ered the United States to work on American farms under the provisions of Public Law 78.4 Throughout its life, the Bracero Program was characterized both by intense support and intense opposition.
The economic impacts of the Bracero Program were held by its critics to be wide spread. It was said that the use of braceros in American fields depressed wage levels particularly in agriculture, of course, but also across the board.5 Critics contended further that the use of braceros in American agriculture also caused increased unemployment among domestic workers again, particularly in agriculture, but also across the board.6 Other critics of the Bracero Program contended that the Mexican workers were more often than not denied basic rights; that the concept of equality suffered because of the program.7
4K. S. Koziara, "Collective Bargaining on the Farm," Monthly Labor Review, 91 (June 1968): 3 9.
5M. Erenburg, "Obreros Unidos in Wisconsin," Monthly Labor Review, 91 (June 1968): 17 23.
6"Battle Over the Braceros," Business Week, 9 January 1965, 24.
7"Labor," Fortune, November 1959, 273 276.
Additionally, the critics contended that the use of braceros in the fields caused domestic agricultural workers to migrate the country's cities, where they further aggravated unemployment in those urban areas.8 Similar arguments were used in the mid 1980s in support of the ICRA of 1986.9 As was true in 1964, these arguments again prevailed in 1986. If, indeed, the arguments were valid, one would expect wages in the American agricultural sector to rise, and, in the absence of some major improvements in productivity, for crop prices to rise. With the rise in crop prices, in the absence of any efforts to restrict the importation of cheaper agricultural produce from low wage countries, one would also expect the market share of American agricultural producers of labor intensive crops to deteriorate. In actual fact, such outcomes did...