The United States is a nation of immigrants. Except for a small number of Native Americans, everyone is originally from somewhere else, and even recent immigrants can rise to top economic and political roles. President Franklin Roosevelt once famously addressed the Daughters of the American Revolution – a group that prided itself on the early arrival of its ancestors – as “fellow immigrants.”In recent years, however, U.S. politics has had a strong anti-immigration slant, and the issue played an important role in the Republican Party’s presidential nomination battle in 2012. But Barack Obama’s re-election demonstrated the electoral power of Latino voters, who rejected Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney by a 3-1 majority, as did Asian-Americans.
As a result, several prominent Republican politicians are now urging their party to reconsider its anti-immigration policies, and plans for immigration reform will be on the agenda at the beginning of Obama’s second term. Successful reform will be an important step in preventing the decline of U.S. power.
Fears about the impact of immigration on national values and on a coherent sense of American identity are not new. The 19th-century “Know Nothing” movement was built on opposition to immigrants, particularly the Irish. Chinese were singled out for exclusion from 1882 onward, and, with the more restrictive Immigration Act of 1924, immigration in general slowed for the next four decades.
During the 20th century, the U.S. recorded its highest percentage of foreign-born residents, 14.7 percent, in 1910. A century later, according to the 2010 census, 13 percent of the American population is foreign born. But, despite being a nation of immigrants, more Americans are skeptical about immigration than are sympathetic to it. Various opinion polls show either a plurality or a majority favoring less immigration. The recession exacerbated such views: in 2009, one-half of the U.S. public favored allowing fewer immigrants, up from 39 percent in 2008.
Both the number of immigrants and their origin have caused concerns about immigration’s effects on American culture. Demographers portray a country in 2050 in which non-Hispanic whites will represent only a slim majority. Hispanics will comprise 25 percent of the population, with African- and Asian-Americans making up 14 percent and 8 percent, respectively.
But mass communications and market forces produce powerful incentives to master the English language and accept a degree of assimilation. Modern media help new immigrants to learn more about their new country beforehand than immigrants did a century ago. Indeed, most of the evidence suggests the latest immigrants are assimilating at least as quickly as their predecessors.
While too rapid a rate of immigration can cause social problems, over the long term immigration strengthens U.S. power. It is estimated that at least 83 countries and territories currently have fertility rates that are below the level needed to keep their population constant. Whereas most developed countries will experience a shortage of people as the century progresses, America is one of the few that may avoid demographic decline and maintain its share of world population.
For example, to maintain its current population size, Japan would have to accept 350,000 newcomers annually for the next 50 years, which is difficult for a culture that has historically been hostile to immigration. In contrast, the Census Bureau projects that the U.S. population will grow by 49 percent over the next four decades.
Today, the U.S. is the world’s third most populous country; 50 years from now it is still likely to be third (after China and India). This is highly relevant to economic power: Whereas all other developed countries will face a growing burden of providing for the older generation, immigration could help to attenuate the policy problem for the U.S.
In addition, though studies suggest that the short-term economic benefits of immigration are relatively small, and that unskilled workers may suffer from competition, skilled immigrants can be important to particular sectors – and to long-term growth. There is a strong correlation between the number of visas for skilled applicants and patents filed in the U.S. At the beginning of this century, Chinese- and Indian-born engineers were running one-quarter of Silicon Valley’s technology businesses, which accounted for $17.8 billion in sales; and, in 2005, immigrants had helped to start one-quarter of all U.S. technology startups during the previous decade. Immigrants or children of immigrants founded roughly 40 percent of the 2010 Fortune 500 companies.
Equally important are immigration’s benefits for America’s soft power. The fact that people want to come to the U.S. enhances the country’s appeal, and immigrants’ upward mobility is attractive to people in other countries. The U.S. is a magnet, and many people can envisage themselves as Americans, in part because so many successful Americans look like them. Connections between immigrants and their families and friends back home help to convey accurate and positive information about the U.S.
Likewise, because the presence of many cultures creates avenues of connection with other countries, it helps to broaden Americans’ attitudes and views of the world in an era of globalization. Rather than diluting hard and soft power, immigration enhances both.
Singapore’s former leader, Lee Kwan Yew, an astute observer of both the U.S. and China, argues that China will not surpass the U.S. as the leading power of the 21st century, precisely because the U.S. attracts the best and brightest from the rest of the world and melds them into a diverse culture of creativity. China has a larger population to recruit from domestically, but, in Lee’s view, its Sino-centric culture will make it less creative than the U.S.
That is a view that Americans should take to heart. If Obama succeeds in enacting immigration reform in his second term, he will have gone a long way toward fulfilling his promise to maintain the United States’ strength.
Joseph S. Nye is a professor at Harvard University and the author of “The Future of Power.” THE DAILY STAR publishes this
commentary in collaboration with Project Syndicate © (www.project-syndicate.org).