Immigration and Integration

Philip Martin: plmartin@ucdavis.edu http://migration.ucdavis.edu

March 2012

 

 

  

Highlights

• US foreign-born (2010): 40 million; 12 milborn in Mexico, 10 mil in Caribbean & Lat America, 11 mil in Asia, 5 mil Europe

• W. Hemisphere: negative selection = immigrants to US have less education; Asia, positive selection

• US: integration via private-sector jobs • Integration : 1st generation: sacrifice for

children; 2nd/3rd generations= integration via education; will K-12 schools make 2nd

and 3rd generation like native born?

 

 

 

US Immigration

• 1.1 million immigrants a year; increase US population by 1/3 of 1% via immigration; with children born toimmigrants in US, half of US popincrease from immigration

• 2/3 of visas issued because foreigner hasrelative in US—family-unification basedpreference system

• Adjustment of status system: Mostimmigrants are in the US when they are “admitted,” change status, not new entry

 

 

 

3 Themes

• 2008-09 recession altered migration patterns. Fewer new unauthorized; stabilization at 11-12 million; no drop in legal immigration; unauthorized stay

• States beginning with Arizona in April 2010 enact omnibus laws requiringemployers to use E-Verify, making “illegal presence” a state crime etc (attrition through enforcement)

• But: status quo “works” for most employers and migrants; 2nd best solution

 

 

 

 

 

US: 104,000 foreign arrivals/day • 3,100 immigrants a day receive green

cards (2009); can naturalize after 5 years • 99,200 tourists, business visitors, guest workers and students; most leave after a

few days, weeks, or years • 2,000 unauthorized, including 1,200 who

entered without inspection from Mexico, and 800 overstayers

• 1970: 50 mil Mexican pop and 750,000 Mex-born in US (1.5% of Mex in US)

• 2010-120 mil Mex, 12 mil in US (10%)

 

 

 

 

 

US Immigration Preferences • Immigrants: 66% = family unification

(2009), 13%=employ (including families-1.5 deps per worker), 21%=refugees & others • Education—best single predictor of US

earnings – US-born adults—diamond shape, wide bulge in

the middle for HS grads and some college, 60% – FB adults—more pyramid or barbell shape—

>BS (Asian) AND <HS education (Lat Amers) – Averages less meaningful for immigrants—

averaging Andy Grove of Intel with Jose fromrural Mexico

 

 

 

Negative & Positive Selection• Mexico and Latin America=high inequality

countries; Lat American migrants to US have LESS education than stay at homes (not Cuba,Venezuela)

• Asia—Most Asians barred from 1880s to 1965;Asians in US have more education than stay-at-homes (not SE Asian refugees); European & African migrants also positively selected

• Typical 30 year-old Mexican migrant has 7-8 years schooling (2010); average 30 year-oldMexican has 9 years schooling

 

 

 

 

 

Immigrants in US = Work • 24 million immigrant (FB) workers,15% of

US labor force of 154 million in 2009; 50%of FB workers = Hispanic; 25% = Asian • 68% of FB 16 and older in labor force, 65%of US-born; FB men LFPR higher than US

• Urate FB was LOWER than for US born 2002-08, not 2009: FB = 9.7%; US-born 9.2%

• FB earn 80% as much as US-born—median $600 a week in 2009 vs $760 for US-born

• FB with college degrees earn = or more than US-born with Bacherlor’s

    

 

Immigration changes: Population

• Between 1990 and 2010: – US population up, 250 to 310 million, +60 mil – FB US residents up, 20 to 40 million, +20 mil – With children, immig > 50% of pop increase

• Most immigrants = Hispanic and Asian, sorace/ethnic composition changes

US Population 1970 2010 2050 White non-Hispanic 83% 66% 52%

Black 11 13 13

Hispanic 5 16 29

Asian 1 4 6

Population 203 million 308 399

 

 

 

 

   

Immigration: Politics 1 • Legal immigrants can naturalize after 5 years

by passing an English and civics test – Mass naturalization ceremonies on July 4 and

other national holidays – Naturalize if you do not intend to return (Cuba,

Vietnam), lower naturalization rates for Canadians & Europeans who may return

– Mexican and Latin American governmentschanged in 1990s.

• Old: discourage naturalization in US • New: encourage dual nationality for remittances &

Diaspora development

  

    

 

Immigration: Politics 2 • Effects of naturalized immigrants:

– US has more Hispanics (50 mil) than Blacks (40 mil), but Blacks cast 2x more votes in 2008 than Hispanics

– November 2008 election: • Whites: 55% McCain, 43% Obama • Blacks: 4% McCain, 95% Obama • Hispanics: 31% McCain, 67% Obama

• Latinos as 3rd force, sleeping giant of USpolitics? Will more Hispanics give Democrats a permanent majority? NB—mostadult Hispanics = foreign born

 

  

 

Immigrant Integration 1 • Metaphor: “Melting Pot,” 1908 play: “Germans and Frenchmen, Irishmen andEnglishmen, Jews and Russians - into the Crucible with you all! God is making the American.”

• Reality more complex: 3 principles: – US = open to all. George Washington: US

welcomes “the oppressed and persecuted of all Nations and Religions”

– US = 2 major political parties. Citizensparticipate as individuals, not members of an ethnic group, so no Mex-American political party

 

  

 

 

Immigrant Integration 2 • Maintain language and cultural heritage with

private, not public, resources – US K-12 public education has 50 million pupils

– 10% are limited-English proficient (LEP) or English language learners (ELL); 80% of LEP/ELL have Spanish as first language

– Federal government (1970): if >5% of pupils in a school are LEP/ELL, school “must take affirmative steps to rectify the language deficiency” to receive federal funds

– Decentralization: 16,000 US school districts, frombilingual education (teach math in Spanish) toEnglish-as-a-second language (ESL) instruction

 

 

 

 

 

Immigrant Integration 3 • Most schools = bilingual education & paid

bilingual teachers more, but students did notmove into regular English-language classes – CA Proposition 227, English for the Children, to

end bilingual ed, approved 61-39% in 1998

– Requires LEP/ELL pupils to receive intensive English lessons up to one year and then move intoregular English-speaking classrooms

– Test scores up, and Arizona (2000) andMassachusetts (2002) approved similar initiativesto end bilingual education

– 30 US states: English = official language

 

 

 

 

 

US Immigration and Integration • US History: waves of immigrants, suggesting

peaks and troughs, pre-1776, 1840s-1860s, 1880-1914, since 1965

• Current 4th wave, immigrant origins shiftedfrom Europe to Latin America and Asia – Family unification-based preferences generate

chain migration from particular countries – Most do not wait for visas—2/3 of immigrants

are already in US when they receive visas--enter via side/back door and adjust status

– Polls: no migrants and no borders extremes, sostatus quo winds up as 2nd best solution

 

 

 

   

US: Lessons 1 • US immigration reality/myth: anyone can

succeed in the flexible US economy andsociety with hard work, from Horatio Alger

to Barack Obama (not an immigrant) • Immigrants: move from poorer and less free

societies to US for opportunity and freedom • Celebrate the accomplishments of immigrants,

from Henry Kissinger to Arnold Schwarzenegger • immigrants join military, can naturalize after 3 years • many sunrise industries such as IT associated with

immigrants who benefited from moving to the US ANDcreated jobs for Americans

 

  

 

 

 

US: Lessons 2 • Immigrants are usually associated with

work, not welfare • High-skilled imms = welcomed everywhere • Low-skilled integration via private jobs more

accepted in the US because: – Migrants seek a hand up the job ladder, not a

hand out (welfare payment) – Employers are advocates for migrants, public

opposition softened if immigrants work – Children of immigrants try for better jobs than

their parents; may get education to move up jobladder

 

 

 

  

 

Integration: Full Employment • Full employment allows migrants to get what

most want: jobs at higher wages • Easy access to jobs reduces discrimination

against minorities etc because employers are actively seeking workers

• Mobile migrants move to jobs and help toprevent production bottlenecks

• FE encourages employers to aid integration – Some hotels and other service businesses give out

Ipods to staff to learn English; employees can keepif they pass English test after several months

– Some employers allow schools and NGOs to offer classes in workplace training rooms

 

  

 

 

But: Working-Poor Immigrants • Flexible labor market helps migrants get

jobs, but many = working poor, workfull time, but low incomes, few benefits

• Federal min wage: $7.25/hour – work 50 weeks x 40 hours = 2,000 hours

$14,500/year – Poverty line (2011) = $10,890 for one,

$22,350 for family of 4 • Working poor immigrant families have

low incomes, few work-related benefits(health insurance). Impacts on children?

 

  

 

Effects on Families • Horatio Alger (1832-99) myth: arrive in US

with little and work up the job ladder • Competing immigrant models:

– Asian model migrant. Parents = well educated, children encouraged to excel in school. Indian-Americans: very well educated and highestaverage family income in US

– Hispanics. Most parents did not complete 9 years. 1/3 of US Hispanic youth do not complete secondary school; over half drop out in large cities. Options: gangs and crime vs military

•US-born Blacks: low LFPRs and high unemployment, esp those with little education

 

 

 

 

 

Comparisons with Europe • US: gets immigrants into jobs, but has many

working poor immigrant families – Relatively little US education for immigrant adults

because of long work hours (2+jobs) and child care and transportation issues – Children’s success depends more on parents’

education than income—Asians vs Hispanics • Europe: fewer immigrant working poor, but

generally lower labor force participation, espfor women and 2nd and third generation

• Summary: US has a working-poor immigrantproblem, Europe a non-working immigrantproblem

 

 

Education Options • Years of schooling = best single predictor of

earnings (Bill Gates exception) • Poor choices = need for 2nd, 3rd, and 4th

chances to get schooling plus employer incentives • Adult immigrants: English-language training

in workplaces, GED at community colleges etc • Children of immigrants: more controversial *bilingual vs English instruction in K-12 schools *youthful enthusiasm vs. experience in teaching in inner city schools *can military compensate for bad schools?

 

 

 

 

 

 

#1 second-chance = comm colleges • 60 million pupils in K-12 schools; 20 million

college & university students • 3 million graduates a year from secondary

school (HS diploma); 2/3 begin college • Almost 10% of college students enroll in for-

profit colleges that have very high drop-outrates – esp immigrant students take out federal loans for

career-oriented programs, and do not complete or do not get jobs

– University of Phoenix—700,000+ students, one of top stocks (90% of revenue from federal loans andgrants

– Selling the American dream or profits?

 

 

 

 

Conclusions 1 • US immigrants: ½ = less-educated Latin

Americans; ¼ =better-educated Asians • Immigrant integration is via private-sector

jobs, with employers sometimes bolstering productivity (English)

• Youth—uneven progress in K-12 schools, with military an option for some (butusually need secondary school)

• Issues: (1) working poor immigrants; (2) privatization of benefits (like defense, prisons)

  

 

Conclusions 2 • Thinking about low-skilled migrants • Benefits tend to be concentrated

(employers, some complementary workers),immediate as migrants go to work, and

measurable in economic terms (more jobs, profits, prices)

• Costs tend to be deferred until family unification/formation, diffused over more people, and much harder to measure (adjustments to new cultures etc)