese - to - white ratio are more competitive. This effect did not exist in pre - Civil War elections.
- **Time trend**: Over time, the marginal impact of the Chinese - to - white ratio on election competitiveness gradually decreased, which is consistent with the observation that the Republican Party began to follow the Democratic Party in adopting anti - Chinese policies.
- **Multiple panel combinations**: The author used multiple panel combinations to verify the robustness of the results, and the results show that the changes in political incentives after the Civil War do support their theory.
### Conclusion
In summary, through empirical analysis, this paper reveals how the Civil War reconfigured political incentives, making the immigration issue a key issue for the two parties to compete for voters, and ultimately leading to the passage of the Chinese Exclusion Act. This research not only explains the phenomena of policy lag and rapid reversal but also provides a new perspective for understanding historical immigration policies.