Immigration opponents have been arguing that the U.S. needs to curb immigration because (1) most immigrants are Mexican or Central American; (2) members of these groups vote heavily Democratic; and (3) allowing them in will tip elections to Democrats and prevent Republicans from winning office on the state and national level.
But most immigrants to this country who are eligible to vote aren’t from Mexico or Central America; those who are eligible vote at lower rates than native-born Americans and immigrants from other regions; and such immigrants settle in places where their votes won’t tip the balance of any state in presidential elections. So why all the angst?
Although Mexican and Central American immigrants tend to vote Democratic, the percentage of all legal immigrants to the U.S. who are Mexican or Central American has dwindled from 34% a year throughout the 1990s to just 18% in 2012—an even larger percentage drop than we’ve seen in European immigration. Legal Mexican immigration in particular has plummeted from 28% to 14%.
In contrast, legal immigration from the Caribbean is up since the 1990s, with most of that increase coming from overwhelmingly Republican-leaning Cuban immigrants, whose representation among all legal immigrants has more than doubled since the 1990s. Legal immigration from Asia has risen by more than 50%.
But what about all those legal immigrants just gunning to get into the voting both so they can pull the lever for Bernie Sanders?
Establishing U.S. citizenship and becoming eligible to vote requires all of the following steps: obtaining an immigrant visa, immigrating legally to the U.S., maintaining permanent residency for five years, becoming a legal permanent resident, obtaining a green card, hiring an attorney and applying for citizenship, paying the appropriate fees, learning English, passing a citizenship exam, and waiting months to take the citizenship oath. From start to finish, the process for a dedicated applicant with no outstanding issues who doesn’t screw up any steps is about ten years. The ordeal can take longer for would-be citizens who live in areas with high concentrations of immigrants, which is to say most applicants. And just obtaining an immigrant visa in the first place can consume decades if you come from a country—such as Mexico or the Philippines—with demand that exceeds your nation’s per-country immigration quota and have to put your name on the waiting list.
Some legal immigrants don’t start the process right away and take much longer to become citizens. Many never even apply. And legal immigrants who become citizens vote at lower rates than native-born Americans.
As for illegal immigrants, anti-immigration agitators argue that some future Congress could grant them amnesty, thus flooding the Democrats with new voters.
Fine—suppose that an amnesty bill were passed, and that some fraction of Mexican and Central American illegal immigrants went through the arduous process of attempting to become U.S. citizens. In ten years, certain key states where illegal immigrants concentrate would thus have some quantity of new voters. How would these extra votes help Democrats?
According to estimates derived from Department of Homeland Security numbers, about three-quarters of illegal immigrants in the U.S. in 2012 came from Mexico or Central America—far higher than the percentage of legal immigrants who came from those regions. According to the same source, about 25% of illegal immigrants in the U.S. in 2012 lived in California, 16% in Texas, 6% in Florida, 5% each in New York and Illinois, 4% in New Jersey, 3% each in Georgia, Arizona, and North Carolina, and 2% in Washington.
Does anyone envision California, New York, Illinois, New Jersey, or Washington on the cusp of turning Republican, but for the addition of some new Mexican and Central American voters in ten years? Does anyone see Texas, Georgia, or Arizona turning blue?
As for the addition of a few thousand reliable Democratic voters to right-leaning North Carolina, it’s not likely to tip the state one way or the other—especially given the ongoing migration to conservative southern states that has seen northerners flocking there to enjoy the more favorable economic policies. And as for Florida, the two biggest Latino groups in the state are Cubans—who vote Republican—and Puerto Ricans—who are American citizens and can vote wherever they live.
Don’t forget the frequency with which Republicans win governorships in deep-blue states such as California, New York, Illinois, and New Jersey. After an extended bout of mismanagement, even left-leaning voters periodically realize they need an adult in charge. The reverse cannot be said for Democrats winning governorships in red states.
And all of these pragmatic arguments presume that Republicans should be setting their immigration policy based on electoral advantage rather than what’s right. They also presume that Republicans don’t feel confident enough in their message to be able to win over hard-working immigrants to their conservative philosophy.
So exactly which state are Democrats poised to flip? Only the state of sensible pro-immigration Americans to paranoid hysteria.
Note: There is a print link embedded within this post, please visit this post to print it.
