|
Issue 2, March/April 2006
Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas
On The Record
A Conversation with Pia Orrenius: The Economics of Immigration
| Congress is considering
various proposals for immigration reform this
year. Pia Orrenius, a Dallas Fed senior economist
and immigration expert, discusses the economic
aspects of the growing number of foreign-born
workers, including their effects on the U.S.
economy, government budgets, and native-born
Americans' jobs and earnings. |
|
Q: What can you tell us about the
size of the immigrant population in the United States?
A:
Immigrants make up about 12 percent of the overall population,
which means about 36 million foreign-born live in the
United States. The commonly accepted estimate for the
undocumented portion of the foreign-born population
is 11 million. Immigrants come from all parts of the
world, but we’ve seen big changes in their origins.
In the 1950s and 1960s, 75 percent of immigrants were
from Europe. Today, about 75 percent are from Latin
America and Asia. Inflows are also much larger today,
with 1 million to 2 million newcomers entering each
year.
What’s interesting about
the United States is how our economy has been able to
absorb immigrants and put them to work. U.S. immigrants
have high employment rates compared with other developed
countries. This is partly because we don’t set
high entry-level wages or have strict hiring and firing
rules. In this type of flexible system, you have more
job openings. You have more opportunities. You also
have lower entry-level wages, but immigrants at least
get their foot in the door.
Being in the workforce allows
immigrants to interact with the rest of society. They
learn the language faster, pay taxes and become stakeholders.
Q: Where do immigrants fit into the
U.S. economy?
A: Our immigrants are diverse
in economic terms. We rely on immigrants for both high-
and low-skilled jobs. Some immigrants do medium-skilled
work, but more than anything else they’re found
on the low and the high ends of the education distribution.
The economic effects are different
depending on which group you’re talking about.
We have an extremely important group of high-skilled
immigrants. We rely on them to fill important, high-level
jobs in technology, science and research. About 40 percent
of our Ph.D. scientists and engineers were born in another
country. We also employ many high-skilled immigrants
in the health sector.
High-skilled immigration has good
economic effects—it adds to GDP growth. It also
has beneficial fiscal effects—the impact on government
finances is large and positive. People tend to focus
on illegal or low-skilled immigration when discussing
immigrants and often do not recognize the tremendous
contribution of high-skilled immigrants.
Q: What about the low-skilled immigration?
A: With low-skilled immigration,
the economic benefits are there as well but have to
be balanced against the fiscal impact, which is likely
negative.
What makes the fiscal issue more
difficult is the distribution of the burden. The federal
government reaps much of the revenue from immigrants
who work and pay employment taxes. State and local governments
realize less of that benefit and have to pay more of
the costs associated with low-skilled immigration—usually
health care and educational expenses.
Q: Does it matter whether the immigration
is legal or not?
A: If you’re making value
judgments about immigrants, or if you’re discussing
national security, you probably need to distinguish
between those who come legally and those who don’t.
From an economic perspective, however, it makes more
sense to differentiate among immigrants of various skill
levels than it does to focus on legal status.
The economic benefits of low-skilled
immigrants aren’t typically going to depend on
how they entered the U.S. Illegal immigrants may pay
less in taxes, but they’re also eligible for fewer
benefits. So being illegal doesn’t mean these
immigrants have a worse fiscal impact. In fact, a low-skilled
illegal immigrant can create less fiscal burden than
a low-skilled legal immigrant because the undocumented
don’t qualify for most benefits.
Q: How does immigration affect jobs
and earnings for the native-born population?
A: We focus a lot on that—for
example, exactly how immigration has affected the wages
of Americans, particularly the low-skilled who lack
a high school degree. The reason we worry about this
is that real wages have been falling for low-skilled
U.S. workers over the past 25 years or so.
The studies tend to show that
not much of the decline is due to inflows of immigrants.
The consensus seems to be that wages are about 1 to
3 percent lower today as a result of immigration. Some
scholars find larger effects for low-skilled workers.
Still, labor economists think it’s a bit of a
puzzle that they haven’t been able to systematically
identify larger adverse wage effects.
The
reason may be the way the economy is constantly adjusting
to the inflow of immigrants. On a geographical basis,
for example, a large influx of immigrants into an area
tends to encourage an inflow of capital to put them
to use. So you have a shift out in labor supply, but
you also have a shift out in labor demand, and the wage
effects are ameliorated. At the same time, the native
labor supply is changing. We have fewer and fewer low-skilled
workers, largely because older workers, who are more
likely to lack a high school degree, are retiring and
leaving the labor force. In that way, low-skilled immigrants
are filling a disappearing niche in our native labor
force. So that, too, might work against finding large
wage impacts.
Q: Is it all about wages?
A: Economic models say people
move in response to wage differentials, and that’s
pretty much it. When wage differentials shrink, migration
should slow. Sociologists have long pointed out, however,
that other dynamics affect immigration, such as family
reunification, risk diversification, security and access
to financial markets.
Workers are more likely to migrate
if patterns have been established to help them make
their way to the foreign workplace. In Mexico over the
past 15 years, for example, we’ve seen increased
migration to the U.S. even as living standards in Mexico
improved slightly. Because of the networks and migration
flows in place, it’s going to take longer before
a small shrinkage in the wage gap results in a decline
in immigration.
Q: What about the American Dream of
immigrants coming to this country, working hard and
prospering? Is it still alive?
A: Most immigrants start out behind
the native-born because they don’t have the advantages
of growing up in this society. As they learn, their
wages grow. Within the same generation, you should find
that immigrants assimilate to natives with similar characteristics—
job, age, education and such. So a high school dropout
immigrant will likely achieve the wage outcomes of a
native high school dropout. However, if you don’t
take into account education, you don’t see the
same economic assimilation. Mexican immigrants who lack
a high school degree don’t achieve the average
wages of natives once they come to the U.S., even after
10 to 15 years.
What we want over generations
is for the children of immigrants to achieve the same
education and incomes as average natives. You do see
that for many groups. Our biggest concern is with Hispanic
immigrants, because they’re the ones coming in
with the lowest education levels.
While the great majority of children
of Hispanic immigrants do well, their summary statistics
aren’t as favorable. This is because in the second
and third generation they still have twice the high
school dropout rate as other natives. So a fraction
of these immigrants and their children aren’t
assimilating even over generations. They’re not
achieving overall U.S. averages in education and wages
as much as they’re assimilating to Hispanic averages,
which are lower.
Q: What are the likely economic effects
of a guest-worker program?
A: A guest-worker program would
likely have two components, addressing existing and
new migrants. Incorporating illegal immigrants who are
already here and working, while controversial, would
not have large economic effects. These immigrants have
already had a labor-market impact. They’ve already
had a fiscal impact. Because they’ve been working
here, we’re not going to suddenly have a big wage
impact or see native workers displaced.
What
might change is that they would get temporary legal
status in the U.S., and they’d be able to get
driver’s licenses and open bank accounts. It would
make their lives easier. It really wouldn’t worsen
the fiscal situation because, as guest workers, the
immigrants presumably wouldn’t be eligible for
more public benefits than they are now.
The economic effects of legalizing
new migrant workers is more complicated. If the program
simply institutionalizes the existing stream of undocumented
workers, economic and fiscal effects will be much what
they are today. In fact, depending on how it’s
implemented and how employers are impacted, a guest-worker
program combined with stricter enforcement could actually
serve to reduce the demand for immigrant labor.
If the program comes with fees
on employers and workers or if employees who were off
the books are now going to be contributing employment
taxes, the program would raise the cost of immigrant
workers. This would increase the relative demand for
native-born workers. If there is no cap on the number
of new workers coming in or other measures to limit
the guest-worker inflows, then increases in labor supply
could negate any benefit for natives.
«Previous
article | Next Article»
| About
Southwest Economy
Southwest Economy
is published six times annually by the Federal
Reserve Bank of Dallas. The views expressed
are those of the authors and should not
be attributed to the Federal Reserve Bank
of Dallas or the Federal Reserve System.
Articles may be reprinted
on the condition that the source is credited
and a copy is provided to the Research Department
of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas.
Southwest Economy
is available free of charge by writing the
Public Affairs Department, Federal Reserve
Bank of Dallas, P.O. Box 655906, Dallas,
TX 75265-5906, or by telephoning (214) 922-5254. |
|
|