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.     

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.     

More Inclusive States,Less Poverty Among Immigrants? An Examination of Poverty,Citizenship Stratification,and State Immigrant Policies

Over the last 20 years, policymaking related to immigrant populations has increasingly been conducted at the state-level. State immigrant polices may influence immigrant poverty by determining immigrants’ level of access to social, economic, political, and health resources and by shaping the social environment. Further, these immigrant policies may shape the stratification between citizens and noncitizens, potentially contributing to distinct patterns of disparities in poverty by both citizenship and race/ethnicity. To assess the relationship between immigrant policy and socioeconomic stratification of immigrants across citizenship status and race/ethnicity in the U.S., we combined data from the 2014 American Community Survey and a measure of level of inclusion of state immigrant policies. We estimated fixed-effects logistic regressions to test the associations between poverty and the interaction of level of inclusiveness, citizenship, and race/ethnicity, controlling for state- and individual-level characteristics. Results showed that there are significant disparities in poverty by citizenship status and race/ethnicity. Asian/Pacific Islander (API) noncitizens experienced lower levels of poverty in states with higher levels of inclusion. Both Latino and API citizens experienced lower levels of poverty in states with higher versus lower levels of inclusion. Among Latinos, the gap in poverty rates between noncitizens and citizens is larger in more inclusive than less inclusive ones, suggesting that the potential positive impact of more inclusive environments does not necessarily translate to the most vulnerable Latino group. The level of inclusion was not associated with differences among Whites and Blacks. Findings suggest that states with more inclusive immigrant policies may foster environments that advance the economic well-being of API noncitizens, as well as API and Latino citizens.     

Differences in registering and voting between native-born and naturalized Americans

Relatively little is known about the differences in voting behavior between immigrantsand native-born Americans, primarily due to a lack of good quality data on the national level. Using data from the Voting and Registration Supplement to the November 1996 Current Population Survey (CPS), we examine whether variables known to affect electoral participation among the citizen population are also important among naturalized citizens. We find that naturalized citizens are less likely to register and to vote than native-born citizens, net of other factors. Citizens born abroad in Europe, Latin America, and Asia are less likely to register and those born abroad in Europe and Asia are less likely to vote than those born in the U.S. Among naturalized citizens, region of origin does not remain a major explanatory variable once time in the U.S. is considered.     

Housing Cost Burden and New Lawful Immigrants in the United States

Housing in the United States constitutes the largest expenditure for many households. Increasing rents and home prices, changes in the mortgage industry, and the growing importance of immigrants in the U.S. housing market underscore the value of examining the economic hardship that housing costs pose for immigrants. As is true for the native-born, immigrants’ allocation of financial resources to housing influences the funds available for savings, investments, survival of emergencies, and the overall economic well-being of children and families. This project employs 2003 national-level data of legal permanent residents from the New Immigrant Survey to examine an outcome lacking sufficient empirical study: the proportion of household income spent on housing. The study examines whether disparities in immigrant housing cost burden by country/region of origin persist after accounting for differences in human capital, stage in the life cycle, assimilation, and other factors. The analyses disaggregate immigrants from Latin America, Asia, Europe and other areas into more nuanced categories. The results document that after controlling for a diverse array of variables, legal immigrants vary widely in housing cost burdens by country/region of origin. These disparities have implications for the future wealth accumulation and long-term financial security of immigrants in the United States.     

Dual Citizenship Rights: Do they Make More and Richer Citizens?

In the 1990s, Colombia, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Costa Rica, and Brazil passed dual citizenship laws granting their expatriates the right to naturalize in the receiving country without losing their nationality of origin. I estimate the effects of these new laws on naturalization rates and labor market outcomes in the United States. Based on data from the 1990 and 2000 U.S. censuses, In find that immigrants recently granted dual nationality rights are more likely to naturalize relative to immigrants from other Latin American countries. They also experience relative employment and earnings gains, together with drops in welfare use, suggesting that dual citizenship rights not only increase the propensity to naturalize but may also promote economic assimilation. The effects of dual citizenship on improved economic performance, if mediated through naturalization, are consistent with American citizenship conferring greater economic opportunities.     

Receptivity Attitudes and the Occupational Attainment of Male and Female Immigrant Workers

This paper seeks to extend assimilation scholarship by focusing on the impact ofimmigrant receptivity attitudes. We test the hypotheses that receptivity attitudestoward immigrants held by citizens of metropolitan and regional labor marketswill have a direct impact, and/or interact with the educational human capital ofimmigrants, in explaining the occupational attainment of male and female immigrantworkers. Multi-level modeling is used to test the impact of aggregated immigrantreceptivity attitude measures, derived from the General Social Survey, which arespatially merged with immigrant worker human capital, individual-level assimilation,and area labor market indicators to predict managerial/professional and service/laboroccupation attainment of immigrant workers from a merged 1995–97 CurrentPopulation Survey data file. The results provide support for the receptivity attitudesthesis with statistically significant effects on service and labor attainment, but showminimal effects on managerial and professional occupational attainment. The keyreceptivity dimensions affecting occupational attainment are native-born citizens'attitudes concerning the impact of immigrants on American society, and attitudeson English-only language policies. The results show no systematic support for thereverse causation hypothesis that the occupational patterns of immigrants determinethe immigrant receptivity attitudes of citizens.     

迁入地类型的选择——基于五普资料的分析

利用第五次人口普查长表0.95‰微观资料,研究移民特征对迁入地类型选择的影响。结果显示,移民的人口因素和社会特征对迁移目的地的选择有较大的影响。移民人口有向青壮年集中的趋势。婚姻迁移妇女的目的地主要是乡村。有配偶的人更多地考虑迁移对家庭的影响。户籍制度仍然对人口迁移起到限制作用。     

On the measurement of naturalization

This paper proposes a new way of measuring naturalization, which takes into account both emigration and death. I argue that the new method corrects for underestimation and thus provides a more accurate measure of the concept. Using data from six groups of the 1973 immigrant cohort and multiple-decrement life table techniques, I estimated and compared naturalization measures derived from new and old methods. The results show that failure to control for emigration has a significant effect on the measurement of naturalization, particularly if an immigrant group has relatively high rate of emigration. Some further substantive implications of this new method are also explored.     

In-State College Tuition Policies for Undocumented Immigrants: Implications for High School Enrollment Among Non-citizen Mexican Youth

This paper examines the secondary effects of policies that extend or deny in-state tuition to children of undocumented immigrants. Drawing upon repeated cross-sections of 15–17-year-olds in the Current Population Survey across 1997–2010, we assess changes in high school enrollment rates among Mexican-born non-citizen youth—a proxy for the undocumented youth population. We find that Mexican-born non-citizen youth living in states that deny in-state tuition benefits to undocumented youth are 49 % less likely to be enrolled in school than their peers living in states with no explicit policy. Conversely, Mexican-born non-citizen youth living in states that grant in-state tuition benefits to undocumented youth are 65 % more likely to be enrolled in school than their peers living in states with no explicit policy. The enactment of these policies is unrelated to changes in school enrollment among naturalized citizens. Our findings lend support to the proposition that that the implementation of in-state tuition policies sends signals to immigrant youth about their future educational possibilities in the long-term, which in turn influences the extent to which they engage in school in the short-term.     

Immigration and status exchange in Australia and the United States

This paper evaluates the status exchange hypothesis for Australia and the United States, two Anglophone nations with long immigration traditions whose admission regimes place different emphases on skills. Using log-linear methods, we demonstrate that foreign-born spouses trade educational credentials via marriage with natives in both Australian and U.S. marriage markets and, moreover, that nativity is a more salient marriage barrier for men than for women. With some exceptions, immigrant spouses in mixed nativity couples are better educated than native spouses in same nativity couples, but status exchange is more prevalent among the less-educated spouses in both countries. Support for the status exchange hypothesis is somewhat weaker in Australia partly because of lower average levels of education compared with the United States and partly because of the less sharply defined educational hierarchy at the postsecondary level.     

Imputation Match Bias in Immigrant Wage Convergence

Although immigrants to the United States earn less at entry than their native-born counterparts, an extensive literature has found that immigrants have faster earnings growth that results in rapid convergence to native-born earnings. However, recent evidence based on U.S. Census data indicates a slowdown in the rate of earnings assimilation. We find that the pace of immigrant wage convergence based on recent data may be understated in the literature as a result of the method used by the census to impute missing information on earnings, which does not use immigration status as a match characteristic. Because both the share of immigrants in the workforce and earnings imputation rates have risen over time, imputation match bias for recent immigrants is more consequential than in earlier periods and may lead to an underestimate of the rate of immigrant wage convergence.     

The Subjective Well-Being of Immigrants: Pre- and Post-migration

In recent years, migration studies have increasingly shown that subjective well-being carries considerable weight in immigrant integration. Yet little is known about the subjective well-being of immigrants in their origin country (pre-migration) or its relation to their well-being in the host country. This paper examines the relationship between subjective well-being, both pre- and post-immigration, among North Americans who arrived in Israel during the past two decades. The study combines both quantitative and qualitative research methods. According to our quantitative findings, the labor market performance of North American immigrants in Israel is lower than in their origin countries. Further, we learned from the qualitative analysis that although the immigrants’ positions in the labor market were better in their origin countries, the immigrants perceived their standard of living in Israel to be the same as in their origin country—if not better—due to the low cost of services in Israel. The importance of the immigrant’s satisfaction from the current job in Israel was apparent in the findings of both methods. We also found that the subjective well-being of North American immigrants in Israel is relatively high, and most immigrants did not consider leaving Israel. The subjective well-being of the immigrants in Israel was found to be related to their social networks in their origin country, to their religious immigration motive and to their work satisfaction in Israel. The more supportive the immigrants’ families were of their decision to immigrate, the less the immigrants tended to consider leaving Israel. Immigrants with a religious motivation for immigrating to Israel were less inclined to leave, and the same was true for immigrants who were satisfied with their work in Israel. The qualitative data added important perspective on the immigrants’ social networks, this time in Israel. Interviewees reported having more supportive social networks in Israel, and a greater sense of community, although most of their contacts were within the Anglo community.     

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.     

The Patterns of Satisfaction Among Immigrants in Germany

Using the data from the German Socio-Economic Panel, the paper focuses on the analysis of life satisfaction and income satisfaction among immigrants in Germany. The results suggest that it cannot be argued that Germany’s immigrants are, ceteris paribus, more satisfied or less satisfied than natives, since some immigrant groups appear to be more satisfied, while others show lower satisfaction levels relative to natives. Separate estimations for natives and immigrants show that, even though the patterns of satisfaction for the two groups are largely similar, several notable differences emerge. The final goal was to take a closer look at the negative relationship between satisfaction and duration of stay in Germany. After constructing reference groups by the timing of arrival, the negative relationship between income satisfaction and years since migration is reduced substantially. On the other hand, the negative association between duration of stay and life satisfaction is persistent, regardless of the way the reference groups are defined.     

Smoking and Variation in the Hispanic Paradox: A Comparison of Low Birthweight Across 33 US States

The Hispanic Paradox in birth outcomes is well documented for the US as a whole, but little work has considered geographic variation underlying the national pattern. This inquiry is important given the rapid growth of the Hispanic population and its geographic dispersion. Using birth records data from 2014 through 2016, we document state variation in birthweight differentials between US-born white women and the three Hispanic populations with the largest numbers of births: US-born Mexican women, foreign-born Mexican women, and foreign-born Central and South American women. Our analyses reveal substantial geographic variation in Hispanic immigrant–white low-birthweight disparities. For example, Hispanic immigrants in Southeastern states and in some states from other regions have reduced risk of low birthweight relative to whites, consistent with a “Hispanic Paradox.” A significant portion of Hispanic immigrants’ birthweight advantage in these states is explained by lower rates of smoking relative to whites. However, Hispanic immigrants have higher rates of low birthweight in California and several other Western states. The different state patterns are largely driven by geographic variation in smoking among whites, rather than geographic differences in Hispanic immigrants’ birthweights. In contrast, US-born Mexicans generally have similar or slightly higher odds of low birthweight than whites across the US. Overall, we show that the Hispanic Paradox in birthweight varies quite dramatically by state, driven by geographic variation in low birthweight among whites associated with white smoking disparities across states.     

Region of Birth and Disability Among Recent U.S. Immigrants: Evidence from the 2000 Census

This study aimed to test the “healthy immigrant” hypothesis and assess health heterogeneity among newly arrived working-age immigrants (18–64 years) from various regions of origin. Using the 5% sample of the 2000 U.S. Census (PUMS), we found that, compared with their native-born counterparts, immigrants from all regions of the world were less likely to report mental disability and physical disability. Immigrants from selected regions of origin were, however, more likely to report work disability. Significant heterogeneity in disabilities exists among immigrants: Those from Eastern Europe and Southeast Asia reported the highest risk of mental and physical disability, and those from East Asia reported the lowest risk of physical disability. Furthermore, Mexican immigrants reported the lowest risk of mental disability, and Canadian immigrants reported the lowest risk of work disability. Socioeconomic status and English proficiency partially explained these differences. The health advantage of immigrants decreased with longer U.S. residence.     

Measuring immigrant wage growth using matched CPS files

Cross-sectional estimates of immigrant wage growth have painted an optimistic picture of the ability of immigrants to adapt to the U.S. labor market: Studies using cross-sectional data have generally found the wage growth of immigrants to exceed that of the native born. This optimistic picture of immigrant economic assimilation was challenged by the important finding that compared to earlier immigrant cohorts, recent immigrants started at much lower wages. As such, the high wage growth of immigrants relative to the native born measured in cross-sectional data may simply be the spurious result of declining immigrant earnings ability. In this paper, we match Current Population Survey samples so that the wages of individual immigrant and native-born men can be followed for one year. We find that the wage growth of immigrants does exceed that of the native born. The general finding of faster immigrant wage growth also holds when imposing the foreign-born geographic distribution upon natives, but not when imposing the native-born geographic distribution on the foreign born—a result consistent with some theories of immigrant assimilation. In each comparison, however, the actual wage growth of immigrants relative to natives is similar to the predictions of cross-sectional regressions. This similarity suggests that either there is no cohort quality bias in the cross-sectional estimates of immigrant wage growth, or that there has been a coincidental increase in immigrant wage growth as the entry wages of immigrants have fallen.     

Blurring Boundaries? Immigration and Exogamous Marriages in Hong Kong

This article uses micro‐data from the Hong Kong census since 1991 to report trends in the integration of Chinese residents who were born either in Colonial Hong Kong or in Mainland China. We focus on marital exogamy by nativity for women aged 25–34. From 1991 to 2011, we found an increasing likelihood for Hong Kong native men and Mainland women to be married to one another. This increase reflects cross‐border marriages. Such exogamous marriages were associated with a lower degree of educational homogamy, since Hong Kong‐born men tend to be more educated than their Mainland spouses. They are also older than their immigrant wives. Implications for social distance between natives and immigrants in this context of exogamous marriages are discussed.     

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.