Immigration: Then and Now

“In the pace of their economic progress, immigrants of the past were very similar to immigrants today…The true ascent for immigrant families happens in the next generation.  The children of immigrants achieve incredible economic success – a pattern that has held in the United States for more than a century”. – Streets of Gold

As Trump ratchets up the deportation of illegal immigrants, many anticipate significant changes in the 2030 census, as well as adjustments in state congressional seats.  Every ten years, the federal government collects census information across the country to determine the number of congressional districts by state.  Recent open-border policies under Biden may have resulted in 10 more Democratic seats in Congress.  Since legal and illegal residents alike are included, substantial deportation could result in California losing up to 4 seats, and New York, 3. This would not only require redistricting in affected states but would also change the electoral map. 

The Founders believed that Americans were indebted to immigration for their prosperity and wealth.  However, while many believed in open immigration, several felt that naturalization should be delayed until the immigrant had fully assimilated.  In order for America to remain America, new citizens must assimilate and adopt the American spirit. 

In Ran Abramitzky and Leah Boustan’s 2023 book, “Streets of Gold”, economic historians bust prevailing myths about changes in immigration from the past to the present, including that today’s immigrants refuse to assimilate, that their children are not upwardly mobile, and that immigrants create the most crime.  Despite claims that immigrants in the past were more successful, today’s immigrants move up the ladder at the same pace as their earlier peers.  By comparing the first wave of immigrants from 1880 to 1920 to the second wave that began in 1965, the authors reveal that little has changed in immigrant success in America, despite propaganda indicating the opposite. 

Using data-driven evidence from Ancestry.com, census data beginning in 1790, along with tax records, historians have followed multiple generations of immigrants, noting how their lives have changed over time.  What they learned is that immigrants today are similar to immigrants in the past in achieving upward mobility, in their rapid assimilation, and in their contributions to improving the economy.

Immigration policy was mostly open borders for Europeans until 1920.  During this time, 30 million arrived in the US.  By the early 1920s, severe restrictions stalled the once-flourishing migration from Eastern and Southern Europeans, along with those of Asian descent.  In 1965, President Johnson abolished the quota system and allowed immigration from non-European countries.  By 2020, 14 percent of the population was born outside the United States, the same as a century earlier.  Yet, due to recent restrictions on immigration, one in four continues to enter the US illegally.  While illegals do cost society money, primarily for education for first-generation immigrant children, the success of 2^nd generation immigrants more than pays for the debts of their parents.  

Most immigrants, legal and illegal, migrate for economic reasons.  An immigrant can double their income simply by moving to the United States.  Once here, immigrants tend to settle in locations with high upward mobility, while U.S.-born individuals are more rooted in their places of birth.  Then, since it is in the economic interest of immigrants to learn English, today, immigrants are 87 to 95 percent proficient, exceeding the proficiency of 80 percent in the 1920s.  While first-generation immigrants rarely catch up economically to U.S.-born citizens, their children do. 

Immigrants are often blamed for taking the jobs of Americans.  Yet, following the elimination of the Bracero guest worker program in 1964, which promised to alleviate depressed American wages, the results fell flat, as guest workers were simply replaced with illegal immigrants crossing the border.  When immigration is further restricted, employers respond by simply replacing workers with machines or by switching to less labor-intensive products. 

The argument that immigrants take jobs is the same zero-sum game argument that the left uses for wealth.  Just as there is no set amount of money in the world, there is also no set number of jobs.  Immigrants need services just as natives do.  And the more opportunity and freedom individuals are given, the more wealth and prosperity a society enjoys.  As such, there should be no floor or ceiling on wages.  It is up to the business to decide.  If they pay too little, they will not have the workforce to produce their products.  If they pay too much, they will go out of business. 

As far as assimilation, there are many positive signs.  First-generation immigrants still choose to live in ethnic neighborhoods when they first arrive, as immigrants in the past, with isolation indexes at 45-50, that is, they start in neighborhoods where nearly half the residents were born abroad.  Once they settle in, current immigrants further acclimate through intermarriage at rates higher than those in the past.  Then, by choosing Americanized names for their children, further assimilation results in greater Americanization. 

Certainly, different immigration policies attract different people.  If handouts are provided at the border, you will entice a different character of people than if you allow people to come and work for their own benefit. 

Feelings about immigration, past and present, are largely wrought from anecdotal evidence manipulated by stories told and untold in the news every day.  As such, Democrats are not the only group susceptible to propaganda.  Republicans are, too.  Misplaced anger towards immigrants and not the policy makers should not go unnoticed.