Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Article: States Will Need Immigrants to Counter Aging of the Labor Force. By Michele Waslin

Collapse
X
Collapse

  • Article: States Will Need Immigrants to Counter Aging of the Labor Force. By Michele Waslin

    States Will Need Immigrants to Counter Aging of the Labor Force

    by


    Immigrant_Worker

    New population projections from the University of Virginia’s Demographics Research Group show that in many states in the Northeast and Midwest, growth of the working-age population is slowing due to aging, lower fertility rates, and people moving out of the state. The aging of the workforce in the working-age population can mean shrinking workforces and potential economic problems. As a result, states need to think about how immigration can ameliorate impending trouble.

    By 2020, the number of working age adults (age 25-54) will decline in 16 states. For example, in Maine, while the overall population is expected to decrease by about two percent, the working age population will decline by 16 percent. Vermont and West Virginia can also expect declines of more than 10 percent, while Connecticut, Illinois, Michigan, New Hampshire, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and Wisconsin can expect more than five percent decline. A shrinking working-age population can hurt a state’s economy: businesses close due to a lack of workers and customers, housing prices drop, schools close, and tax revenue declines. Troubled states “will become less attractive to the people who are already there, and less attractive to newcomers,” according to UC-Berkeley demographer Ronald Lee.

    The decline in the working-age population will not be offset by births. The current total fertility rate is about 1.86 children per woman and would need to be at least 2.08 for the population to replenish itself. At the same time, the U.S. population is getting older and living longer. The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) projects that by 2024, Americans age 55 and older will increase by 18.2 million—reaching 102.9 million, or 38.2 percent of all people in the country.

    Immigration mitigates these trends. In many areas of the country, the foreign born have accounted for more than 20 percent of the growth of the adult population since 1990. In some areas – mainly in the Midwest – overall adult population would have declined if not for an increase in the foreign born population. Almost half of immigrants admitted between 2003 and 2012 were between the ages of 20 and 40, while only 5 percent were ages 65 or older.

    Immigrant workers will likely be needed to replace retiring native-born workers and to provide them with needed care. The aging of the U.S. population will generate a high demand for healthcare workers of all kinds, and immigrants will likely be needed to meet growing demand.

    According to the Bipartisan Policy Center, worldwide population growth has been slowing for decades and will continue to decline over the next century. However, “Immigration is an important reason why the United States can anticipate less severe demographic challenges than most other developed countries… [Its] approach to immigration has helped the United States maintain a younger population and a higher fertility rate. Moving forward, the United States can expect to maintain its demographic advantage—provided that America retains its historic edge in attracting immigrants, integrating them, and allowing them to reach their full economic potential.”

    While immigration can be a hotly debated political topic, the bottom line is – given an aging population and low fertility rates – immigrants need to be a part of the country’s future if we’re going to remain a leader in the world economy.

    Photo Courtesy of DFID.

    This post originally appeared on Immigration Impact. © 2016 Immigration Impact. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.


    About The Author

    Michele Waslin Michele Waslin is a Senior Research and Policy Analyst at the American Immigration Council, where she had also worked from 2007-2012. Before returning to the Council, Michele worked at the Pew Charitable Trusts where she launched the Immigration and the States project focusing on the relationship between levels of government. She also previously served at the National Council of La Raza and the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights. For nearly twenty years, Michele has conducted policy-relevant research, translated it into effective outreach messages and materials, and served as a leading voice advocating for effective immigration reform. She has written many reports on a wide variety of immigration-related policies, and has authored multiple book chapters. She is an accomplished public speaker and appears regularly in English- and Spanish-language press. Michele holds a Ph.D. in Political Science from the University of Notre Dame and an MA from the University of Chicago.


    The opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the opinion of ILW.COM.


    • Guest's Avatar
      #1
      Guest commented
      Editing a comment
      You aren't saying anything about the proverbial elephant in the room, which is the fact that the need for immigrant workers can be better met with lawful immigration. One of the many benefits of lawful immigration is that the government can base the availability of visas on our country's needs, as opposed to illegal immigration where the aliens themselves decide whether to come here. Under lawful immigration, if more engineers are needed, additional visas are allocated for engineers, and so on. But I don't think we can talk the republicans into an increase in lawful immigration while unlawful immigration is out of control. I don't want to break up families any more than you do, but I wince every time I hear an outcry objecting to interior enforcement that removes undocumented immigrants who aren't dangerous criminals. That may be cruel and morally wrong, but the republicans aren't going to go along with comprehensive immigration reform until we show a willingness to implement an IRCA wipe-the-slate-clean deal. That's the reality we are dealing with, like it or not. And that deal has to include an agreement to deport everyone who is here illegally, prospectively anyway. If you want to learn more about the wipe-the-slate-clean deal I am talking about, see my article, "What is IRCA, and What Does It Have To Do with Comprehensive Immigration Reform?" (Feb. 8, 2013), http://www.lexisnexis.com/legalnewsr...migration-law- blog/archive/2013/02/08/what-is-irca-and-what-does-it-have-to-do-with- comprehensive-immigration-reform.aspx

    • Guest's Avatar
      #2
      Guest commented
      Editing a comment
      Try this link if the one I gave before doesn't work for you, https://www.lexisnexis.com/legalnews...edirected=true
    Posting comments is disabled.

Categories

Collapse

article_tags

Collapse

There are no tags yet.

Latest Articles

Collapse

  • Article: Birthright Citizenship Is Not A Legal Assumption; It
    ImmigrationDaily
    Last week on Fox News, Tucker Carlson said,
    08-21-2018, 01:24 PM
  • Blogging: Trump's "National Security" Abuses: First, Muslim Ban; Next, Security Clearance Revocation.. By Roger Algase
    ImmigrationDaily
    Trump's "National Security" Abuses: First, Muslim Ban; Next, Security Clearance Revocation. Trashing Immigrant Rights Endangers Freedom of All Americans.

    CNN reports on August 21 that 175 former US officials have denounced Donald Trump for revoking the security clearance of former CIA director John Brennan for speaking out in opposition to Trump.

    https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/20/polit...ent/index.html

    Presidential use of "national security"
    ...
    08-21-2018, 12:54 PM
  • Article: The EB-5 Immigration Program and the Investors Process By H. Ronald Klasko
    ImmigrationDaily

    If you are having difficulty viewing this document please click here.

    08-20-2018, 08:15 AM
  • Article: Immigration Judges’ Union Fights for Judicial Independence By Karolina Walters
    ImmigrationDaily
    Immigration Judges’ Union Fights for Judicial Independence by Karolina Walters The National Association of Immigration Judges (NAIJ), the union that represents the nation’s immigration judges, is challenging the government’s decision to remove an immigration judge from a well-known case and replace him with a judge who immediately ordered the immigrant in the case deported. NAIJ’s grievance addresses the treatment of one immigration judge, but its resolution will have implications for judicial independence throughout the entire immigration court system. The grievance was filed on behalf of Philadelphia-based immigration judge Steven A. Morley, who was presiding over the case of Mr. Reynaldo Castro-Tum. Castro-Tum’s case rose to national importance earlier this year when Attorney General Jeff Sessions chose to refer the case to himself to reconsider the Board of Immigration Appeals’ previous decision in the case. In reconsidering the decision, Sessions effectively eliminated judges’ use of administrative closure, a docket management tool. Sessions sent Castro-Tum’s case back to Judge Morley, noting that the immigration court order Castro-Tum removed if he did not appear at his next hearing. Castro-Tum did not appear at the next hearing. However, Judge Morley continued the case to resolve whether Castro-Tum received adequate notice of the hearing. Due process requires, at a minimum, that an individual be given notice of proceedings and an opportunity to be heard by a judge. But before the next hearing could take place, the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) replaced Judge Morley with an Assistant Chief Immigration Judge who ordered Castro-Tum removed when he did not appear at court again. In their grievance, NAIJ asserts that the decision to remove Judge Morley from Castro-Tum’s case and reassign many other cases from his docket resulted in unacceptable interference with judicial independence. The grievance specifically claims that EOIR’s actions violate immigration judges’ authority under the regulations to exerci...
    08-17-2018, 11:12 AM
  • Article: Indirect Refoulement: Why the US Cannot Create a Safe Third Country Agreement with Mexico By Sophia Genovese
    ImmigrationDaily
    Indirect Refoulement: Why the US Cannot Create a Safe Third Country Agreement with Mexico by Sophia Genovese The Trump Administration is seeking to create and implement a safe third country agreement with Mexico . Under this agreement, asylum seekers arriving at the US border who have travelled through Mexico would be denied the ability to file their asylum claims in the US. Such an agreement would trample on the rights of asylum-seekers, violating both international and US asylum law. In particular, the US would be violating the international principle of non-refoulement , which provides that no State “shall expel or return (“refouler”) a refugee in any manner whatsoever to the frontiers of territories where his [or her] life or freedom would be threatened,” where Mexico has a proven track record of being anything but safe for asylum seekers . The US has also codified Article 33(1) of the Refugee Convention into Section 208(a)(2)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) which provides that it will not return an asylum seeker to his or her country of origin, but may, at the determination of the Attorney General, remove the asylum seeker to a “safe third country… where the [asylum seeker] would have access to a full and fair procedure for determining a claim to asylum or equivalent temporary protection.” Although Mexican officials have not yet indicated whether they would sign a safe third country agreement with the US, asylum advocates should proactively seek to prevent such a devastating policy with a country that lacks adequate asylum protections. As reported by Human Rights First and Amnesty International , 75 percent of asylum seekers apprehended and detained by the National Institute of Migration (INM), the Mexican immigration enforcement agency, were not informed of their right to seek asylum. Even if asylum seekers are able to make their claims, only 30% of the asylum proceedings are ever concluded , and even fewer are granted, leaving many bona fide asylum seekers stranded without a resolution. The treatment of unaccompanied minors’ asylum claims in Mexico are even more dismal. Of the 35,000 minors apprehended by the INM in the first half of 2016, only 138 were able to apply for asylum , of which only 77 were granted protection. Beyond the failing asylum system in Mexico, asylum seekers are also in extreme danger of kidnapping, murder, rape, trafficking, and other crimes by INM officers and civilians. A safe third country agreement with Mexico would violate the United States’ international obligations under the 1967 Optional Protocol to the Refugee Convention, to which we are a signatory, which adopts by incorporation the obligations outlined in the 1951 Refugee Convention, to which the US is not a signatory. Take the example of an asylum-seeker, Mrs. H, who is fleeing politically-motivated violence in Honduras. Her husband, Mr. H, was a vocal political activist who opposed the National Party and members of the Honduran government. Mr. H began to receive death threats due to his political beliefs and reported such threats to the authorities. The authorities, however, di...
    08-16-2018, 02:32 PM
  • Article: Flawed Statistics Undermine USCIS/ICE/SEVP’s Restriction of D/S for Unlawful Presence By Eugene Goldstein, Esq.
    ImmigrationDaily

    Flawed Statistics Undermine USCIS/ICE/SEVP’s Restriction of D/S for Unlawful Presence

    by


    On August 9, 2018 USCIS published a “Policy Memorandum” restricting the 20-year-old calculation of Duration of Status (D/S) for F-1, J-1 and M-1 entrants (and their derivative families). https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/...immigrants.pdf

    USCIS also published an announcement (hereinafter “announcement”) “USCIS Issues Revised Guidance on Unlawful Presence for Students and Exchange Visitors https://www.uscis.gov/news/uscis-iss...hange-visitors , and a general discussion “Unlawful Presence and Bars to Admissibility” ...

    08-15-2018, 12:57 PM
Working...
X