Citizenship Acquisition of Post-1965 Asian Immigrants

This article examines the citizenship acquisition of major post-1965 Asian immigrant groups including Chinese, Filipinos, Japanese, Asian Indians, Koreans, and Vietnamese, using the PUMS data from the 1990 U.S. Census and an INS longitudinal data set. The analysis of data reveals a very high average naturalization rate of post-1965 Asian immigrants and a bifurcated pattern in citizenship acquisition among the six Asian immigrant groups. Furthermore, the results of a pooled logistic regression model indicate that the characteristics of Asian immigrants, ethnic communities, and countries of origin largely explain the naturalization of these Asian immigrants. Separate logistic regression models for the six groups further uncover similarities and differences in determinants of naturalization across groups. The findings suggest that in terms of naturalization rates new Asian immigrants are more assimilable than most immigrant groups, including European immigrants, and that in the foreseeable future Asian Americans are likely to become a swing vote at the local and possibly state levels and perhaps in presidential elections under some special circumstances. The findings also point to commonality and diversity in determinants of citizenship acquisition among post-1965 Asian immigrants.     

Wealth Inequality Among Immigrants: Consistent Racial/Ethnic Inequality in the United States

Wealth is a strong indicator of immigrant integration in U.S. society. Drawing on new assimilation theory, we highlight the importance of racial/ethnic group boundaries and propose different paths of wealth integration among U.S. immigrants. Using data from the Survey of Income and Program Participation and quantile regression, we show that race/ethnicity shapes immigrant wealth inequality across the entire distribution of net worth, along with immigrants’ U.S. experience, such as immigrant status, U.S. education, English language proficiency, and time spent in the United States. Our results document consistent racial/ethnic inequality among immigrants, also evidenced among the U.S. born, revealing that even when accounting for key aspects of U.S. experience, wealth inequality with whites for Latino and black immigrants is strong.     

One Size May Not Fit All: How Obesity Among Mexican-Origin Youth Varies by Generation,Gender, and Age

Immigrants’ health (dis)advantages are increasingly recognized as not being uniform, leading to calls for studies investigating whether immigrant health outcomes are dependent on factors that exacerbate health risks. We answer this call, considering an outcome with competing evidence about immigrants’ vulnerability versus risk: childhood obesity. More specifically, we investigate obesity among three generations of Mexican-origin youth relative to one another and to U.S.-born whites. We posit that risk is dependent on the intersection of generational status, gender, and age, which all influence exposure to U.S. society and weight concerns. Analyses of National Health and Nutrition Examination Studies (NHANES) data suggest that accounting for ethnicity and generation alone misses considerable gender and age heterogeneity in childhood obesity among Mexican-origin and white youth. For example, second-generation boys are vulnerable to obesity, but the odds of obesity for first-generation girls are low and on par with those of white girls. Findings also indicate that age moderates ethnic/generational differences in obesity among boys but not among girls. Overall, ethnic/generational patterns of childhood obesity do not conform to a “one size fits all” theory of immigrant health (dis)advantage, leading us to join calls for more research considering how immigrants’ characteristics and contexts differentially shape vulnerability to disease and death.     

The Influence of Acculturation on Breastfeeding Initiation and Duration for Mexican-Americans

This paper uses data from the Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Study to test the hypotheses that (1) similar to other positive pre- and post-natal outcomes, Mexican immigrant mothers are more likely to breastfeed, and to breastfeed longer, than white or Mexican-American mothers; and (2) acculturation accounts for the ethnic/nativity differential in breastfeeding initiation and duration. The results support both hypotheses. Mexican immigrants to the U.S. are much more likely than whites to breastfeed, and to breastfeed longer. Mexican-American mothers, after controlling for background characteristics, have similar initiation and duration to whites. Using expanded acculturation measures developed for this paper, acculturation accounts for some of the difference between whites and Mexican immigrants in breastfeeding initiation, and much of the difference for breastfeeding duration. The results suggest that low levels of acculturation operate to protect Mexican immigrants from choosing to formula-feed, which gives their babies many health advantages, and may be associated with better health outcomes across the life course. The results also suggest that successive generations of Mexican immigrants may abandon breastfeeding, which is deleterious for their infants.     

Quality of Post-1965 Asian Immigrants

The reliance on an overall average approach to the labor market quality of immigrants could generate misleading information and biased policy recommendations. Focusing on Asian immigrants, this article demonstrates that much insight into immigrant quality can be gained via a diversity approach. Using the 5% PUMS data of the 1990 U.S. census, this paper shows that a common perception that the quality of post-1965 immigrants is lower than natives and earlier immigrants is invalid for post-1965 Asian immigrants. Unlike their Latin American counterparts, post-1965 Asian immigrants are generally more educated and skilled than natives. The educational level of post-1965 Asian immigrants surpasses that of their pre-1965 counterparts, despite their disadvantage in occupational attainment due to their shorter time of adaptation. Diversity also characterizes educational and occupational attainment across major post-1965 Asian immigrant groups and within each Asian immigrant group before and after 1965. Gender does not alter the advantage of post-1965 Asian immigrants over natives and their pre-1965 parallels in education, but it does complicate their occupational status. Policy implications of the findings are considered.     

A decomaosition of trends in poverty among children of immigrants

Poverty levels among all children in the United States have tended to fluctuate in the past 30 years. However, among the children of immigrants, child poverty increased steadily and rapidly from about 12% in 1970 to 33% in the late 1990s before declining to about 21% in 2000. Using 1970, 1980, 1990, and 2000 Public Use Microdata Samples data, we identified key factors that underlie the fluctuations in immigrant child poverty from 1969 to 1999 and the divergence from children of natives. We found that roughly half the absolute increase in immigrant child poverty can be linked to changing conditions in the U.S. economy that make it more difficult to lift a family out of poverty than 30 years ago. These changes occurred disproportionately among children of parents with lower levels of education, employment, and U.S. experience but not among racial/ethnic minorities. Poverty risks among various racial and ethnic groups converged over time. The relative increase in poverty for immigrant versus native children owes largely to the divergence between immigrant and native families in racial/ethnic composition, parental education, and employment.     

Just Like in Their Home Country? A Multinational Perspective on Living Arrangements of Older Immigrants in the United States

Older immigrants are more likely to share residence with their adult children and other family members than are U.S.-born older adults. Because socioeconomic factors only partially explain these differences and direct measures of cultural preferences are seldom available, the persistently high rates of intergenerational coresidence among the older foreign-born are often interpreted as driven by cultural preferences and/or a lack of assimilation. To challenge this interpretation, this study investigates the extent to which older immigrants’ living arrangements deviate from those of older adults in their home countries. The analysis combines data on immigrants from the 2008–2012 American Community Survey (ACS) with census data from three major immigrant-sending countries: Mexico, the Dominican Republic, and Vietnam. Despite persistent differences from U.S.-born whites, coresidence in later life is significantly less common than in the sending countries among the older foreign-born who migrated as young adults, and especially among those who migrated as children. The older foreign-born who migrated after age 50, however, are more likely to coreside and less likely to live independently than the older adults in their home countries. The similarity of these patterns across the three immigrant subgroups suggests that the unusually high coresidence among late-life immigrants is driven by U.S. family reunification policy and not simply by cultural influences.     

Familial Influences on Poverty Among Young Children in Black Immigrant,U.S.-born Black,and Nonblack Immigrant Families

This study examines how familial contexts affect poverty disparities between the children of immigrant and U.S.-born blacks, and among black and nonblack children of immigrants. Despite lower gross child poverty rates in immigrant than in U.S.-born black families, accounting for differences in family structure reveals that child poverty risks among blacks are highest in single-parent black immigrant families. In addition, within two-parent immigrant families, child poverty declines associated with increasing assimilation are greater than the respective declines in single-parent families. The heads of black immigrant households have more schooling than those of native-black households. However, increased schooling has a weaker negative association with child poverty among the former than among the latter. In terms of racial disparities among the children of immigrants, poverty rates are higher among black than nonblack children. This black disadvantage is, however, driven by the outcomes of first-generation children of African and Hispanic-black immigrants. The results also show that although children in refugee families face elevated poverty risks, these risks are higher among black than among nonblack children of refugees. In addition, the poverty-reducing impact associated with having an English-proficient household head is about three times lower among black children of immigrants than among non-Hispanic white children of immigrants.     

Educational selectivity in U.S. Immigration: How do immigrants compare to those left behind?

Current immigration research has revealed little about how immigrants compare to those who do not migrate. Although most scholars agree that migrants are not random samples of their home countries' populations, the direction and degree of educational selectivity is not fully understood. This study of 32 U.S. immigrant groups found that although nearly all immigrants are more educated than those who remain in their home countries, immigrants vary substantially in their degree of selectivity, depending upon the origin country and the timing of migration. Uncovering patterns of immigrant selectivity reveals the fallacy in attributing immigrants' characteristics to national groups as a whole and may help explain socioeconomic differences among immigrant groups in the United States.     

Parental characteristics and the schooling progress of the children of immigrant and U.S.-born blacks

In this study, I examine disparities in schooling progress among children born to immigrant and U.S.-born blacks. I find that in one- and two-parent families, children born to black immigrants are less likely to fall behind in school than those born to U.S.-born blacks. In two-parent immigrant families, children born to two immigrant parents have a significant schooling advantage over children born to one immigrant parent. While children born to two immigrant parents in the wealthiest black immigrant families do better in the second generation than in the first, the reverse is observed among children in less wealthy families. These findings contribute in two ways to our understanding of the assimilation processes of children born to black immigrant parents. First, they show that there is a positive association between the number of immigrant parents in a family and children’s schooling performance. Second, they suggest that disparities in the assimilation patterns of the children of black immigrants are a likely product of the interaction between their parental characteristics and the socioeconomic circumstances of their families.     

Racial/Ethnic and Nativity Patterns of U.S. Adolescent and Young Adult Smoking

We document racial/ethnic and nativity differences in U.S. smoking patterns among adolescents and young adults using the 2006 Tobacco Use Supplement to the Current Population Survey (n = 44,202). Stratifying the sample by nativity status within five racial/ethnic groups (Asian American, Mexican–American, other Hispanic, non-Hispanic black, and non-Hispanic white), and further by sex and age, we compare self-reports of lifetime smoking across groups. U.S.-born non-Hispanic whites, particularly men, report smoking more than individuals in other racial/ethnic/nativity groups. Some groups of young women (e.g., foreign-born and U.S.-born Asian Americans, foreign-born and U.S.-born Mexican–Americans, and foreign-born blacks) report extremely low levels of smoking. Foreign-born females in all of the 25–34 year old racial/ethnic groups exhibit greater proportions of never smoking than their U.S.-born counterparts. Heavy/moderate and light/intermittent smoking is generally higher in the older age group among U.S.-born males and females, whereas smoking among the foreign-born of both sexes is low at younger ages and remains low at older ages. Taken together, these findings highlight the importance of considering both race/ethnicity and nativity in assessments of smoking patterns and in strategies to reduce overall U.S. smoking prevalence and smoking-attributable health disparities.     

The demography of disability and the effects of immigrant history: Older Asians in the United States

Using data from the 2000 U.S. census, we compare the older Asian population with U.S.-born, non-Hispanic whites with respect to three indicators of disability. Insofar as any Asian "advantage" in health vis-a-vis whites exists among the population aged 65 and over, our evidence suggests that it occurs primarily among the U.S.-born segments of this population. We also investigate how differences in disability levels among Asian immigrant groups are influenced by country of birth and by the combined effects of duration of residence in the United States and life cycle stage at entry. These results highlight the diversity of the older Asian population with respect to the ways in which immigration and origin history are linked to disability outcomes. We conclude that in later life, immigrant status confers few disability advantages among the Asian population in the United States.     

Ethnic identity, majority norms, and the native–immigrant employment gap

Earlier studies do not agree on whether ethnic identity, i.e., immigrants’ attachment to the home country and the host country, can explain lower employment outcomes among immigrants. This study investigates the relationship between employment and ethnic identity and complements the literature by capturing a novel dimension of ethnic identity: openness to majority norms. Reproducing measures from earlier studies, I find that immigrants’ employment outcomes do not systematically associate with their ethnic identity. However, immigrants who share social norms with the majority experience significantly better employment outcomes, particularly first-generation immigrant women. Furthermore, I show that interethnic differentials in majority norms could account for up to 20 % of the explained part of the employment gap between natives and first-generation immigrants. Those results shed more light on the interethnic employment gap and aspects of immigrants’ identity relevant to economic integration.     

Gender, Job Searching, and Employment Outcomes among Mexican Immigrants

Past quantitative research has typically disregarded the effect of gender on the relationship between social capital and immigrant adaptation. However, recent theory and qualitative evidence suggest that gender is a significant factor moderating this association. I use Mexican Migration Project (MMP) data regarding Mexican immigrant experiences in the U.S. to examine quantitatively how the process of job searching, and the effects of network-based job searching, vary by gender. Results show no evidence of overall sex differences in the likelihood of using network (i.e., family-based or friend-based) or individual (i.e., non-network) job search methods, but there are sex differences in the processes affecting job search method used. Settlement increases women’s use of their friend networks to obtain work, while for men, it decreases the use of networks of any kind. Contrary to conventional wisdom, women who use network-based job searches are less likely to obtain formal sector employment than women who find work without network assistance. Conversely, using network-based job searches increases the likelihood that men will find work in the formal sector. Since employment in the formal sector is correlated with wages, as well as nonwage benefits, this suggests that using networks in the job search has markedly different effects on the overall economic well-being of male and female Mexican immigrants in the U.S.     

Recent Trends in Coverage of the Mexican-Born Population of the United States: Results From Applying Multiple Methods Across Time

The accuracy of counts of U.S. racial/ethnic and immigrant groups depends on the coverage of the foreign-born in official data. Because Mexicans constitute by far the largest single national-origin group among the foreign-born in the United States, we compile new evidence about the coverage of the Mexican-born population in the 2000 census and 2001–2010 American Community Survey (ACS) using three techniques: a death registration, a birth registration, and a net migration method. For the late 1990s and first half of the 2000–2010 decade, results indicate that coverage error was somewhat higher than currently assumed but had substantially declined by the latter half of the 2000–2010 decade. Additionally, we find evidence that U.S. census and ACS data miss substantial numbers of children of Mexican immigrants, as well as people who are most likely to be unauthorized: namely, working-aged Mexican immigrants (ages 15–64), especially males. The findings highlight the heterogeneity of the Mexican foreign-born population and the ways in which migration dynamics may affect population coverage.     

Hurricane Katrina,a Construction Boom,and a New Labor Force: Latino Immigrants and the New Orleans Construction Industry, 2000 and 2006–2010

Disasters provide opportunities to study the social and economic dimensions of large-scale shifts. Drawn by the surge in demand for low-skill construction workers in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in 2005, Latino immigrants represented a substantial share of the New Orleans reconstruction workforce. Scholars, however, have yet to examine how the increased presence of immigrants affected U.S.-born workers in New Orleans. In this analysis, we investigate how the influx of Latino immigrant construction workers shaped the demographic composition and occupational-wage structure of the New Orleans construction sector. Using IPUMS-U.S.A. data from the 2000 and 2006–2010 periods for the New Orleans MSA, we employ logistic and multinomial logistic regression models to analyze a sample of 3,206 foreign-born Latinos, U.S.-born whites, U.S.-born blacks, and others employed in the construction industry. Our analysis indicates that the probability of U.S.-born workers being employed in construction remained stable from the pre- to post-storm period, even as we find evidence of an emerging immigrant employment niche in the post-Katrina construction industry. After the storm, however, Latino immigrants were much more heavily concentrated in occupations at the bottom end of the construction industry’s wage structure, while the relative position of U.S.-born workers improved across the two periods. Together, these findings show that disasters, like other structural shifts, can yield the conditions that produce immigrant employment niches. Moreover, our results indicate that while employment niches provide economic opportunities for the foreign-born, they can also intensify the disadvantage experienced by immigrant workers.     

Migration Processes,Familial Characteristics,and Schooling Dropout Among Black Youths

This study uses data from the 2000 U.S. census to examine whether the schooling advantage of black immigrants’ children found in previous studies is robust. According to the results, the advantage associated with having migrant parents is not restricted to the children of immigrants. Black migrant parents, regardless of foreign-born status, have children with favorable schooling outcomes. Such parental-level influences, however, seem stronger among some immigrant groups than among native internal migrants. The study also suggests that the collective advantage of the children of immigrants is driven by positive migrant selectivity. Accordingly, comparisons between the children of native migrants and children in various immigrant groups reveal that the immigrant advantage is not robust. In fact, the results suggest that when immigrant ethnicity is considered, some children of immigrants may be disadvantaged relative to the children of native migrants. Among recent migrants, the children of native internal migrants also have more favorable outcomes than the children of immigrants, although these differences disappear after background factors are controlled. Further, internal-migrant and immigrant households are less likely to have characteristics that adversely affect schooling than nonmigrant households. Unsurprisingly, the children of nonmigrants have the worst outcomes among black youths.     

Intended and initial settlement patterns of recent immigrants to the U.S., 1985–1990: A comparison of PUMS and INS public use files

At the time of entry into the U.S., immigrants are required to identify their ’intended’ destination to INS officials. They are not, however, required to remain in that location. If immigrant settlement patterns represent an evolutionary, dynamic system, it is likely that immigrants will adjust their location in the period shortly after arrival in the U.S. in response to various factors, leading to an ‘initial’ settlement system. Of interest in the following paper are the scale, direction and magnitude of adjustments made to the immigrant settlement system in the period shortly after arrival. The analysis utilizes the 1990 5 percent Public Use Microdata Sample (PUMS) and the 1985–90 Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) Public Use Tapes in order to explore the intended and initial (observed) settlement patterns of recent (1985–90) immigrants and to comment upon the applicability of these terms. Results indicate that the two settlement patterns are highly similar, despite apparently high levels of movement among recent arrivals. The analysis also touches upon the ‘come to stay’ question raised by Ellis and Wright (1998a), suggesting that the interpretation of the question is dependent upon immigrant status rather than when immigrants first arrived in the U.S. This research was funded by a grant from the National Science Foundation (97-08436). The author is solely responsible for the content of this research.     

Migrant Selection and the Health of U.S. Immigrants From the Former Soviet Union

Few prior studies have investigated the health of U.S. immigrants from the former Soviet Union (FSU). Utilizing data from the 2000 U.S. census and the 2000–2007 National Health Interview Survey (NIHS), we compare levels of disability of FSU immigrants with U.S.-born whites (ages 50–84). Our findings suggest an “epidemiologic paradox” in that FSU immigrants possess higher levels of education compared with U.S.-born whites, but report considerably higher disability with and without adjustment for education. Nonetheless, FSU immigrants report lower levels of smoking and heavy alcohol use compared with U.S.-born whites. We further investigate disability by period of arrival among FSU immigrants. Changes in Soviet emigration policies conceivably altered the level of health selectivity among émigrés. We find evidence that FSU immigrants who emigrated during a period when a permission to emigrate was hard to obtain (1970–1986) displayed less disability compared with those who emigrated when these restrictions were less stringent (1987–2000). Finally, we compare disability among Russian-born U.S. immigrants with that of those residing in Russia as a direct test of health selectivity. We find that Russian immigrants report lower levels of disability compared with Russians in Russia, suggesting that they are positively selected for health despite their poor health relative to U.S.-born whites.