Immigration Goes Nationwide Recent dispersal has made immigrants and new minorities more visible William H. Frey The Brookings Institution Metropolitan Policy Program Briefing, Immigration Policy: Federal Debates and Local Realities, US Capitol Building, March 24, 2006
Immigrants in the US, 1900-2005 40 35 30 25 in millions 35.1 20 15 10 5 14.2 9.6 0 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2005 Source: US Census sources
Immigrant Share of US Population 16 14 12 10 8 6 14.7 12.1 4 2 0 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2005 4.7 Source: US Census sources
Big Six States: Share of Immigrant Gains 1990-2000 2000-2005 61 54 Big Six Rest of US
Immigration Spreads Beyond Traditional Magnet States 40,000,000 35,000,000 30,000,000 25,000,000 20,000,000 15,000,000 10,000,000 5,000,000 0 19.7 m 35.1 m 1990 2005 Rest of US Illinois New Jersey Texas Florida New York California
Fast Growing "New Immigrant" Destinations 1990-2005 Immigrant Growth, 1990-2005 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 North Carolina Tennessee Georgia Nevada Arizona Iowa Nebraska Colorado Source: William H.Frey
State Immigrant Growth, 1990-2005 200% or more growth Btn 100% and 199% growth Traditional immigrant gateway All other states
States with at least 5% Immigrants 2005 29 2000 26 1990 17 0 10 20 30 40
Immigrant Concentrations in States 1990 2005 15% or more 10-14% 5-9% Less than 5%
States with Most Undocumented Immigrants Source: Jeffery Passel, Pew Hispanic Center??
Hispanics and Asians Recent Immigrants vs Native Born 2005 Recent Immigrants Native Born 14% 26% 4% 22% 52% 82% Hispanics Asians Other
Hispanic and Asian Adults by Generation Hispanics Asians 8% 30% 13% 13% 57% 79% Foreign Born 2nd Gen 3rd+Gen
Growth Rates, 2000-2010 40 35 30 25 34.1 33.3 20 15 12.9 10 5 0 2.8 Hispanics Asians Blacks Whites
At Least 5% Hispanic States Counties 1990 2005 16 28 538 907
STATES: Fastest Hispanic Growth 2000-04 %Growth 1. Arkansas 37.7 2. South Dakota 37.3 3. South Carolina 35.7 4. Georgia 35.7 5. North Carolina 35.0 6. Tennessee 33.4 7. Nevada 32.7 8. New Hampshire 32.7 9. Maine 32.0
Metros: Fastest Hispanic Growth, 2000-04 1. Cape Coral-Ft Myers, FL 55.4 2. Charlotte 49.8 3. Raleigh 46.7 4. Nashville 44.9 5. Indianapolis 44.3 6. Atlanta 41.0 7. Naples, FL 38.7 8. Lakeland, FL 38.3 9. Sarasota, FL 38.0 10. Las Vegas 35.1
States: Fastest Asian growth, 2000-04 1. Nevada 35.2 2. New Hampshire 32.5 3. Delaware 27.4 4. Georgia 26.8 5. Florida 24.4 6. Connecticut 24.4 7. North Carolina 24.2 8. Arizona 24.2 9. Arkansas 23.0 10. New Jersey 21.7
Metros: Fastest Asian Growth, 2000-04 1. Las Vegas 38.5 2. Riverside 31.1 3. Orlando 30.2 4. Atlanta 28.5 5. Stockton, CA 28.4 6. Tampa-St.Pete 28.4 7. Austin 28.2 8. Phoenix 27.0 9. Sacramento 25.6 10. Dallas 24.8
Suburban Co. Growth, 2000-04 Hispanic and Asian Contributions Douglas Co. CO 15% Forsyth Co. GA 20% Kendall Co. IL 27% Loudon Co. VA Williamson Co.TX 34% 37% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% Hispanic Asian
Metro Growth, 2000-04 Hispanic and Asian Contributions Las Vegas Orlando Phoenix 53% 54% 56% Dallas Houston 68% 72% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Hispanic Asian
Central County Changes, 2000-04 Race-Ethnic Contributions 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 0-10,000-20,000-30,000-40,000-50,000 Queens, NY Wayne Co, MI King Co. WA Hispanics Asians Blacks Whites
Shares versus Growth Traditional Magnets New Destination States 2005 Shares Immigrants Hispanics Asians 20% 26% 7% 9% 11% 2% 2000-04 Growth Immigrants Hispanics Asians 10% 15% 16% 33% 26% 28%
Hispanic and Asian Shares by Age Group United States 65 + 9% 40-64 14% 15-39 23% Under 15 24% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Hispanic Asian Others
Hispanic and Asian Shares by Age Group California Georgia 65 + 27% 65 + 3% 40-64 37% 40-64 6% 15-39 54% 15-39 12% Under 15 57% Under 15 12% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Hispanic Asian Others
Year of Immigrant Arrival: Traditional Magnets versus New Destinations* Traditional Magnets New Destinations 2000-05 before 1980 2000-05 before 1980 20% 31% 1980-89 1990-99 1980-89 1990-99 *Traditional Magnets are California, New York, Florida, Texas, Illinois and New Jersey. New Destinations are North Carolina, Tennessee, Georgia, Nevada, Arizona, Iowa, Nebraska, and Colorado.
Race of Immigrants: Traditional Magnets versus New Destinations* 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 26.3 22.5 21.4 18.5 52.3 59.0 All Others Asian Hispanic 0% Traditional Magnets New Destinations
Immigrants vs Natives: 2005 Poverty and Near Poverty** Hispanics: Poverty and Near Poverty Blue Collar Workers* Hispanics: Blue Collar Workers 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Immigrants in New Destinations. Immigrants in Traditional Magnets US Native Born
Where Undocumented Dominate Foreign Born Source: Jeffery Passel, Pew Hispanic Center GT 40% Other
Desired US Immigration Levels 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 33.6 29.3 14.1 47.1 7.8 56.8 5.2 6.2 Traditional Magnet States New Destination States Present Increased Decreased Don't Know analysis of CBS News Poll, July 29-Aug 2, 2005
3 Year Work Permits for Illegal Immigrants? 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 39.1 54.5 24.7 71.9 6.4 3.4 Traditional Magnet States New Destination States Allowed Not Allowed Don't Know analysis of CBS News Poll, July 29-Aug 2, 2005
Hispanics: 2004 Total vs Voter Shares 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 45 34 37 22 33 16 29 12 23 20 19 10 9 10 Total Voters 0 New Mexico Texas California Arizona Nevada Colorado Florida Source: William H.Frey
Useful Websites www.brookings.edu/metro www.frey-demographer.org