September 2, 1999
End Notes,
References, &
List
of Figures, Tables, and Maps
End Notes
1. In this paper the term
poor is used to mean persons living below the poverty threshold.
2. Unrelated individuals
under age 15 who are mostly foster children are not included in most official
poverty statistics and they are not included in this study.
3. While there are many
criticisms of this official definition, most observers agree that persons living
below the poverty line are quite poor by American standards. For a brief
discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of our current definition see
Devine and Wright (1993).
4. By itself this does not
mean that immigrants are a net drain. But a report published by the National
Research Council in 1997 found that at the present time the net drain on public
coffers (tax revenue minus services used) caused by immigrant households was
between $11 billion and $22 billion a year (Edmunston and Smith, 1997). The high
rate of immigrant poverty is partly responsible for this fiscal drain.
5. The 1 percent public use
sample is used for analysis of metropolitan statistical areas.
6. For the 1980 Census, the
study uses a 60,000 person sample drawn from the Integrated Public Use Microdata
Series provided by the University of Minnesota.
7. These figures are for the
1998 CPS.
8. These figures are only
for primary family members, as defined by the Census Bureau. Individuals in
subfamilies along with those not in a family, such as persons living alone, are
not included in these statistics. Such persons are included in all other poverty
statistics reported in this study.
9. These numbers are based
on the author's tabulations of March 1996 CPS.
10. Additional information
provided by Dr. Jeffrey Passel of the Urban Institute in personal communication,
July, 12 1999.
11. These results also mean
that the poverty rate for persons in immigrant households who are not illegal is
19.6 percent. While this is somewhat lower than the poverty rate of 21.8 percent
when illegal aliens are included, it is still 63 percent higher than the 12
percent for persons in native households.
12. It is important to keep
in mind that the same households are not being observed in 1979, 1989 and 1997.
Moreover, the general characteristics of household composition changes for each
cohort over time. Even so, a clear pattern does emerge from comparing cohorts
over time.
13. It is important to keep
in mind that these calculation exclude poverty among persons under age 25.
14. Comparisons cannot be
made between the Census and CPS for the American Indian/other category because
"other" is not a choice on the CPS. Since this response is only possible in the
Census, the figures from 1997 are for only American Indians.
15. Persons are considered
of working age if they are at least 15 years of age.
16. This report uses the
standard Census Bureau definition of geographic regions of the country. The
Northeast region includes: Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont,
Massachusetts, Connecticut,
Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey, and
Pennsylvania. The Midwest includes: Ohio,
Indiana, Illinois,
Michigan, Wisconsin,
Minnesota, Iowa,
Missouri, North Dakota,
South Dakota, Nebraska, and Kansas. The South
includes: Delaware, Maryland, Washington D.C.,
Virginia, West Virginia,
North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia,
Florida, Kentucky,
Tennessee, Alabama,
Mississippi, Arkansas,
Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas.
The West includes Montana, Idaho, Wyoming,
Colorado, New Mexico,
Arizona, Utah,
Nevada, Washington, Oregon,
California, Alaska, and Hawaii.
17. Proportionately, the
increase in New Jersey in immigrant-related poverty was much larger than in New
York State.
18. The very large sample
size in the CPS in these two states allows for a more detailed examination of
immigrant-related poverty that is possible in other states.
19. Comparisons are only
made in the 32 states with more than 100,000 persons residing in immigrant
households at the time of the March 1998 CPS.
20. The original census data
for counties were drawn from 1990 Census Summary Tape File 4 tabulations of
poverty status by nativity for families and unrelated individuals (Tables 108
and 120). To show poverty for the total population in counties regardless of
whether they were living in a family, it was necessary to combine the two
tabulations. (Persons in families, are by definition, related to the household
head) Since the tabulations for families do not specify how many people are in
each family, an analysis of PUMS data was used to create factors to translate
numbers of families into their corresponding numbers of persons. First, the
average family size was tabulated for families above and below poverty according
to the nativity of the head and state of residence. These four average family
size figures per state (above and below poverty for persons in families in
native and immigrant families) were then multiplied by the corresponding counts
of families based on the nativity of the head in each county of every state.
This yielded counts of persons in immigrant and native headed families by
poverty status for all counties. Adding these counts of persons in families to
the counts of unrelated individuals using their individual nativity yielded the
final data used to generate Maps 2, 3 and 4. While not exactly the same as the
method used in the rest of the study, combining tables from the summary tape
files in this way comes as close as possible to matching the definition of
immigrant and native households used to create the tabulations found in Tables 1
though 15 and Map 1.
21. The same definition of
household is used in the logistic regression as in tabulations reported in
Tables 1 through 15.
22. The dummy variables in
the model are set at .5.
23. There is currently a
large backlog of persons waiting to enter in the spouses and minor children of
Lawful Permanent Residents category. A significant portion of these individuals
are the family members of IRCA amnesty beneficiaries. It seems unwise to
continue to separate these families. Therefore, it would make sense to
grandfather in those already on the waiting list. However, no future
applications would be taken for the spouses and minor children of LPRs.
24. In 1997 unskilled
employment-based immigration was temporally lowered to 5,000 to offset amnesty
given some illegal aliens from Central America. It will remain at this level
until all those eligible have adjusted to legal status.
25. 1996 is the most recent
year for which data is available. This figure is from the Statistical Abstract
of the United States: 1998 and does not include cash assistance for foster care
or the EITC.
References
Bolton,
Nancy. Employment Verification
Program Survey. Forthcoming 1999. Center for Immigration Studies.
Borjas, George J. 1994. "The
Economics of Immigration." Journal of Economic Literature 32 (4): 1667-1717.
Blank, Rebecca M. 1991. "Why
Were Poverty Rates So High in the 1980s?" National Bureau of Economic Research,
Working Paper No. 3878. Cambridge, Mass.: NBER.
Camarota, Steven A. 1999.
"Immigrants in the United States 1998: A Snapshot of America's Foreign-born
Population" Backgrounder 1-99. Washington, D.C.: Center for Immigration
Studies.
Clark, Rebecca L. and
Jeffrey Passel. 1998. Identifying Legal and Illegal Immigrants in the Census and
Current Population Surveys: A New Technique Based on the Occupational
Distribuion of Illegal Aliens. Washington D.C.: Urban Institute.
Dalaker, Joeseph and Mary
Naifeh. 1998. Poverty in The United States: 1997. U.S. Bureau of Census, Current
Population Reports, Series P60-201, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
Devine, Joel A., and James
D. Wright. 1993. The Greatest of Evils: Urban Poverty and the American
Underclass. New York: Aldine De Gruyter.
Edmonston, Barry and James
Smith, ed. 1997. The New Americans: Economic, Demographic, and Fiscal Effects of
Immigration. Washington D.C.: National Academy Press.
Gasiorowski, Mark and
Timothy Power. 1998. "The Structural Determinants of Democratic Consolidation:
Evidence from the Third World." Comparative Political Studies 31: 740-771.
Hanratty, Maria J. and
Rebecca M. Blank. 1992. "Down and Out in North America: Recent Trends in Poverty
Rates in the United States and Canada." Quarterly Journal of Economics,
February. p.233-254.
Harrison, Bennett and Barry
Bluestone. 1988. The Great U-Turn: Corporate Restructuring and The Polarizing of
America. New York: Basic Books.
Legal Immigration, Fiscal
Year 1997. January 1999. Immigration and Naturalization Service, Press Release.
Office of Policy and Planning, Statistics Branch.
Lipset, Seymour Martin.
1959. "Some Social Requisites of Democracy: Economic Development and Political
Legitimacy." American Political Science Review 53: 69-105.
Massey, Douglas S., and
Kristin E. Espinosa. 1997. "What's Driving Mexico-U.S. Migration? A Theoretical
Empirical, and Policy Analysis". American Jouranal of Socialogy 102: # 4
939-999.
Mishel, Lawrence, Jared
Bernstein and John Schmitt. 1998. The State of Working America: 1998-1999.
Cornell University Press.
Statistical Abstract of the
United States:1998 (118th edition.) Washington, D.C.: 1998. U.S. Bureau of the
Census.
Palloni, Alberto, Mike
Spittel and Miguel Ceballos. 1999. "Using Kin Data to Falsify Social Networking
Hypotheses in Migration." Paper presented at the annual meeting of the
Population Association of America.
Rueschmeyer, Dietrich,
Evelyne Huber Stevens, and John Stevend. 1992. Capitalist Development and
Democracy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Uslaner, Eric M. 1999. The
Moral Foundations of Trust. Forthcoming book. University of
Maryland Political Science
department. < www.bsos.umd.edu/gvpt/uslaner >.
Warren, Robert. 1999.
"Unauthorized Immigrants Residing in the United States: Estimating the
Populations, Components of Change, and Trends, by Broad Area of Origin, 1987 to
1997." Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Population Association of
America
[MFS note: works of several of the
cited authors are available on the "Sustainability Authors" page here.]
List
of Figures, Tables, and Maps
Figure 1 The poverty rate
for persons in immigrant households has grown dramatically since 1979.
Figure 2 The total poor
population accounted for by persons in immigrant house holds has grown
dramatically since 1979.
Table 1 Poverty Statistics
for Persons Residing in Immigrant and Native Households by Year of Entry
Table 2 Poverty Statistics
for Persons Residing in Immigrant and Native Households by Region of Origin and
Year of Entry
Table 3 Poverty Statistics
for Persons 25 and Older Residing in Immigrant and Native Households by
Educational Attainment
Table 4 Poverty Statistics
for Persons Residing in Immigrant and Native Households by Race
Table 5 Poverty Statistics
for Persons 16 and Over residing in Immigrant and Native Households by Labor
Force Status
Table 6 Poverty Statistics
for Persons Residing in Immigrant and Native Households by Age and Sex
Table 7 Poverty Statistics
for Persons Residing in Immigrant Households by Country of Origin
Table 8 Poverty Statistics
for Persons Residing in Immigrant and Native Households in the Northeast
Table 9 Poverty Statistics
for Persons Residing in Immigrant and Native Households in the Midwest
Table 10 Poverty Statistics
for Persons Residing in Immigrant and Native Households in the South
Table 11 Poverty Statistics
for Persons Residing in Immigrant and Native Households in the West
Table 12 Poverty Statistics
for Persons Residing in Immigrant and Native Households in Major
Immigrant-Receiving States
Table 13 Poverty Statistics
for Persons residing in Immigrant and Native Households in California
Table 14 Poverty Statistics
for Persons Residing in Immigrant and Native Households in New York State
Table 15 Poverty Statistics
for Persons Residing in Immigrant and Native Households by Consolidated
Metropolitan Areas
Table 16 Variable
Definitions
Table 17 Logistic Regression
of Household and Individual Level variables on Odds of an Individual Being in
Poverty in 1997
Table 18 Predicted
Probabilities for Being in Poverty
Table 19 Predicted
Probabilities for Being in Poverty for Selected Variables
Map Poverty
Rates of Persons in Immigrant Households vs. Persons in Native Households:
1996-97 Average
Map Poverty
Rates of Persons in Immigrant Households vs. Persons in Native Households: 1990
Census
Map Poverty
Rates of Persons in Immigrant Households: 1990 Census
Map Percent
of Total Poor Population Living in Immigrant Households: 1990 Census
[Return to
study.]
_______
* Courtesy of the Center for Immigration
Studies
Mark Krikorian, Executive Director
Center Paper #15
Center for Immigration Studies
1522 K Street N.W., Suite 820
Washington, DC 20005
See original at < http://www.cis.org/articles/poverty_study/
>.
