Texas governor Rick Perry has pointed to job growth in Texas during the current economic downturn as one of his main accomplishments. But in a new report for the Center for Immigration Studies, based on data collected monthly by the Census Bureau, we found that newly arrived immigrants (legal and illegal) have been the primary beneficiaries of this growth between 2007 and 2011, not native-born workers.
We found that of jobs created in Texas since 2007, 81 percent (225,000) were taken by newly arrived foreign workers (legal and illegal). The Census Bureau asks immigrants to say when they came to the United States, so it is easy to look at new arrivals who took jobs. Of newly arrived immigrants who took a job in Texas, the data show that 93 percent were not U.S. citizens. We estimate that about half of newly arrived immigrants who took jobs in Texas since 2007 were illegal immigrants. This means that about 40 percent of all the job growth in Texas between 2007 and 2011 went to newly arrived illegal immigrants and 40 percent went to newly arrived legal immigrants.
Advertisement
What is so surprising about these numbers is that so much of the job growth in the state went to immigrants even though the native-born accounted for 69 percent of the growth in Texas’s working-age population (16 to 65). Put another way, even though natives made up most of the growth in potential workers, most of the job growth went to immigrants. As a result, the employment rate for natives — the share of working-age natives holding a job in the state — declined in a manner very similar to that seen in the rest of the country. This is an indication that the situation for native-born workers in Texas is very similar to that of the nation as a whole, despite the state’s job growth.
The employment rate declined significantly, from 71.1 percent in 2007 to 66.6 percent in 2011. In my view, and that of many labor economists, the decline in the employment rate is more troubling than the rise in the unemployment rate. Unemployment counts only those who have looked for work in the last four weeks. It does not include those who have not looked recently, nor does it include those who have given up looking for work.
Now, I realize that there is always the post-national perspective held by some libertarians that says, “Who cares who gets the jobs?” But in my view this is not how most Americans think about the issue. For most of us, it matters a great deal that three-fourths of job growth in the state went to newly arrived non-citizens at the same time as the employment situation for the native-born deteriorated dramatically. It raises the very real question of whether we are being well served by allowing so many new immigrants into the county.
The United States continues to allow in more than 1 million permanent legal immigrants each year, plus several hundred thousand additional guest workers. And although my research and that of others shows that the number of new illegal immigrants has declined significantly, hundreds of thousands of new illegal immigrants still settle in the country each year, and the total illegal population stands at close to 11 million, according to the government.
As for Rick Perry, the above numbers matter because he has a track record on immigration, and as president he would play a huge role in setting legal immigration levels and enforcing immigration laws. Perry has repeatedly sung the praises of high levels of legal immigration; he opposes the border fence and signed into law a bill that gave in-state college tuition to illegal immigrants. He also opposes using E-Verify, an electronic system to confirm workers’ legal status. For these reasons, NumbersUSA has given him a D-minus on his immigration record and positions. In fairness to Perry, this grade places him in the middle of the Republican pack, and NumbersUSA also gives President Obama an F-minus.
Some may argue that it was the arrival of immigrants in Texas that stimulated what job growth there was for natives. But if immigration stimulates job growth for natives, the numbers in Texas should look very different. The unemployment rate and the employment rate of natives in Texas show a dramatic deterioration during the recession that is similar to the rest of the country. Among the native-born, for the second quarter of 2011, Texas ranked 22nd in terms of unemployment and 29th in terms of its employment rate for the native-born.
This is a distraction. The simple fact is that jobs were created in Texas. California, with a high immigration rate, does not have Texas' record on job creation.
Should immigration be reigned in? Yes, definitely. Start with illegal immigration by enforcing the law and letting the states help, like Arizona.
But whether Rick Perry suffers because so many jobs went to immigrants is not a big deal, IMHO. We need jobs now and a leader with a record of creating jobs.
I again argue that there exists an Evangelical Subsidy when it comes to evangelical candidates. And for Romney a "Mormon Tax". How is this not more apparent than in this comment. Rick Perry is in lock step with Obama on immigration and yet Perry supporters come to his defense because he is their guy. Excuses will be readily made for all of Rick Perry's substantial weaknesses as a candidate and Romney will get lambasted for his.
Perry's record on the economy is due to exactly what Romney said: Low taxes and oil essentially.
So to find out now that Perry's pro illegal immigration stance has cost natives jobs similar to anywhere else in the country... should invite Perry supporters to question their support for him..
What do they do instead? They blindly follow the true RINO in this race (Perry) because he is one of their own.
Romney is the only candidate we currently have in the field that can beat Obama, and unless someone with more economic experience steps up, I am will to forgive Romney his weaknesses in favor of his stengths.
NO BIAS PEOPLE! WE NEED TO CHOOSE WISELY THIS TIME OR WE WILL SCREW THIS UP.
Your blue blood comment doesn't make sense. So you don't believe that the jobs created in TX should at least primarily go to unemployed American citizens, those who have been paying taxes for years if not decades? Or are Americans too lazy, like the mass immigration zealots like Michael Bloomberg like to blather?
Seems to me the "blue bloods" a/k/a CoC elitists like Dream Act Perry want cheaper foreign labor to clean their pools and cut their grass (but just don't live in my neighborhood), and then insult the American work ethic and whine about "jobs Americans will not do."
I think the point is that Perry ought to think twice about placing too much emphasis on job-growth numbers in Texas and focus on Obama's track record and on what precisely he would do as President to imbue the private sector with the confidence necessary to create long-term jobs for U.S. citizens. If he doesn't, he may be toast.
How can anyone tag the republicans as anti-immigrant if Perry is indeed the nominee? Besides-as were always told when a state tries to do something about illegal immigrants-it's the federal government's job to secure the borders.Finally, Perry is right that jobs were created in Texas. The fact that so many illegals got jobs is not surprising as most of those jobs were in construction and landscaping(as well as agricultural), evidence that new homes and other construction projects are underway which is further proof that the economy in that state is outperforming the nation as a whole. Don't get me wrong, I want real action on border security ,but I'm tired of the damned if you do, damned if you don't principle always and only applied to Republicans.
Actually, no - most people don't wonder that, only liberals and race baiters.
Most conservatives have no problem with LEGAL immigration, sure some on the far right are against all immigration (and lets not pretend like some on the far left don't think the same thing - THEY DO) but this is a complete fallacy you're painting 50% of the population with. Having said that, the point is valid; unemployment is over 9% yet we're allowing foreigners to come in and grab jobs while more and more Americans lose houses - that makes sense to you?
Any country that allows under-controlled immigration - as we have, is doing so to the detriment of their population, you know - the people who have actually been paying taxes.
We are a nation of immigrants, and I personally believe that is something to be proud of but in the modern era we have to control immigration, especially when millions of Americans, educated or otherwise, can't get a job, much less one that will support their family.
Attacking 50% of the population over and over again as racist, intolerant or anti-immigrant isn't going to make it true - it just undermines your credibility.
I'm sorry, but I don't get it. Perry has done a good job of creating (or at least, preserving) a relatively good climate for job creation in Texas. Most people seem to agree on that. And now it's his responsibility to make sure those jobs are filled by US citizens, too? Perry has been arguing for years that it's the federal government's job to police the border. And most people agree that it has failed. So where's the story here?
I guess I'm stupid, but how exactly does the writer determine from "census data" that 81% of new jobs in Texas since 2007 went to "new immigrants," and of those half went to illegals. Is this all conjecture, or is there some validity to these numbers? You'd think that maybe NRO would ask for some exposition on these matters before publishing such statements.
I'm a legal immigrant (now a citizen) and would have found it harder to get a job in this economy if I'd had to compete against better educated native-born.
My advice to my new fellow-countrymen: stop wasting money on liberal-arts tenures and grotesque administrative bloat. Implement vouchers and subsidize only the most useful education.
