Mexican immigration to the United States started in the mid-1800s and has grown substantially to this day. New York City became a hub for Mexican immigration decades later in the late 1980s and early 1990s. The heavy Mexican presence in the city over the past few decades is visible in the city’s local artwork and food, especially in neighborhoods like Sunset Park, Corona, and El Barrio in East Harlem. Mexican immigrants have a unique immigration history compared to other Latino immigrant populations and the overall immigrant population in New York City, making them an important group to study. Our statistical profile examines specific trends in the Mexican immigrant population in NYC using data gathered from the U.S. Census Bureau, the Department of Homeland Security, and the New York City Department of City Planning. We examined foreign-born Mexicans’ gender/age composition, their educational attainment levels, and their current distribution within the city. We connected the data to various themes discussed throughout this seminar, such as transnationalism, assimilation, and ethnic enclaves. This presentation of Mexican immigrants includes visual representations such as graphs, YouTube clips, and images, as well as textual representation to aid in the viewer’s understanding of the Mexican Immigrant experience in NYC.
A Brief History of Mexican Immigration
Mexican immigration into the United States began in the mid nineteenth century (Light et al 2008: 282). After defeating Mexico in the Mexican-American War, the United States gained vast territory that spanned current day California, New Mexico, Texas, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, Colorado, and parts of Wyoming (Light et al: 282). After the Mexican-American War, Mexico faced economic difficulties and social instability made rural living in Mexico too difficult. This caused many young men to come to the United States in search of work (Light et al: 282). The first large wave of Mexican immigration occurred between 1900 and 1930. Mexican immigration into the United States stayed at high levels until the Great Depression (Light et al: 283) During the Great Depression, the need for labor was gone. There were not enough jobs for Americans and anti-immigrant resentment was at its peak. Throughout the 1930s, hundreds of thousands of illegal Mexicans were repatriated because Mexicans were viewed as an added strain on the economy (Light et al 2008: 283). By 1942, the US was once again involved in a World War and the demand for labor rose again. The U.S. government began the Bracero Program, the purpose of which was to accommodate seasonal labor demand. The program began in 1942 and kept Mexican immigration steady until around 1964 when the program ended (Light et al 2008: 283). The end of the program did not end Mexican immigration to the country though.
Decades after the Bracero Program ended, Mexican immigration continued, and Mexicans started to migrate to New York City. In 1990, there were roughly 56,000 Mexicans living in the city, a number that tripled to 187,000 by 2000 (Badillo 2009: 107). By the year 2011, Mexicans became the third largest immigrant group in the city (New York City Department of City Planning: 24). But before the late 1900s, Mexican Immigration to the city was much more limited. Only 3,000 foreign-born Mexicans lived in the city in 1930 (Badillo 2009: 107). In the 1980s, that number skyrocketed to what it would become in the 1990s (Badillo 2009: 113). In Mexico, the value of the peso dropped dramatically. That economic predicament, coupled with a drought in Mexico at the same time, forced people out of the country and into the United States in large numbers (Badillo 2009: 113). This massive immigration of Mexicans into the United States could possibly explain the spike of Mexicans in New York City in the 1990s. That pattern continues today, as Mexicans continue to flock to the city.
Mexican Migration Patterns: Unauthorized & Authorized
Most unauthorized immigrants in the United States are born in Mexico, according to Pew (Passel et al 2008: 1). But many Mexican immigrants who obtain Legal Permanent Residence, or LPR, do so in a variety of ways. According to the Department of Homeland Security, 143,446 Mexicans obtained LPR status in the 2011 fiscal year (Department of Homeland Security 2011: 29). A brief breakdown of that number shows that 43,631 of them were family-sponsored preferences, 9,164 were employment-based preferences, 84,280 were immediate relatives of U.S. citizens, 605 were refugees and asylums, and 5,754 Mexicans received LPR status through other means (Department of Homeland Security: 29). This data shows us that the most popular form of entry into the United States is through immediate family preferences or family sponsored preferences, aside from unauthorized immigration. In 2014, there were 11.7 million Mexican immigrants living in the United States and about 50% of them were unauthorized (Gonzales-Barrera et al 2017: par. 17). The largest group of unauthorized immigrants in the U.S. is from Mexico, and they make up 28% of the country’s immigrants (Gonzales-Barrera et al: par. 17). For the past decade, Mexicans have made up the largest group of unauthorized immigrants in the country, but their numbers have been gradually declining since their peak in 2007 when there were 6.9 million unauthorized Mexican immigrants in the U.S. accounting for 57% of the unauthorized immigrant population (Passel et al 2017: par. 4). That percentage decreased to 50% in 2016, when there were 5.6 million unauthorized immigrants in the United States (Passel et al 2017: par. 4).
Current Statistical Data
New York City, home to over 2,989,817 immigrants, which is 36% of the city’s entire population, continues to be a center of migration in the 21st century (New York City Department of City Planning 2013: 10). Dominicans make up the largest immigrant group in the city, making up 12% of the city’s foreign-born population in 2011 (New York City Department of City Planning: 10). Chinese immigrants are the second largest immigrant group in the city. In 2011, they made up 11.7% of the foreign-born population (New York City Department of City Planning: 10). Mexicans are the third largest immigrant group in the city with a population of 186,298, which is about 6.2% of the foreign-born population (New York City Department of City Planning: 10).
Age Differences between Mexican Immigrants and Other Latin American Groups in New York City Metropolitan Area
Mexican immigrants in New York City and the greater metropolitan area are on average younger than immigrants from other Latin American groups. In 2010, 79% of foreign-born Mexicans in the city and the surrounding metropolitan area were between the ages of 15 and 44, while only 3.6% of Mexican immigrants were age 60 and up (Bergad 2013: 20). The graph below shows the significant difference between the percentage of working age of Mexicans migrating to the U.S. and the rest of the foreign-born Latino population. Similarly, there is a noticeable difference in the relatively low percentage of Mexican immigrants over the age of 60 migrating to the U.S. as compared to the other Latino foreign-born groups.
Gender Composition of Foreign-Born Mexicans as Compared to other Immigrant Groups in New York City
In 2011, foreign-born Mexicans had the highest sex ratio, 171 males per 100 females, compared to the top twenty foreign-born groups in the city (New York City Department of City Planning 2013: 96). The foreign-born groups with the second and third highest sex ratios were India with a ratio of 124 and Pakistan with a ratio of 123 (New York City Department of City Planning: 96). Russians and Filipinos had the lowest sex ratio of 62 males per 100 females (New York City Department of City Planning: 96). The average foreign-born sex ratio is 89 males per 100 females and the average native-born sex ratio is 92 males per 100 females, telling us that Mexicans have a disproportionately large male to female ratio (New York City Department of City Planning: 96). On many occasions, groups that migrate to the country begin with high sex ratios, because men often come to the country and establish an economic foundation before their families arrive, which in turn decreases the sex ratio (New York City Department of City Planning: 97). Many Mexican men specifically, leave their wives and children behind to come to the United States in search of jobs because it is easier to focus on finding work and working if they do not have to worry about taking care of their families as well (Semple 2010: par. 16).
Average Educational Attainment for Mexican Immigrants in the NYC Metropolitan Area
In 2010, only 54% of foreign-born Mexicans in NYC and the surrounding metropolitan area had a high school degree (Semple 2011: par. 16). According to census data from 2010, 41% of Mexican immigrants living in NYC between the ages of 16 and 19 dropped out of high school (Semple 2011: par. 3). Comparatively, the dropout rate of Mexican immigrants is twice as high as the dropout rate for other major immigrant groups in the city and it is more than four times as high as the dropout rate for the city, which is less than 9% (Semple 2011: par. 4). Similar trends among Mexican immigrants can be found at the college level. Only 6% of Mexican immigrants between the ages of 19 and 23 who did not have a college degree were enrolled in college (Semple 2011: para 5). Many experts say that these trends are a result of multiple factors, such as poverty, immigration status, and the educational attainment level of their parents (Semple 2011: par. 13). Others hypothesize that it is a result of a parent’s lack of involvement in their children’s education, due to language barriers or a lack of time from working multiple jobs, that causes such trends (Semple 2011: par. 14). Understanding why young people drop out and how many of them do is critical for learning about their potential upward mobility and ability to bolster the city’s workforce (New York City Department of City Planning: 103).
“Someone did a favor [for] me. Someone helped me go to college. And now it’s my time for me to go back and do the same for the community.” - Angelo Cabrera
Current distribution of Mexican Immigrants in NYC
The majority of the foreign-born Mexican population in New York City resides in Brooklyn, Queens, and the Bronx (Bergad 2011: 10). By 2010, 30% of Mexican immigrants lived in Brooklyn, 27% lived in Queens, and 26% lived in the Bronx.[2] In 2010, neighborhoods in Queens such as Corona and Jackson Heights were popular places of settlement (Bergad 2011: 10) In Brooklyn, the majority of Mexican immigrants lived in Sunset Park and Bushwick, while popular neighborhoods in the Bronx included Mott Haven and the Fordham-Pelham-Kingsbridge districts (Bergad 2011: 23). The remaining Mexican immigrants lived predominantly in East Harlem and Washington Heights in Manhattan and in Port Richmond in Staten Island (Bergad 2011: 23). The graph below shows the population of foreign-born Mexicans in the five boroughs over a span of 30 years. It is clear that Brooklyn and Queens have been the most popular places of residence for the past 30 years. In 2010, 101,533 Mexicans resided in Brooklyn and 93,101 resided in Queens (Bergad 2013: 23). Currently, the top two neighborhoods of settlement are Corona, Queens and Sunset Park, making them ideal locations for a Mexican ethnic enclave to flourish (New York City Department of Planning 2013: 71). The graph below demonstrates the distribution of Mexican immigrants throughout the city.
Ethnic enclaves are places where immigrants of the same origin gather and concentrate their businesses. (Sullivan 2012: 3). Enclaves help immigrants to find jobs without necessarily needing knowledge of a language other than their own. Employers in enclaves are also encouraged to hire people from the same country of origin which helps them to create a more trusting and healthy work environment. Enclaves allow immigrants to stay in touch with their home country through the many restaurants that offer authentic food from the immigrants’ home country and stores that cater to their needs, such as a market that sells ingredients specific to their country of origin. In Sunset Park specifically, there are many Mexican shops along Fourth and Fifth avenues, including restaurants and grocery stores. Guadalupita II is stocked with imported Mexican goods and restaurants like Casa Vieja Restaurant, Taqueria El Maguey, and Las Conchitas Bakery provide the Mexican community with a connection to their home life (Semple 2013). The Mexican flag can also be found hanging in front of shops along the streets. The neighborhood is also home to the Basilica of Our Lady of Perpetual Help, providing the community with a way to stay connected to their religious roots. In the past, the church was predominantly Irish-American but currently, about 67% of the of the 3,000 parishioners are Latinos and the majority of them are Mexican (Semple 2013).
Sunset Park: A Mexican Enclave
Transnationalism and Assimilation
The Mexican immigrant story is incomplete without discussing Mexican transnationalism. Transnationalism refers to when an immigrant group retains connections and traditions from their home country, and are still bound by some means to their old communities. One way transnational immigrants maintain ties with their home countries is by sending money back to their families, returning for cultural or familial celebrations, and helping others from their hometown to migrate (Robert et al 2011: 239). Many Mexican immigrants of working age retain their connection to home when they migrate to the city because they come to work for money to support their families. The remittances sent back to their families help offset the financial imbalance which the Mexican economy might face because so many working age people have left the country and are no longer economically bound to their families.
The Mexican government actually promotes transnational migration for rural migrants because the alternative, permanent out-migration, would hurt the Mexican economy due to the potential loss of financial aid to local and national development (Roberts et al, 251). In 2015, remittances replaced oil revenues as Mexico’s number one source of foreign income, due to declining oil production resulting from low investments and falling oil prices (Estevez 2016: par. 1). Mexican remittances totaled $24.8 billion in 2015, while oil exports only added up to $18.7 billion (Estevez 2016: par. 4). José Alfredo Coutiño, Moody’s Director for Latin America, said, “remittances have surpassed oil revenues because there are more and better-paid jobs for Mexican workers in the U.S. and because the tracking system and accounting of money transfers between the two countries has improved” (Estevez 2016: par. 7). Although transnationalism benefits both Mexican immigrants and the Mexican economy, experts have argued that Mexican immigrants do not assimilate as fully as they would if they had not maintained connections with their old lives.
Assimilation is widely defined as the process in which an immigrant infuses him or herself into the dominant culture while losing his or her own culture. The “Assimilation” and “Acculturation” entries in the Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology mention that to assimilate means to change oneself ethnically. However, now the pattern of assimilation is considered to be a multistep process of socioeconomic, cultural, and social integration (Alba et al 2007: par. 19). Under this premise, transnational migrants are not assimilating in the strictest sense because they are not changing themselves ethnically and they are holding on to their own culture rather than losing it in the assimilation process. By keeping ties with their old lives, Mexican immigrants leave themselves in between two cultures: their own culture and American culture. However, in an interview about the book Mexicans in New York, the author Robert Smith states that scholars are now saying that, “people who are more fully assimilated, meaning that they’re participating economically in the U.S., they’re doing well educationally, many of them are more likely to be more transnationally involved” (Smith, 2011). This is an interesting deviation from the strict interpretation of what it means to be assimilated. Perhaps, a looser interpretation of what it means to be assimilated will change the mindset that it is necessary to change oneself ethically to be assimilated.
References
Alba, R., Nee, V. (2007). Assimilation. In Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology.
Badillo, D. (2009). An urban historical portrait of mexican migration to new york city. New York History, 90(1/2), 107-124.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/23185100
Bergad, L. (2013). Demographic, economic and social transformations in the mexican-origin population of the new york city
metropolitan area, 1990 – 2010. Center for Latin American, Caribbean, & Latino Studies. 1-73.
http://clacls.gc.cuny.edu/files/2013/10/Mexicans-in-New-York-Metro-Area-and-Surrounding-Counties-1990-2010.pdf
Bergad, L. (2011). The latino population of new york city, 1990-2010. Center for Latin American, Caribbean, & Latino Studies.
1-61. http://clacls.gc.cuny.edu/files/2013/10/The-Latino-Population-of-New-York-City-1990-2010.pdf
Cunytv75 . (2011, June 25). City Talk: Robert Smith, author, “Mexican New York”. [Video File].
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kj6MjZNzS_E&t=16s
Estevez, D. (2016). Remittances supersede oil as mexico’s main source of foreign income. Forbes.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/doliaestevez/2016/05/16/remittances-supersede-oil-as-mexicos-main-source-of-foreign-
income/#7a43f9861754
Gonzalez-Barrera, A., Krogstand, J. M. (2017). What we know about illegal immigration from Mexico. Pew Research Center
Light, M. T., Togunde, D. (2008). The mexican immigration debate: assimilation and public policy. International Review of
Modern Sociology 34, (no. 2). 279-93. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41421682.
New York City Department of City Planning. (2013). Characteristics of the city’s foreign-born population. 1-201.
Passel, J., Cohn, D. (2017). As Mexican share declined, U.S. unauthorized immigrant population fell in 2015 below recession
level. Pew Research Center. (2017) http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/04/25/as-mexican-share-declined-u-s-
unauthorized-immigrant-population-fell-in-2015-below-recession-level/
Passel, J., Cohn, D. (2008). Trends in unauthorized immigration: undocumented inflow now trails legal inflow. Pew Research
Center. http://www.pewhispanic.org/2008/10/02/trends-in-unauthorized-immigration/
Roberts, B. R., Frank, R., Lozano-Ascencio, F. (2011). Transnational migrant communities and mexican migration to the U.S.
Ethnic and Racial Studies, 238-266. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/014198799329477?needAccess=true
Semple, K. (2011). In new york, mexicans lag in education. New York Times.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/25/nyregion/mexicans-in-new-york-city-lag-in-education.html?
_r=1&sq=mexican%20high%20school&st=cse&scp=1&pagewanted=all
Semple, K. (2010). Mexican new yorkers are steady force in workplace. New York Times.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/23/nyregion/23mexicans.html
Semple, K. (2013). Take the a train to little guyana. New York Times.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/06/09/nyregion/new-york-citys-newest-immigrant-enclaves.html?_r=1&
Voices of New York. (2014, April 1). Mexico to the Bronx: Angelo’s Tale. [Video File].
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4y11mSllDSQ
