Could “Acculturation” Effects Be Explained by Latent Health Disadvantages Among Mexican Immigrants?

This paper tests portions of a new theory of immigrant health by focusing exclusively on latent biomarkers of future health risks. Using data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey III, 1988–1994 – we uncover the typically observed immigrant health advantage among recent immigrants that diminishes among long‐term immigrants. In addition, we observe worse health among U.S.‐born Mexican Americans relative to non‐Hispanic Whites. Finally, although our theory suggests that recent immigrants may have latent health risks due to disadvantaged childhood experiences, we do not find evidence in support of this theory.     

Can We Measure Immigrants' Legal Status? Lessons from Two U.S. Surveys

This research note examines response and allocation rates for legal status questions asked in publicly available U.S. surveys to address worries that the legal status of immigrants cannot be reliably measured. Contrary to such notions, we find that immigrants' non‐response rates to questions about legal status are typically not higher than non‐response rates to other immigration‐related questions, such as country of birth and year of immigration. Further exploration of two particular surveys – the Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey (LAFANS) and the Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP) – reveals that these data sources produce profiles of the unauthorized immigrant population that compare favorably to independently estimated profiles. We also find in the case of the SIPP that the introduction of legal status questions does not appear to have an appreciable “chilling effect” on the subsequent survey participation of unauthorized immigrant respondents. Based on the results, we conclude that future data collection efforts should include questions about legal status to (1) improve models of immigrant incorporation; and (2) better position assimilation research to inform policy discussions.     

Is it Race,Immigrant Status,or Both? An Analysis of Wage Disparities among Men in the United States1

The intersection of race and immigrant status forms a unique social space where minority group members and immigrants are afforded or denied the privileges that are routinely accorded to native-born, non-Hispanic whites. Yet recent research on the intersection of race and immigrant status is inconsistent in its findings, limited to a small number of racial groups, and does not account for the geographic distribution of racial/ethnic groups. In this paper, we shed light on the intersection of race and immigrant status by answering two questions: (1) Do racial disparities in socioeconomic outcomes vary by nativity? and (2) Do native-immigrant disparities in socioeconomic outcomes vary by race? Using 2000 Census data linked to metropolitan area and sending country data, we find that racial disparities are similar and significant among natives and immigrants (Question 1). Asians, blacks, and Latinos fare significantly worse than their white counterparts in both the native and immigrant populations. Furthermore, our analysis of native-immigrant wage disparities by race reveals that the immigrant experience is considerably worse for Asians, blacks, and Latinos (Question 2). These groups also receive fewer wage returns to years spent in the U.S. and their wage disparities are magnified by the percentage of immigrants in a metropolitan area – whereas all whites receive a wage premium when living in an area with a larger share of immigrants. The results suggest that race and immigrant status work in concert to uniquely influence the social experience of immigrant minorities in the U.S.     

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.     

Interests Aren’t Everything: An Exploration of Economic Explanations of Immigration Policy in a New Destination

Current debates around US immigration policy are playing out against a backdrop that has changed significantly in the past 20 years: immigrants have increasingly gravitated towards “new destinations”; a large and growing portion of immigrants are undocumented; and the federal vacuum in responding to the promise and problems of these new immigration trends has devolved policy to the states. As a result, we have seen innovation on the state level as policymakers seek to accommodate, welcome or resist immigration, with varying degrees of success. In this paper, we explore the case of Utah as a new immigration destination, seeking to understand its transformation from a state with very inclusive immigrant policies as late as 1999 to one currently adopting highly restrictive immigrant policies. To explain this trajectory, we test three prominent materialist theories of public policy: instrumentalism, structuralism and strategic-relational approaches. We draw on a decade’s worth of primary data – including data on state-level legislation, key economic indicators, public statements concerning immigration from the private business sector and the LDS Church, and the editorial content of the state’s two major newspapers regarding immigration – to examine the policy explanations that grow out of interest-based theories of the state. Whereas these theories provide robust explanations for a large and diverse array of public policies, we find that they fall short in explaining immigration policy. While conventional wisdom – and extensive scholarly research – suggests that economic interests drive policy, we find that the policies around immigrants challenge this economic reductionism, suggesting the need for more complex and ideational accounts of this important phenomenon.     

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.     

The Influence of Attitudes toward Immigrants on International Migration

We investigate whether anti‐immigrant attitudes affect migrant inflows in Organisation for Economic Co‐operation and Development (OECD) countries. Using longitudinal exhaustive data, we find that natives’ hostility, particularly natives’ propensity to discriminate on the labor market, reduces immigration. This effect is comparable to more conventional migration factors. We obtain robust results when we, for example, capture hostility with far‐right parties’ popularity instead and control for tighter immigration policies or multilateral resistance to migration. We find a stronger effect for EU‐to‐EU migrants, migrants from developed countries and linguistically close countries. Our results raise a challenge for policy makers when the demand for foreign workers and anti‐immigrant sentiment are present.     

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."     

Israeli immigrants in the United States: The question of community

Despite their possession of many social advantages such as high levels of education, familiarity with Western, urban culture, Caucasian appearance, relative economic security and ties to an established, co-ethnic community, much literature on Israeli immigrants in the U.S. depicts them as plagued by social and psychological alienation to the extent that they are incapable of creating viable ethnic communities. This paper uses field work and photography collected within the Israeli immigrant population of Los Angeles to critically examine the assertion that Israeli immigrants in the U.S. are much less organized than would be predicted by recent theories on immigrant adaptation and community formation. Based on this research, we argue that while Israelis are ambivalent about their presence in the U.S., they have created a variety of communal activities involving entrepreneurship, religion, culture, politics and leisure.     

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.     

Race/Ethnicity and Stop‐and‐Frisk: Past,Present, Future

Scholarly debates surrounding stop‐and‐frisk typically assess the effectiveness and lawfulness of stop‐and‐frisk. Notwithstanding these efforts, recent reviews have excluded some recent research that addresses its impact on racial and ethnic immigrants. Understanding how the practice of stop‐and‐frisk affects racial and ethnic immigrants is worth including in reviews of these policies, considering the recent growth of research involving crime and immigrants that largely finds that immigration does not result in higher levels of crime. This review includes recent work showing that overall enforcement – stops and arrests – is higher in immigrant communities despite their lower levels of criminal involvement and recent work exploring differences among first‐generation and second‐generation immigrants in perceptions of police stops. Finally, some suggestions for the future of stop‐and‐frisk research are considered.     

Adoption,Foreign‐Born Status,and Children's Progress in School

Using recent data from the American Community Survey, the author investigated how the dynamics of immigration influence our understanding of the adoption–schooling relationship. The results suggest that implications of immigrant and adoption statuses could be understood within specific familial contexts. Thus, no statistical differences were found in the outcomes of foreign‐born adoptees in U.S. native families and their peers with immigrant parents. Instead, the most favorable patterns of schooling progress were found among U.S.‐born adoptees living in immigrant families. Among immigrants, the analysis indicated similar patterns of achievement among Hispanic and White adoptees that are inconsistent with the predictions of segmented assimilation theory. However, there was a Hispanic disadvantage relative to Whites among immigrant children living with biological and stepparents. The article concludes with a discussion of the implications of these findings for kinship selection and assimilation processes and the contention that alternative theoretical frameworks should be used to understand the implications of adoption status.     

Determinants of Attitudes towards Immigration: Testing the Influence of Interculturalism,Group Threat Theory and National Contexts in Time of Crisis

Since 2008 a profound crisis, not only economic but also political, has been affecting the EU. The Eurobarometers carried out by the European Commision show an increased percentage of people who see their country as not having benefitted from being an EU member. In addition, the presence of extreme‐right parties has grown recently in several democracies. These parties adopt not only an anti‐European but also an anti‐immigrant stance. It is precisely the growing strength and visibility of this link between anti‐Europeanism and anti‐immigration in ideological positions that has prompted our research. Using data from the Eurobarometer 71.3 (2009) for eleven countries, we confirm a correlation between intercultural dialogue – measured using a proxy variable: European identification – and tolerance. Results also corroborate group threat theory. However, the best model takes into account national contexts. These findings show the relevance of studying national historical and cultural traditions to understand how prejudices develop.     

“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.     

From Illegal to Legal: Estimating Previous Illegal Experience among New Legal Immigrants to the United States1

This paper develops a framework for estimating previous illegal experience among annual cohorts of new legal immigrants to the United States – using public‐use administrative microdata alone, survey data alone, and the two jointly – and provides estimates for the FY 1996 cohort of new immigrants, based on both administrative and survey data. Our procedures enable assessment of type of illegal experience, including entry without inspection, visa overstay, and unauthorized employment. We compare our estimates of previous illegal experience to estimates that would be obtained using administrative data alone; examine the extent of previous illegal experience by country of birth, immigrant class of admission, religion, and geographic residence in the United States; and estimate multivariate models of the probability of having previous illegal experience. To further assess origins and destinations, we carry out two kinds of contrasts, comparing formerly illegal new legal immigrants both to fellow immigrants who do not have previous illegal experience and also to the broader unauthorized population, the latter using estimates developed by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (2002 ), Passel (2002 ), and Costanzo et al. (2002 ).     

Bridges and Barriers: Religion and Immigrant Occupational Attainment across Integration Contexts

This article advances knowledge about context‐dependent impacts of religion on immigrant structural integration. Drawing on theories of inter‐generational immigrant integration, it identifies and spells out two context‐dependent mechanisms through which religion impinges upon structural integration – as ethnic marker prompting exclusion and discrimination, or as social organization providing access to tangible resources. The propositions are empirically tested with nationally representative data on occupational attainment in three different integration contexts which vary in religious boundary configurations and religious field characteristics – the United States, Canada, and Western Europe. Using data from the US General Social Survey, the Canadian Ethnic Diversity Survey, and the European Social Survey, the article analyzes indirect and direct effects of religious affiliation and participation on occupational attainment among first and second generation immigrants. The analyses find only limited evidence for the assumption that in contexts with strong religious boundaries (such as Western Europe and, to a lesser extent, Canada), immigrants face religious penalties in structural integration. By contrast, the analyses support the assumption that in contexts with a thriving religious field (such as the United States and, to a lesser extent, Canada), religious attendance tends to be positively related to occupational attainment, especially for the second generation. For the first time, the article empirically tests arguments about transatlantic differences in the role of religion for immigrant structural integration, and it suggests ways of better integrating micro‐oriented survey research with macro‐oriented institutional analysis.     

Earning Gaps for Chinese Immigrants in Canada and the United States

This study compares the US and Canada on the gap in earnings between Chinese immigrants and native‐born whites. Canada and the US are arguably more alike than most possible country pairings, yet they differ in significant ways in their approaches to immigration and integration. The primary difference between Canada and the US regarding immigration policy is that Canada selects a larger proportion of economic immigrants – that is, those admitted based on their ability to contribute to the economy – than the US's focus on family reunification. Canadian immigration and multicultural integration policy does not appear to improve Chinese immigrant earnings in the way that might be predicted from Canada's skilled‐based immigrant selection policy and welcoming social context. In spite of a more laissez‐faire approach to immigrant integration and a less skill‐selective immigration policy, we show that Chinese immigrants are earning relatively more in the US than in Canada.     

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.     

Self‐Selection and Economic Assimilation of Immigrants: The Case of Iranian Immigrants Arriving to Three Countries During 1979–1985

The study is designed to evaluate the impact of the interaction between patterns of immigrants' self‐selection and the context of reception at destinations on economic assimilation of Iranian immigrants who came to three countries during 1979–1985. For that purpose, we studied immigrants at the age of 22 or higher upon arrival by utilizing the 5 percent 1990 and 2000 Public Use Microdata files (PUMS) of the United States census, the 20 percent demographic samples of the 1983 and 1995 Israeli censuses of population, and the 1990 and 2000 Swedish registers. The results indicate that the “most qualified” immigrants – both on observed and unobserved variables – who left Iran right after the Islamic revolution, arrived in the US Their positive self‐selection led them to reach complete earnings assimilation with natives there. Iranian immigrants who arrived in Israel and Sweden did not achieve full earnings assimilation with natives. Of these two groups, a smaller immigrant‐to‐native gap in average earnings was found in Sweden, but in the same time Iranian immigrants in Israel were more positively self‐selected and showed better assimilation than their counterparts in Sweden. Market structure played a certain role in immigrants' earnings assimilation mainly in Sweden.