Each month in St. Louis, one immigrant who was an engineer in his or her home country but isn’t currently working in the field is invited to the Engineers’ Club’s regular networking dinner. The practice began earlier this year, after the club met with the St. Louis Mosaic Project, a public-private partnership founded by civic leaders to get the whole city working together to promote St. Louis as an immigrant-friendly place. The project has also been working to make it easier for some 6,000 international students at local colleges to find jobs in the area when they graduate, by persuading the Regional Business Council to include international students in its internship program, for example.
St. Louis is hardly alone in rolling out the welcome mat for immigrants. Over the past half-decade, many cities in the Midwest and beyond have been looking to boost their declining populations and strengthen their local economies by making their communities as enticing as possible to new arrivals from other countries.
Such efforts — from Ohio’s Welcome Dayton initiative to the nonprofit Global Detroit — have become so common, in fact, that groups representing 20 metro areas, from Buffalo, N.Y., to Minneapolis, will head to the Global Great Lakes conference in Pittsburgh this June, where they’ll swap ideas on promoting immigration as an economic-development opportunity. Pittsburgh’s new mayor, William Peduto, who made welcoming immigrants part of his campaign platform, will speak at the event.
The surge in courting immigrants aligns with the decline in population that many formerly bustling metropolises have seen in recent years. More than 400,000 residents left the Midwest between April 2010 and July 2012 alone, according to a 2013 report from the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, an independent research organization. Detroit lost a quarter of its people between 2000 and 2010, according to an analysis of census data conducted by the Council of State Governments Midwest. Cities such as Pittsburgh have half the population today that they had in 1950. In addition, while at the turn of the last century immigration helped drive economic growth in cities such as St. Louis and Pittsburgh, in recent years immigrants have been more likely to head to the Sun Belt than the Rust Belt. As native-born young people have moved elsewhere and immigration has lagged, cities and states have been left with shrinking, aging populations, often composed mainly of the white descendants of Europeans who arrived a century ago.
The population loss has been traumatic, says Anna Crosslin, president and CEO of the International Institute of St. Louis, a refugee- and immigrant-resettlement agency. “Because of that, there simply aren’t enough individuals to buy goods and services that others in the community want to be able to sell,” she says. A declining population skewed toward retirees also means a smaller tax base.
St. Louis civic and business leaders got serious about making a pro-immigration strategy part of the city’s economic-development efforts in 2012, spurred by research from then-Saint Louis University professor Jack Strauss. Through statistical analysis, Strauss found that St. Louis’s income growth would have been greater, housing prices would have been higher, and more new businesses would have been formed over the previous decade if immigration had occurred at a higher rate, comparable to those of other major cities.
Strauss’s report also noted that immigrants to the U.S. now tend to be either lower-skilled or higher-skilled than native-born workers. Because they have different skills, those immigrants tend to complement, rather than supplant, existing workers — a finding that cuts against the common belief that more immigrants will mean fewer jobs and lower wages for locals. In fact, in earlier work, Strauss had analyzed census data and found that immigration from Latin America improves wages and job opportunities for African-Americans living in the area.
Immigrants also often create jobs for themselves and others: The Small Business Administration has found that immigrants are more likely than others to start and own their own businesses. And a 2010 study by McGill and Princeton researchers found that immigrants patent inventions at twice the rate of native-born residents because they’re more likely to have expertise in science, technology, engineering, or math.
Local business and civic leaders obviously can’t reform the nation’s immigration system — only the federal government can increase the number of employment-based visas available or create a path to citizenship for undocumented residents. And, unlike Canada, the U.S. doesn’t allow people to apply for residency in specific areas of the country — although some Midwest leaders wish it would. (Earlier this year, Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder, a Republican, asked the federal government to approve 50,000 additional visas over the next five years for skilled immigrants destined for Detroit.)
But cities can do some things themselves to better support existing immigrant communities and to encourage new arrivals — and they’re doing them. “People are recognizing this opportunity right now, while our federal government is dealing with much bigger politics,” says Steve Tobocman, director of Global Detroit and a former Michigan state representative. “And folks are saying, regardless of whatever happens on the national scene, there are things we could be doing to improve our economic future.”
What We're Following See More »
The Commission on Presidential Debates put out a statement today that gives credence to Donald Trump's claims that he had a bad microphone on Monday night. "Regarding the first debate, there were issues regarding Donald Trump's audio that affected the sound level in the debate hall," read the statement in its entirety.
"A video of Donald Trump testifying under oath about his provocative rhetoric about Mexicans and other Latinos is set to go public" as soon as today. "Trump gave the testimony in June at a law office in Washington in connection with one of two lawsuits he filed last year after prominent chefs reacted to the controversy over his remarks by pulling out of plans to open restaurants at his new D.C. hotel. D.C. Superior Court Judge Brian Holeman said in an order issued Thursday evening that fears the testimony might show up in campaign commercials were no basis to keep the public from seeing the video."
No matter that his recall of foreign leaders leaves something to be desired, Gary Johnson is the choice of the Chicago Tribune's editorial board. The editors argue that Donald Trump couldn't do the job of president, while hitting Hillary Clinton for "her intent to greatly increase federal spending and taxation, and serious questions about honesty and trust." Which leaves them with Johnson. "Every American who casts a vote for him is standing for principles," they write, "and can be proud of that vote. Yes, proud of a candidate in 2016."
"By all means vote, just not for Donald Trump." That's the message from USA Today editors, who are making the first recommendation on a presidential race in the paper's 34-year history. It's not exactly an endorsement; they make clear that the editorial board "does not have a consensus for a Clinton endorsement." But they state flatly that Donald Trump is, by "unanimous consensus of the editorial board, unfit for the presidency."