Citation URL: http://www.urban.org/WendyZimmermann

In 2004 there were about 50,000 immigrants in the Louisville metropolitan area, representing 4.5 percent of the area’s population. Louisville, like other Southeastern cities, has a relatively small but rapidly growing foreign-born population. But Louisville’s immigrants are more diverse than elsewhere in the Southeast: higher shares are from African and Asian, and a lower share from Latin America. Louisville also has a lower share of undocumented immigrants and a higher share of refugees, due to a large and successful resettlement program. Louisville’s immigrants—which make up an increasing component of the labor force in sectors such as manufacturing, retail and health care—are also relatively well educated compared to the nationwide foreign-born population. This report, sponsored by the Louisville Metro Office for International Affairs, describes characteristics and trends in the city’s international population, and makes recommendations for the future successful integration.

Key findings, based on case studies of New York, Los Angeles, and Houston, show that: immigrants and limited English speakers make up a significant share of those on welfare; many have significant barriers to work including less education and work history than natives; and immigrants on welfare are less likely to be working and more likely to be working in dead-end jobs. Job training programs often have English language requirements, limiting immigrants' access. The authors conclude that combining part-time work and language training can help immigrant welfare recipients move into jobs and off the welfare rolls.

What do we know about the integration of immigrant families within the United States—the progress these families are making and their reception in the communities where they settle? How are immigrants affected by the nation’s integration policies or lack thereof? What directions might immigrant integration and the policies governing it take in the future? This paper examines these and other pertinent immigration questions.

In this paper, we use data from U.S. decennial censuses and March Supplements to the Current Population Surveys (CPS) of 1995–1999 to examine the historic patterns of immigrant settlement within the United States, recent shifts in these patterns, and the extent to which changes are due to international versus internal migration, focusing particularly on California. We examine the characteristics of internal migrants, comparing those moving out, those moving in, and those staying put. We also revisit briefly the so-called "welfare magnet" theory to see if immigrants are drawn to states with the strongest safety nets for immigrants.

This report documents the increasingly large number of mixed-status immigrant families in the United States and examines how the complexity of these family structures has thwarted the effectiveness of recent welfare and illegal immigration policy reform. It also discusses the ways in which current immigration status laws block citizen children’s access to public benefits due to their parents’ status as noncitizens and explains how recent changes to these laws have only served to further divide families into legal and illegal sides.

This supplement to Patchwork Polices: State Assistance for Immigrants under Welfare Reform provides a summary of each state’s immigrant eligibility rules for cash, food, and health assistance programs.

Despite significant federal benefit restorations and considerable assistance provided by states, the social safety net for immigrants remains weaker than before welfare reform. Although many states stepped in to help immigrants, few fully replaced lost federal benefits and state variation in available safety net services has increased. This report, based on a survey of state officials in all 50 states, found that most states that created substitute programs placed conditions on program eligibility rendering many immigrants ineligible, often targeted only specific groups of immigrants, or provided lower benefits than the federal programs which they replaced. The paper ranks states according to the availability of their safety net to immigrants.

[Orlando Sentinel] Urban Institute researchers, Wendy Zimmermann and Michael Fix, write about the complex rules, mixed messages, confusion and fear in the immigrant community in light of changes to Welfare rules as they apply to noncitizens. In their opinion, the results are that many immigrants are refusing a helping hand.

There are two Highlights for each state. The income support and social services Highlights look at basic income support programs, employment and training programs, child care, child support enforcement, and the last-resort safety net. The Highlights capture policies in place and planned in 1996 and early 1997.

This report is based on an analysis of administrative data from the Los Angeles County Department of Public Social Services. The data provide information on monthly approvals of applications for Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), Medi-Cal, and General Relief for January 1996 to January 1998. The data show that the number of non-citizen monthly approvals for these benefits has dropped significantly since 1996, while the number of citizen approvals has either remained the same or declined more moderately. The report explores a number of reasons why fewer immigrants are applying for assistance for which they remain eligible.

Return to list of authors