Does anti-immigration policy lead to protectionism? Evidence from the Smoot–Hawley Tariff Act

I study whether the imposition of anti-immigration policy affects the subsequent passage of anti-trade legislation, using the protectionist Smoot–Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 as a setting. I show that the immigration quotas resulted in a higher likelihood of voting in favour of Smoot–Hawley and raising tariffs; this effect is driven primarily by increased Republican representation. Districts who voted in an anti-immigration manner in 1924 were subsequently more likely to vote in support of Smoot–Hawley in 1930 if affected by the immigration quotas. In contrast, districts who voted against immigration restrictions were then more likely to oppose Smoot–Hawley if they became heavily affected by immigration quotas. My results therefore suggest that the immigration quotas from the 1921 and 1924 anti-immigration legislation may have increased polarization in congressional voting within the House of Representatives.