By Daphne Spain

Immigration to the United States has been so extensive during the past two decades that it appears the century will end as it began, with healthy debates about how immigrants fit into the ideal U.S. society. Do we celebrate cultural differences or try to minimize them? Should ethnic and racial boundaries be erased through assimilation of immigrants by blurring differences to achieve a melting pot, or should racial and ethnic differences be maintained to create a stronger pluralistic society? There is a healthy degree of support for each point of view. A nationwide survey conducted by the National Opinion Research Center in 1994 included the following statement: "Some people say that it is better for America if different racial and ethnic groups maintain their distinct cultures. Others say it is better if groups change so that they blend into the larger society as in the idea of a melting pot." People were asked to rank their opinions on a scale ranging from "maintaining distinct cultures" (pluralism) to "blending into the larger society" (assimilation). Roughly one-third of Americans thought pluralism was the best route, one-third endorsed assimilation, and one-third found themselves somewhere in between. This article describes recent trends in immigration to the United States. It addresses the demographic, socioeconomic, cultural and political impact of high levels of immigration and identifies emerging challenges for the new century. Immigration is the "bookend" demographic phenomenon of 20th-century United States history. Over one million immigrants arrived annually during the first decade of the century, and about one million have arrived annually in the last decade. (Relatively little immigration occurred between 1915 and 1965 due in part to the Depression of the late 1920s and 1930s and various forms of restrictive legislation.) Today, they hail from different countries than the new arrivals of the 1900s, and proceed to a wider range of cities. Still, immigrants raise some of the same issues today that they did 100 years ago. In Immigration to the United States: Journey to an Uncertain Destination, a 1994 report of the Population Reference Bureau, Philip Martin and Elizabeth Midgley identify three reasons that immigration has become a subject of debate in the 1990s. First, the number of immigrants is rising from its low point in the 1940s. Second, today's immigrants differ significantly in ethnicity, education and skills from native-born Americans. Third, no political consensus exists on whether immigrants are assets or liabilities to U.S. society. Although the 1994 General Social Survey revealed general tolerance for immigration, it also found that 60 percent of Americans believe immigration should be reduced from its current levels. Slightly more (about two-thirds) thought additional immigration would "make it harder to keep the country united." Americans think immigration is unlikely to contribute to higher economic growth, and over 80 percent think higher immigration would create higher unemployment (although they don't fear that immigrants affect their own job security). Demographic Trends When immigrants arrived in the United States primarily by ship, an average of one million per year landed between 1905 and 1914. In this decade, since 1992, the number of annual arrivals is the same. But now, they arrive by land, sea and air. If the figures are high at both ends of the century, their impact on the composition of the U.S. population is different now because the country is so much larger. The foreign-born accounted for almost 15 percent of the total population in the early 1900s compared with about nine percent today, according to Martin and Midgley, and to a 1996 article in Population Bulletin, "The United States at Mid-Decade," by Carol J. De Vita. The most obvious difference between immigrants at the beginning and end of this century is their origins. Most immigrants around 1900 came from Italy, Austria-Hungary, Russia, Canada and England. So many 19th-century immigrants came from Europe by ship, in fact, that the U.S. Government did not tabulate those who crossed into the United States from Mexico or Canada until 1908. Mexico emerged as a significant contributor to U.S. immigration during the 1920s and now accounts for the greatest flow of immigrants entering the country. After Mexico, the Philippines, China and India send the largest number of immigrants to the United States today. New York City was the favored destination of European immigrants landing at Ellis Island in 1910, when about 40 percent of the city's population was foreign-born. Now that Central America and Asia have become major sources of immigration, Los Angeles competes with New York City for top rank. Between 1991 and 1996, each city was the intended destination of over 600,000 immigrants. Together these two cities accounted for one in five immigrants. Chicago and Miami were the next two most popular destinations, each averaging about 200,000 new arrivals between 1991 and 1996. Boston and San Francisco, important destinations at the beginning of the century, are still among the top 12 destinations of immigrants. The immigrants who came primarily from Europe settled in the U.S. Northeast and Midwest. Recent immigrants from Central America and Asia are moving to the West and Southwest. Thus immigrants are mirroring the migration patterns of native-born residents, introducing distinctly regional accents to the debate over assimilation versus pluralism. Socioeconomic Status The three basic indicators of socioeconomic status in the United States are education, occupation and income. In a perfectly assimilated society, there would be only minor differences in these measures among people from different countries. One would also expect such distinctions to decline the longer immigrants are in this country. Census data for 1990 partially support these assumptions. Immigrants from earlier periods have higher family incomes than more recent immigrants and are more likely to be employed as managers and professionals. And yet, recent arrivals are more likely to have college degrees than earlier arrivals and the native-born. Median family income in 1990 was $35,700 among the foreign-born who arrived in the United States before 1980, about the same as for native-born Americans. Among immigrants who arrived after 1980, however, median family income in 1990 was only $24,600. Recent immigrants are twice as likely to be poor (23 percent) as earlier arrivals (11 percent) and the native-born (10 percent). These statistics on economic well-being reflect different employment patterns. One-quarter of adult immigrants who arrived in the United States before 1980 held managerial or professional jobs, similar to the proportion of native-born Americans who worked as managers and professionals. By contrast, only 17 percent of working-age immigrants arriving after 1980 held managerial or professional occupations. Immigrants are about equally as likely as the native-born to be self-employed (13 percent). The anomaly is educational attainment. Approximately one out of every four recent arrivals had a college degree in 1990 compared with one out of five among earlier arrivals and the native-born, according to Martin and Midgley and to another team of researchers, Barry Chiswick and Teresa A. Sullivan, whose 1995 survey on new immigrants appeared in State of the Union: America in the 1990s (edited by Reynolds Farley). Cultural Contributions Religion, language, food and festivals are the cornerstones of cultural identity. Mosques have joined churches and synagogues as part of the urban landscape in the largest cities. Signs that announce worship services in two or more languages are now a common sight in many U.S. communities, since many churches share their facilities with new immigrant congregations until the newcomers can establish their own houses of worship. The multitude of languages introduced by immigrants has strained the capacity of some school systems at the same time that it has enriched students' exposure to non-western literature and art. Immigrants have enriched the American palate through successful restaurants and stores that cater to immigrants and the native-born. For example, the Washington, D.C., metropolitan area boasts thriving Vietnamese, Korean and Ethiopian communities that have introduced ethnic specialties to traditionally bland diets. Cinco de Mayo and the Chinese New Year are celebrated widely across the nation. The creation and management of small businesses, and investment in dormant housing markets in marginal neighborhoods, are two ways in which immigrants have helped revitalize U.S. cities. As far as a preference for assimilation or pluralism is concerned, immigrant thinking varies. In an ideal world, the two would coexist, enabling newcomers to continue to observe the cultural practices that sustained their communities in their country of origin, at the same time that they participate in U.S. society in economically productive ways. Political Participation Immigrants vote less often than native-born Americans, because many have not yet become citizens through the naturalization process. New arrivals ages 18 and over may acquire U.S. citizenship if they have been legal residents for at least five years; can read, write and speak English; have some knowledge of U.S. history and government; and are of sound moral character. Choosing to become a citizen is one of the clearest signals of assimilation immigrants can convey. Among all immigrants in 1990, 40 percent had earned citizenship. Italians and Germans had the highest rates (nearly three-quarters of all immigrants), while Central Americans had the lowest rates (less than 20 percent), according to the Martin and Midgley study. Is a 40 percent "naturalization rate" high or low by historical standards? In 1920, the first year in which women were eligible to vote in the United States, 49 percent of the adult foreign-born population were citizens, according to U.S. Bureau of the Census data. One could look at the slight decline in naturalization rates and read it as an indicator of increased pluralism. On the other hand, the similarity in rates for 1920 and 1990 seems remarkable given the greater diversity among recent immigrants and the changing political climate. Most Americans prefer assimilation to pluralism when it comes to political issues. In the 1994 National Opinion Research Center poll, two-thirds of Americans agreed or strongly agreed with the statement that "political organizations based on race or ethnicity promote separatism and make it hard for all of us to live together." People seem to practice what they preach. When asked about their own identities, an overwhelming majority of respondents (89 percent) considered themselves as "just an American" rather than as a member of a particular racial or ethnic group, or a "hyphenated American." The Road Ahead Past and current immigration trends have resulted in an American population that is predominantly white and non-Hispanic (74 percent). If immigration continues at its present rate, however, whites will hold a slim majority (52 percent) by 2050. Hispanics will account for the single largest minority group (22 percent). African Americans will represent 14 percent of the population, and the Asian contingent will have risen from three to 10 percent. For the first time in history, Americans responding to the Census 2000 will be able to identify themselves on the form as "one or more races." The decision to allow multiple racial designations was the result of intense debate among census statisticians, politicians and the public. It indicates a shift toward racial assimilation, and raises the possibility that previously contentious racial distinctions may eventually disappear. Roberto Suro, author of Strangers Among Us: How Latino Immigration Is Transforming America, proposes that our current vocabulary of race is inadequate because Latinos and Asians fall outside a world in which people are categorized as insiders or outsiders depending on whether they are white or black. Indeed, the category "Hispanic" applies to both immigrants and the native-born, thus obscuring distinctions between new arrivals and long-term residents. Future debates about assimilation versus pluralism will sound very different as distinctions by race and ethnicity fade. The late 1990s saw extensive welfare reform legislation enacted by the Congress and signed into law by President Clinton. This legislation limits certain types of public assistance to immigrants. In that light, since recent immigrants are more likely to be poor than earlier arrivals, it remains to be seen how localities with high rates of immigration will provide adequate services to those who need them. What does the future hold? The debate over immigration tells us something about ourselves as Americans. The story is one of increasingly blurred boundaries between groups. Although erasing distinctions completely may be neither possible nor desirable, minimizing them seems inevitable. The framers of the Constitution who wrote "We, the People of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union..." at the end of the 18th century were voicing their hopes for a nation of immigrants. As we enter the 21st century, the American challenge is to continue to incorporate immigrants into our vision of the future. ---------- Daphne Spain, Ph.D., is professor of urban and environmental planning in the School of Architecture, University of Virginia (Charlottesville). She is the author of America on the Edge of Two Centuries, a report published in May 1999 by the Population Reference Bureau, Washington, D.C.