The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
Print Email
Text Size

The Spectacle Blog

In September, the Center for Immigration Studies published a report claiming that immigrants, both legal and illegal, got the lion’s share — 81 percent — of the new jobs created in Texas from 2007 to 2011. Yesterday Chuck DeVore, a former California Republican legislator who is now at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, published a piece challenging this assertion.

“Put simply, CIS used faulty methodology to make its main point,” DeVore wrote. It compared a net increase in jobs in Texas over a four-year period with a gross increase in employed newly arrived immigrants in Texas.” He also pointed to the job churn in the labor market that makes it difficult to establish who the Texas jobs went to.

In response, CIS research director Steven Camorta argues that they did a net-to-net comparison and still found immigrants gained disproportionately over the native-born. Camorta also wrote:

Here are the facts: Government data shows there were about 280,000 more people working in Texas in the second quarter of 2011 than in the same quarter of 2007. In the second quarter of 2011 there were 225,000 immigrants (legal and illegal) working in the state who indicated that they arrived in our country between the second quarter of 2007 and the second quarter of 2011. Thus the employment gains of newly arrived immigrants (225,000) equaled 81 percent of total employment growth (280,000). Over the same time period, the employment situation for native-born workers deteriorated significantly.

The DeVore-Camorta debate has taken on significance because of Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s presidential candidacy. Some conservative critics have argued that Perry’s immigration record undermines his record of presiding over substantial job growth in Texas.

View all comments (6) |

Bob K.| 10.11.11 @ 10:36AM

Assuming that the immigrants will work for less wages and benefits than the non-immigrant population and the employers have no problem paying these lesser wages and benefits to the immigrants we can assume that the study is correct.

This is common sense.

JeffC| 10.11.11 @ 12:54PM

The CIS piece was a hit job from the start. They managed to ignore the 2001 - 2007 numbers. Obviously they didn't paint the picture they wanted ...

Bob K.| 10.11.11 @ 2:29PM

Unfortunately it is the economy since 2008 that counts now and how those immigration statistics will affect it.

Chuck DeVore| 10.11.11 @ 2:39PM

Bob, what's not common sense was the assertion by CIS that “Of jobs created in Texas since 2007, 81 percent were taken by newly arrived immigrant workers (legal and illegal).” It defies logic that more than 4 of every 5 jobs created in Texas in the past 4 years went to immigrants when CIS' own statistics show that the number of native-born Americans working has increased by 129,000 in Texas since 2007.

yisong| 10.25.11 @ 1:22AM

slewing ring is a kind of comprehensive load to bear large bearings, because of its appearance resembling plate, so it is also called "slewing bearing". http://www.1stbearing.com

yisong| 10.25.11 @ 1:23AM

slewing ring is a kind of comprehensive load to bear large bearings, because of its appearance resembling plate, so it is also called "slewing bearing". http://www.1stbearing.com

More Blog Posts by W. James Antle, III

http://spectator.org/blog/2011/10/11/dueling-studies-on-immigration

ADVERTISEMENT

SPONSORED LINKS

FLASHBACK TO: 1995

Clip of the Day

Most Popular Articles

Obama and the IRS: The Smoking Gun?

Jeffrey Lord | 5.20.13

Time to Go for the Kill

Peter Ferrara | 5.22.13

From the Obama Ministry of Truth

Ben Stein | 5.21.13

IRS Union Chief Stonewalls

Jeffrey Lord | 5.21.13

Wimps Versus Barbarians

Thomas Sowell | 5.21.13

Damage Control for Dummies

Matt Purple | 5.22.13

Anyone Still Believe Me?

Aaron Goldstein | 5.21.13

ADVERTISEMENT