|
September 16, 2007
Immigration Killed The War On Poverty
The poverty rate is down slightly,
to 12.3%. Phooey.
For more than two decades
following the end of World War II, rising incomes
and declining poverty rates characterized the American
economy. In 1947 nearly one-third (32 percent) of all
families were officially classified as poor. [Have
Antipoverty Programs Increased Poverty? James
Gwartney and Thomas S. MeCaleb, The Cato Journal,
Spring-Summer 1985 (PDF)]
By 1959 only one-fifth (22.4 percent) were poor. By
1973, the fraction of Americans living in poverty had
dropped to just over a tenth, to 11.1 percent.
Then everything came to a
screeching halt. The poverty rate rose to the 15 percent
range in the eighties and early nineties. The
Clinton boom pushed poverty down 11.3 percent in
2000, but it has since rebounded.
Basically, the poverty rate has
been oscillating in the 11-15 percent range for more
than thirty years. It has never bettered the low
set in 1973—34 years ago.

Incredible as it may seem, progress
against poverty came to a grinding halt in the late
1960s exactly as federal transfers were expanding at a
record pace. Most of the postwar decline in poverty
occurred before
Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society reached full
throttle.
Perhaps we shouldn’t be surprised.
LBJ’s War On Poverty programs proved to be an
irresistible draw to millions of
impoverished foreign born—who could enter legally
after the floodgates were opened by the
1965 Immigration Act.
The quality of immigrants
deteriorated dramatically after that legislation was
signed into law. In 1960, for example, new immigrants
were generally better educated, earned more, and were
less likely to be poor than natives. But by the end of
the 20th century, new arrivals had two fewer
years of education and earned one-third less than
natives. [See The
Top Ten Symptoms of Immigration, by George J.
Borjas, CIS, November 1999]
Data for 2006 show that the poverty
rate for recent (non-citizen) arrivals is nearly twice
that of natives: [Source: Census Bureau, Income,
Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United
States: 2006, August 2007. Table 6.
PDF]
 |
Native born: 11.9 percent are
poor |
 |
Foreign born (all): 15.2
percent |
 |
Foreign born (non-citizens):
19.0 percent |
Immigrants, legal and illegal,
accounted for 12.6 percent America’s population, but
15.6 percent of the
its poor in 2006. Of course, we should also include
their native-born “anchor
babies” to gauge their full impact. My estimate:
immigrants and their children are 23.0 percent of the
U.S. poverty population.
Illegals are a particularly acute
problem. They are included among "non-citizens,"
who amount to 7.7 percent of the U.S. population and
11.8 percent of its poverty population. But this
category also includes
highly educated guest workers,
students, and others who are not likely to be poor.
Calculating poverty rates for the
illegal alien population is tricky, not the least
because (needless to say) the
Census does not record the legal status of
respondents to its annual poverty survey.
Luckily, researchers at the
Pew Hispanic Center have isolated the "extra"
immigrants – i.e., those that appear to be over and
above the potential legal immigrant population. [See
discussion in Robert Rector, "How
Poor Are America’s Poor?", Heritage Foundation
Backgrounder, August 27, 2007 and Unauthorized
Migrants: Numbers and Characteristics, Pew Hispanic
Center, June 14, 2005, (PDF)]
They arrive at a figure of 10 to 11 million illegals,
which may well be too low. Nevertheless, poverty rates
for illegals are alarmingly high:
 |
All illegals: 30 percent are
poor |
 |
Illegals and their
U.S. born children: 37 percent are poor |
About 4.7 million
children of illegal immigrant parents live in the
U.S., according to the
Pew Hispanic Center. They account for 6 percent of
all children in the U.S., but 11.8 percent of poor
children.
Of course, that’s only the static
effect of immigration. The dynamic effect of
immigration—the displacement of American workers and
overall wage depression—must be responsible for some
portion of the American-born poverty population.
My estimate: some 20 percent of the
native poor would not be poor without competition from
immigrants. That's about 6 million fewer native poor.
The overall poverty would fall from 12.3% to 10.1%.
We would love to be optimistic
about the
second- and third- generation of immigrants.
Unfortunately, this optimism is
hard to justify: The poverty rate for non-immigrant
Hispanic families is about 19 percent, or more than half
as much again the rate for all non-immigrant families.
Only
black non-immigrants, with a 26 percent poverty
rate, fare worse than Hispanic non-immigrants.
With
Hispanic birth rates so much above the
national average, a second underclass is clearly
developing. Even an immigration
moratorium won’t keep poverty from drifting higher.
Nevertheless, without an
immigration moratorium, things are going to get much
worse.
Edwin S. Rubenstein (email
him) is President of
ESR Research Economic Consultants in Indianapolis. |