“The Politics of the HealthCare Reform Debate: Public Support of Including Undocumented Immigrants and Their Children in Reform Efforts in the U.S.”

Although U.S. immigration and health care policies appear to be highly correlated, scholarship has yet to gauge the public's views toward providing undocumented immigrants with health coverage at the state level. We analyze support for including undocumented immigrants in health care reform in New Mexico. Utilizing an original public opinion survey of New Mexico adults, we find that individuals are more supportive of the state providing health care to the children of undocumented immigrant than to their parents. Multivariate logistic regression analyses suggest that factors such as liberal ideology and perceptions of commonalities with Latinos increase support levels. Despite a lack of support among a majority of respondents, the influence of perceived commonalities with immigrants suggests that reform advocates and political elites who mobilize along ethnic or human solidarity may be successful in creating conditions for the inclusion of undocumented immigrants in the public provision of health care at the state level.     

Gender differences in immigrant health: the case of Mexican and Middle Eastern immigrants

This article draws on theories of gender inequality and immigrant health to hypothesize differences among the largest immigrant population, Mexicans, and a lesser known population of Middle Easterners. Using data from the 2000-2007 National Health Interview Surveys, we compare health outcomes among immigrants to those among U.S.-born whites and assess gender differences within each group. We find an immigrant story and a gender story. Mexican and Middle Eastern immigrants are healthier than U.S.-born whites, and men report better health than women regardless of nativity or ethnicity. We identify utilization of health care as a primary mechanism that contributes to both patterns. Immigrants are less likely than U.S.-born whites to interact with the health care system, and women are more likely to do so than men. Thus, immigrant and gender health disparities may partly reflect knowledge of health status rather than actual health.     

U.S. Immigration Policy at a Crossroads: Should the U.S. Continue Its Family‐Friendly Policy?

An ongoing debate is whether the U.S. should continue its family‐based admission system, which favors visas for family members of U.S. citizens and residents, or adopt a more skills‐based system, replacing family visas with employment‐based visas. In many ways, this is a false dichotomy: family‐friendly policies attract highly‐skilled immigrants regardless of their own visa path, and there are not strong reasons why a loosening of restrictions on employment migrants need be accompanied by new restrictions on family‐based immigration. Moreover, it is misleading to think that only employment‐based immigrants contribute to the U.S. economy. Recent immigrants, who have mostly entered via kinship ties, are economically productive, a fact hidden by a flawed methodology that underlies most economic analyses of immigrant economic assimilation.     

Recent Immigration to Canada and the United States: A Mixed Tale of Relative Selection

Using large‐scale census data and adjusting for sending‐country fixed effect to account for changing composition of immigrants, we study relative immigrant selection to Canada and the U.S. during 1990–2006, a period characterized by diverging immigration policies in the two countries. Results show a gradual change in selection patterns in educational attainment and host‐country language proficiency in favor of Canada as its post‐1990 immigration policy allocated more points to the human capital of new entrants. Specifically, in 1990, new immigrants in Canada were less likely to have a B.A. degree than those in the U.S.; they were also less likely to have a highschool or lower education. By 2006, Canada surpassed the U.S. in drawing highly educated immigrants, while continuing to attract fewer low‐educated immigrants. Canada also improved its edge over the U.S. in terms of host‐country language proficiency of new immigrants. Entry‐level earnings, however, do not reflect the same trend: Recent immigrants to Canada have experienced a wage disadvantage compared to recent immigrants to the U.S., as well as Canadian natives. One plausible explanation is that while the Canadian points system has successfully attracted more educated immigrants, it may not be effective in capturing productivity‐related traits that are not easily measurable.     

North Central Sociological Association Presidential Address. Renewing Sociology: Integral Science,Solidarity, and Loving Kindness

Abstract

We contribute to the debate about the effects of immigration in the United States by analyzing the impact of recent (1980-2000) immigration on the economic outcomes of African Americans. We use Census 2000 data for a sample of 150 U.S. metropolitan areas to examine these outcomes. Our findings indicate that after controlling for a variety of theoretically relevant control variables, increases in recent immigration decrease labor force non-participation and poverty, and increase median earnings, among blacks. We argue that recent immigration expands blacks' job opportunities in or near the middle of the occupational hierarchy (e.g., protective services; office and administrative support). However, we also find a non-linear effect of immigration on black median earnings which indicates an immigrant population threshold where black earnings begin to decline. Thus, both sides of this debate may be correct: middle-class blacks benefit from increased immigration, but the gains of the black middle class do not always offset the fact that poor and lower-skilled blacks are losing out because of increased competition with immigrants.     

Violence against immigrants in a context of crisis: A critical migration feminist of color analysis

Abstract

The anti-immigration measures and xenophobic sentiments that have spread since the eruption of the financial crisis in 2008 have been significantly detrimental for immigrant survivors of intimate partner violence in the U.S. given that employment opportunities have declined, exploitative work conditions have worsened, immigration controls have increased, and nonprofit service provision have been under stress. Based on interviews with service providers across the nation, participant observation of networks of advocates of immigrant survivors, and an analysis of debates around the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act, I present how these dire circumstances have been disadvantageous for immigrants and the movement to end violence against women. In theoretical terms, my research contributes to the body of literature of critical migration studies by linking such perspective with a feminist of color analysis of gender violence and pointing to the persistent strength of interrelated systems and practices of oppression and marginalization of Latin American immigrants and Latino/as in the U.S.     

U.S. Data Sources on the Foreign Born and Immigration

Migration data can be divided into two broad types: “stock” or census and survey data and “flow” or administrative data. Both stock and flow data are valuable resources for analyzing the migration process. In the statistical system of the United States, the U.S. Census Bureau is the primary source for census and survey data on the foreign born. The Department of Homeland Security and the U.S. State Department provide several different administrative sources for studying immigration. The goal of this study is to review the best sources of government data available for analyzing (1) the size, distribution, and characteristics of the foreign‐born population and their households and (2) the level of immigration into the United States, and the distribution and characteristics of immigrants by status.     

Comparing the discussion networks and voluntary association memberships of immigrants and non-immigrants in U.S. suburban gateways

Using survey data from five Chicago (U.S.) suburbs, we build regression models comparing the social lives of immigrants and non-immigrants. We define immigration several ways (citizenship, legal status, immigrant generation, length of time in U.S., and race/ethnicity). Results indicate that the size, longevity and density of immigrants’ discussion networks are mostly comparable to those of non-immigrants, as are the number and longevity of their voluntary association memberships. Immigrants and non-immigrants differ little in geographic location of their network confidants and organizational memberships. However, there is less racial/ethnic variety in immigrants’ social lives, particularly if they are Latinx or not citizens.     

The Great Recession and the Allure of New Immigrant Destinations in the United States

In the 1990s, the immigrant population in the United States dispersed to non‐traditional settlement locations (what have become known as “new immigrant destinations”). This paper examines whether the allure of new destinations persisted in the 2000s with a particular focus on the internal migration of the foreign‐born during the recent deep recessionary period and its aftermath. Three specific questions motivate the analysis. First, are immigrants, much like the U.S.‐born population, becoming less migratory within the country over time? Second, is immigrant dispersal from traditional gateways via internal migration continuing despite considerable economic contraction in many new destination metropolitan areas? Third, is immigration from aboard a substitute for what appears to be declining immigrant internal migration to new destinations? The findings reveal a close correlation between the declining internal migration propensity of the U.S.‐born and immigrants in the last two decades. We also observe parallels between the geographies of migration of native‐ and foreign‐born populations with both groups moving to similar metropolitan areas in the 1990s. This redistributive association, however, weakened in the subsequent decade as new destination metropolitan areas lost their appeal for both groups, especially immigrants. There is no evidence to suggest that immigration from abroad is substituting for the decline in immigrant redistribution through internal migration to new destinations. Across destination types, the relationship between immigration from abroad and the internal migration of the foreign‐born remained the same during and after the Great Recession as in the period immediately before it.     

Sponsors,sponsorship rates and the immigration multiplier

"This article reviews the evidence pertaining to the extent to which U.S. immigrants actually make use of the family reunification entitlements of United States immigration laws, examining the two available studies which are based on probability samples of immigrant entry cohorts. It then provides new estimates of the characteristics of the U.S. citizen sponsors of immigrant spouses and parents.... With respect to the characteristics of sponsors, analysis of the information in the GAO [General Accounting Office] report indicates that 80 percent of the persons who immigrated in FY 1985 as the spouses of U.S. citizens were sponsored by native born U.S. citizens. In contrast, native born U.S. citizens sponsored only five percent of the parent immigrants. Additional findings on the country of origin and sex of the sponsored immigrants are presented."     

Is there any merit to the merit-based immigration system? What Sub-Saharan African immigrant labor and housing market outcomes tell us about U.S. economic and immigration systems

For decades, U.S. immigration policy debates have centered on creating a merit-based system limiting entry to high-skilled immigrants. Yet the emphasis on merit-based immigration ignores the fact that high-skilled immigrants already enter the United States in merit-based immigration assume high-skilled immigrants benefit the U.S. economy because they are better able than low-skilled immigrants to translate skills into economic success. Using Sub-Saharan (Black) African immigrants' labor and housing market outcomes, I show that meritocracy only partially explains U.S. labor and housing outcomes, leaving a merit-based system unlikely to address America's economic needs. The majority of immigrants to the U.S. are non-White, and racial discrimination in the labor market results in occupational and wage disadvantages in the U.S. Due to the public charge rule, high skilled immigrants may be less likely to get their visas renewed or green card applications approved because of these labor market disadvantages. Without stable visa status, high-skilled immigrants will be less likely to make long-term economic investments in the United States—an important way of contributing to the U.S. economy. Together, research indicates that U.S. immigration reform will not work without first enacting policy addressing racial disparities in economic systems.     

Affecting Lives: How Winning the US Diversity Visa Lottery Impacts DV Migrants Pre‐ and Post‐Migration

Usual debates about the diversity visa (DV) programme revolve around the impact of DV initiated mass migration on African countries’ development, on whether the programme sufficiently diversifies U.S. immigrant streams, and on whether there is a tradeoff in immigrant quality for diversity. This article seeks to extend the focus of these debates by examining the impact of the diversity visa programme on DV migrants at the micro‐level pre‐ and post‐migration. Based on in‐depth interviews with sixty‐one diversity visa lottery winners from Ghana and Nigeria, the article examines how this immigration policy has become a contextual determinant of immigrant incorporation. It argues that an account of the impact of immigration policies on immigrants pre‐ and post‐migration must be added to theorization of state agency in shaping migration flows. It concludes with a discussion on ways the diversity visa programme can be modified to facilitate incorporation of DV migrants in the United States.     

Who “They” Are Matters: Immigrant Stereotypes and Assessments of the Impact of Immigration

We investigate the relationship between stereotypes of immigrants and assessments of the impact of immigration on U.S. society. Our analysis exploits a split‐ballot survey of registered voters in Ohio, who were asked to evaluate both the characteristics of one of four randomly assigned immigrant groups and perceived impacts of immigration. We find that associations between impact assessments and stereotypes of Middle Eastern, Asian, and European immigrants are weak and fully attenuated by control covariates. By contrast, this relationship for Latin American immigrants is strong and robust to controls, particularly in the areas of unemployment, schools, and crime. Our findings suggest that public views of the impacts of immigration are strongly connected to beliefs about the traits of Latin American immigrants in particular.     

Immigration and the earnings of youth in the U.S.

"This article reports findings that have emerged from an effort made at statistically measuring the effects of immigration on the earnings of U.S.-born youth. The presence of immigrants arriving before 1965 has a positive impact on youth earnings. Recently arrived immigrants impact negatively, however. These results are consistent with recent findings that the skill level of immigrants arriving within the last two decades is lower relative to that of immigrants arriving earlier. The results also show that the negative effects diminish as the youth ages, reflecting skill acquisition and job mobility of the young worker into jobs less vulnerable to competition from immigrant workers."     

1.5 Generation Internal Migration in the U.S.: Dispersion from States of Immigration?1

The issue of immigrant spatial concentration and the possibilities for immigrant dispersion through migration features in at least three interrelated debates about immigration. First, the ethnic enclave literature centers on the question of whether spatial concentration improves or harms the economic well‐being of immigrants. Second, spatial assimilation theory links immigrant relocation away from residential enclaves to socioeconomic gains. Although framed at an intra‐urban scale, we suggest that similar assimilation logics infuse thinking and expectations about immigrant settlement and spatial mobility at other scales. And third, immigrant clustering links to anxieties about the threats posed by non‐European origin newcomers to the traditional cultural fabric of the nation. In the current wave of immigration, research on questions of settlement geography and spatial mobility has so far been restricted to the first generation. But as the current wave of immigration matures there is a growing population of adults who are the children of immigrants. This article investigates the migration behavior of these adult children, specifically the 1.5 generation, seeking to answer the question of whether they will remain in the states in which their parent's generation settled or move on. It also assesses whether the out‐migration response of the 1.5 generation in states of immigrant concentration is similar to that of their parent's generation or the U.S.‐born population.     

Subordinating Myth: Latino/a Immigration,Crime, and Exclusion

Rhetoric about “crime‐prone immigrants” has contributed to increased enforcement of the U.S.‐Mexico border, the passage of punitive immigration laws, and state and local efforts to make life difficult for new arrivals. Yet scholarly research refutes the notion that immigrants commit more crime. How do we explain this glaring contradiction? By reviewing recent research on immigration, crime, and social control in the context of racial stratification, this article describes the criminalization of Latino/a immigrants in the U.S. as a subordinating myth; that is, a falsity used as part of a larger effort to misallocate material, political, and cultural resources. Four ways in which the criminalization of immigrants contributes to racial exclusion are discussed: the profiting from immigration detention; the political scapegoating of racialized immigrants; the degrading of racialized bodies in enforcement efforts; and the literal control of exploitable populations. The article concludes with a call to develop further our understanding of the relationship between immigration and crime from this critical perspective in order to subordinate the myth of immigrant criminality.     

Policing immigrants or policing immigration? Understanding local law enforcement participation in immigration control

As the United States has expanded its immigration control strategies, police participation in immigration enforcement has increased in scope and intensity. Local law enforcement agencies contribute to immigration enforcement in three key ways: through the direct enforcement of immigration law, through cooperation with federal immigration authorities, and through the everyday policing of immigrant communities. These enforcement approaches have consequences for unauthorized immigrants, and for the agencies and officers tasked with providing them police services. This article reviews local law enforcement practices and argues that future research should move away from an exclusive examination of police policies towards immigrants, to consider how the policing of immigrants actually occurs on the ground. Moreover, we argue that as long as discretionary arrests funnel removable immigrants into the deportation system, some immigrant communities will perceive policing as fundamentally unfair and discriminatory.     

Gender,Migration, and Law: Crossing Borders and Bridging Disciplines

The gendered nature of the immigration experience is shaped and reinforced by law, legal consciousness, and the normative understandings they help constitute. This article provides an overview of the role of gender in migration processes from a law and society perspective, and includes an empirical focus on the new immigration to Italy and Spain as an illustration of the utility of such an approach. Beginning with a brief summary of the literatures of feminist jurisprudence and law and migration, respectively, the small body of scholarship at the intersection of these fields is reviewed. The author then examines the new immigration to Italy and Spain and argues that this immigration and the policies that shape it highlight the role of the state in gendering immigrant labor and offer new angles from which to consider the interplay of gender, race, migration status, and marginality. In concluding, the author proposes that such exploration of immigrants’ experiences in southern Europe reveals the surprising complexity of immigrants’ multiple marginalities, and exposes the powerful contingencies of economic context, prevailing stereotypes, the particulars of state policy, and the agentive power of people struggling to survive.     

Trends in the Gender Ratio of Immigrants to the United States1

Females have held a majority in the imigrant population arriving in the United States since about 1930, despite the traditional picture of the lone male pioneer or the immigrant family group. The 1980s and early 1990s saw a reversal of this pattern. This article provides information on the gender ratio of immigrants in recent years and analyzes how elements of U. S. imigration law favor one gender or trhe other. The number of marriges between U. S. citizens or legal residents and non‐citizens in highlighted as the dynamic factor determining the trend and proportion of male and female immigrants.     

NATIVITY DIFFERENCES IN PHYSICAL HEALTH: THE ROLES OF EMOTIONAL SUPPORT,FAMILY, AND SOCIAL INTEGRATION

U.S. immigrants are a physically healthy population, but we do not understand the explanatory factors responsible for their physical health status, particularly those related to social network support. Using data from the 2001 wave of the National Health Interview Survey, we examine multiple measures of immigrant adaptation, investigating their influence on measures of physical health. In particular, we examine how well indicators of social support and integration explain the immigrant health advantage. Results show clear evidence of an immigrant paradox in physical health, but that measures of support and integration explain almost none of the immigration effect on physical health.