Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 15

PreAP Demographic Reading Guide

Read the accompanying articles, then answer the questions associated them.

Article 1: How will Austin handle population growth?


Article Link >>

1. In 2040, what do you think will be the average home price in Austin? Explain your reasoning.

I think that the average home price in Austin in 2040 will be around $600,000 because our
population is expected to double and since that is such a significant growth, house prices will
continue to rise.

Article 2: UT Austin's automatic admissions change due to rapid Texas population


growth
Article Link >>

2. Why did the University of Texas lower automatic admissions to 6%? The University of Texas had
to lower the automatic admissions to 6% because the population of Texas and the amount of
applications they received increased by a lot.
3. What could be one good consequence of the change? A good result of the change would be that
kids may work harder now to get into the college of their choice because it’s becoming a lot
more competitive. This could also give more opportunities to students out of state to attend UT
because not as many spots are taken up by in-state students.
4. What could be one bad consequence of the change? A negative consequence of the new rule
would be that a lot of kids that were planning on attending UT due to the 7% rule may not be
accepted when the rule is changed to 6% and they have to change their college path. Also the
groups may be less diverse since they are accepting less people.

Article 3: It’s official: Japan’s population is dramatically shrinking


Article Link >>

5. What birth rate (measured in this case as kids per woman) is needed to sustain population
growth? To sustain population growth in Japan the birth rate needs to be at least 2.1 per
woman.
6. What is Japan’s birth rate per woman? Right now Japan’s birth rate per woman is 1.4.
7. Why should Japan be concerned about a shrinking population? Japan should be concerned
about their shrinking population because it means that there is a push factor in Japan that is
pushing people out and that will continue to happen if someone doesn’t fix it.
8. If you were the Prime Minister of Japan, what would you do to combat a shrinking population? If
I was the Prime Minister of Japan, I would give the citizens more accomodations to help them
live longer and to make them want to stay in Japan.

Article 4: Population growth in Africa: grasping the scale of the challenge


Article Link >>

9. What is the GDP per capita in Niger? In Niger, the GDP per capita is less than $1 per day.
10. Over the past couple of decades, why have many family planning programs failed in Africa?
Family planning programs in Africa are failing because people are not properly taught about the
options and side-effects and religious teachings are opposed.
PreAP Demographic Reading Guide
11. What are some positive signs that things could be turning around? In Kenya and Zambia
contraceptive use grew because they informed their citizens about their options.

Article 5: There’s No Solution in Sight to the Migrant Crisis in the European Union
Article Link >>

12. Describe the “Great Debate” between the Left and the Right. People that put themselves on the
left side of the debate believe that societies should embrace all people and understand
everyone’s culture. The right side disagrees with the left and believes that mass migration
should be better monitored.
13. Why might immigration lead to Nationalism? Immigration could lead to Nationalism because it
may cause the country to join together and preserve the country’s culture.
Article 6: Some fight, others flee over Texas immigration crackdown
Article Link >>

14. Pretend you and your family are immigrants. You are a citizen, but your parents are not. After
reading this article, what might some of your fears or concerns be? I would be worried that my
parents could be deported and separated from me or they could be arrested.
15. Do you believe the recent crackdown on immigration in the US is a good thing? Explain. I don’t
think that the crackdown on immigration is a good thing because many people try to move to
the US so they can live a better life and provide for their family but these restrictions keep
people from doing that.

Article 7: Trends in Migration to the US


Article Link >>

16. Describe the three waves of immigration into the United States. The first wave began in 1820
and it was a lot of the British immigrating to the US. The second wave was full of Irish and
German Catholics in the 1840s and 1850s. And the third wave between 1880 and 1914 brought
over 20 million European immigrants to the United States.
PreAP Demographic Reading Guide
Article 1: How will Austin handle population growth?
Article Link >>

This city is crowded. It comes as no surprise to Austinites. And it's only getting worse. The city's
population is expected to increase to nearly 4 million people by 2040. How is Austin going to handle this
growth? KVUE decided to find out.

THE DEMAND FOR HOUSING


The median home price in Austin has skyrocketed from $182,500 in 2006 to $289,990 in 2016. Realtors
said that this growth is causing a shift in population.

"One thing to look at is the areas outside of the metropolitan areas," said Remax Associates Group
Realtor Julie Downs. "Buda and Hays in the month of September had incredible growth, nine percent
increase in their market, 350 home sales, which is great all the areas surrounding Austin are
experiencing tremendous growth."

The problem is that prices are also rising in Hays County where the median home price right now is
$253,250. It is up nearly 8 percent in the last month.

This growth is causing an increase in the number of people who are forced to rent because they can't
afford to buy a home. Forty-seven percent of renters in Austin said that they are renting because they
can't afford to purchase.

Buyers are advised to look for down payment assistance programs and first-time buyer help. They are
also advised to buy now because the prices are only expected to increase. We are definitely in a seller's
market.

THE DEMAND FOR HOTELS


The housing market isn't the only thing exploding in Austin. People are traveling here in record numbers
-- both for work and for play.

Austin Bergstrom International Airport representatives report passenger travel is continuing to grow
year by year.

In the last 12 months, about 12.2 million people traveled through ABIA. The year before that, about 11.4
million traveled through the airport. That is a 7 percent increase in passenger travel in the last year,
amounting to 12.2 million people traveling through ABIA.

Many of those people are staying in hotels and the demand for rooms is increasing.

Many people are calling Austin a developer's dream, which is why more and more companies are
choosing Austin as a prime area to build.

"Developers really see Austin as a great place to come in and invest in product because they know we're
doing a very good job in selling that product," said Shilpa Baker with the Austin Convention and Visitors
Bureau.

Those behind the Austin-based development company New Waterloo agree, saying their two properties,
South Congress Hotel and Hotel Ella, have been very successful.
PreAP Demographic Reading Guide
"Our hotels run in the 80 percent occupancy range, which is pretty much the norm for Austin right now
and probably about 20 points above average for most hotels in most communities in the U.S.," New
Waterloo partner Bart Knaggs said.

So far, 2016 has been a big year for the hospitality industry in Austin.

Tourism officials report by the end of this year, three new hotels will have opened, adding more than
3,000 rooms.

Over the last decade, demand has increased by about 5 percent each year and the supply of rooms have
kept pace.

The Austin Convention and Visitors Bureau reports the average price for a room in the Austin metro is
amounting to about $130 dollars per night.

Find more information from The Austin Convention and Visitors Bureau here.

THE DEMAND FOR WATER


One of the things people may not consider as homes and hotels continue being built are the resources
available to those who inhabit them.

All of Austin's drinking water comes from natural resources -- either aquifers or reservoirs. As droughts
have shown us in the past, those resources can vanish quickly.

Currently, rainwater replenishes our underground aquifers and brings more water into the Colorado
River. That water flows from northwest Texas down to Austin, where we have a series of dams and
reservoirs to collect it.

Growing population means not only more people, but more industry and potentially more agriculture.
Development puts a strain on the river.

The Colorado River Alliance has been working on this problem. They developed a game to teach kids
how difficult it might be for us to last until 2040 with a population boom.

The game puts the player in the shoes of a city planner making decisions as the population grows. Do
you store water for the future? Dam a new lake? Or put money into scientific research for new
solutions?

Executive Director of the Colorado River Alliance Brent Lyles said that decisions such as watering your
lawn less or making sure to turn off the water when you brush your teeth can add up.

PUTTING IT IN CONTEXT
To put all of this in context, we looked at the median home prices for metropolitan areas with
populations similar to Austin.

In 2015, Austin's population was 2 million. Charlotte, N.C. has a population of 2.4 million and
Indianapolis, IA has 1.9 million people. But the median home price in Austin exceeds Charlotte and
Indianapolis by quite a bit.
PreAP Demographic Reading Guide
In the Austin area, the median price of a home is $225,000. In the Charlotte metropolitan area the
median home prices is $138,000 and in Indianapolis it is $114,450.

In 2040, Austin's population is expected to be double what it is today. Cities in that projected population
range include Detroit with a population of 4.3 million people, Phoenix with a population of 4.5 million
people and San Francisco with a population of 4.6 million people.

A home in the Detroit metropolitan area costs $147,000. In Phoenix, the median home price is $205,000
and in San Francisco a home would cost around $700,000.

Like most facts and figures, median home prices aren't the only statistic that predicts success. Other
elements are certainly a factor. But it leaves us wondering: Will Austin become a San Francisco or
Detroit? Or can we keep the home price more manageable as the city grows?

Article 2: UT Austin's automatic admissions change due to rapid Texas


population growth
Article Link >>

Author: Kevin Reece , WFAA

Published: 5:31 PM CDT September 18, 2017

Updated: 5:31 PM CDT September 18, 2017

UT Austin's automatic admissions change due to rapid Texas population growth

Starting in 2019, being near the top of your class and earning an automatic spot will get more
competitive too if your eyes are on UT Austin.

Admission to The University of Texas at Austin gets more competitive every year. Starting in 2019, being
near the top of your class and earning an automatic spot will get more competitive too.

The university announced Friday that students hoping to enroll as undergraduates in the fall of 2019 will
be eligible for automatic admission if they are in the top 6% of their high school graduating class. The
previous standard was the top 7%.

"It will indeed effect a lot of kids, "said certified college counselor and admissions advisor Catherine
Marrs. "Because it is hard to be in that top, even 10%, particularly 6%." Marrs, who runs her own firm
Marrs College Admissions Advisors, is currently helping 55 college candidates navigate the application
process to various universities.

The state's 'Top 10 Percent Rule' is still in place at all other public universities in the state; the top 10%
gaining automatic admission to the public Texas university of their choice. Enacted by the Texas
Legislature the rule, which certainly has its critics in larger more competitive school districts, is intended
to offer a college education to a more diverse group of students: enabling UT access to students from
each high school in the state not just the top performing students at the top performing or largest
schools.
PreAP Demographic Reading Guide
But, faced with a dramatically increasing population in the state and an equally dramatic increase in
applications at UT Austin, the university opted to make the qualification for automatic admission more
strict. In 2013 UT Austin had approximately 38,000 applicants. In 2017 that number increased to 51,000.

But of those admitted to the university each year, the school is allowed to cap its number of automatic
admissions at 75% of the total incoming freshman class, with the remaining 25% based on grades, GPA,
and other factors. Faced with a rising number of applications, the University says to maintain that cap it
must adjust the automatic admissions percentage. That percentage is subject to change each year.

In a written statement UT Austin President Gregory L. Fenves says the university "is enrolling about
1,000 more freshmen than it did six years ago. We accomplished this by dramatically improving
four-year graduation rates, making it possible for us to serve more students. We are committed to even
further improvements, which will continue to expand access to UT."

So what is the advice from a college counselor? Be ready to compete.

"So what I tell 8th graders is that when you start high school, if UT is even in the back of your mind, that
you must start out doing really well from day one," said Marrs. "That you must start thinking about
making good grades, performing well, getting to know your teachers, in 9th grade. And that kids just
need to realize that there is a greater selectivity going on right now not only in Texas but everywhere
with colleges. Because they can't necessarily accommodate the growth."

According to the UT Austin admissions report issued to the state legislature, in-coming freshmen in the
automatic admission program are more diverse than the rest of the incoming class in 2016. 'Top Ten
Percenters' were 35% White and 30% Hispanic. The non-'Top Ten Percenters' were 46% White and 17%
Hispanic. The percentage of Asian students (23%) and Black students (5%) essentially stayed the same in
each group.

Copyright 2016 WFAA

Article 3: It’s official: Japan’s population is dramatically shrinking


Article Link >>

By Adam Taylor February 26, 2016

It's finally happened. After years, if not decades, of warnings about Japan's aging population and its low
birth rate, the day is here. Japan's official census shows that the country's population has shrunk.

And not by an inconsiderable amount either: The 2010 census showed a population of 128,057,352, but
the 2015 figure, released Friday, shows just 127,110,000.

Japan's population had shrunk by almost 1 million people in five years.

While data on birth and death rates has long given clear evidence that Japan's population was on the
decline, this is the first time since records began that the census has confirmed the nation's population
has actually dropped (the blip between 1940 and 1950 in the chart is largely due to the fact that many
Japanese soldiers were stationed abroad and Okinawa island, then controlled by the United States, was
not included in the census).
PreAP Demographic Reading Guide
The following chart, which shows the population change between each census since 1950, gives a sense
of just how dramatic an effect Japan's dwindling demographics are having:

So does this come as a surprise to anyone? Nope, not at all. Almost a decade ago, The Washington Post's
Fred Hiatt warned that Japan had "embarked on a path no developed nation has ever followed -- of
sustained and inexorable population decline."

Japan's birth rate has long been significantly below the 2.1 per woman that is needed to sustain growth
— it currently stands at about 1.4 per woman — and the deficit isn't made up by significant levels of
immigration like it is in some other nations. Nearly a third of all Japanese citizens were older than 65 in
2015; Research from the National Institute of Population and Social Securities Research suggests that
number will rise to 40 percent by 2050.

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has said that keeping the population of Japan above 100 million is a
priority. However, actually doing that may be difficult. Last year, the Population Division of the U.N.
Department of Economic and Social Affairs released a population estimate for Japan that showed the
country would dip below 100 million shortly after the middle of the 21st century. By the end of the
century, Japan stood to lose 34 percent of its population, the United Nations found.

Japan is far from alone here. The U.N. has estimated that a total of 48 countries will see their population
decline by 2050. Moldova is expected to lose more than half its population by 2100, the worst decline of
anywhere in the world. But Moldova is tiny. Japan is the third largest economy in the world. It's a crucial
trading partner for the United States and China. How exactly will its declining population affect the
wider world? Looks like we'll start finding out soon.

Article 4: Population growth in Africa: grasping the scale of the


challenge
Article Link >>

While population growth slows in the rest of the world, it continues to rise in Africa. What are the
implications?

The last 100 years have seen an incredible increase in the planet’s population. Some parts of the world
are now seeing smaller increments of growth, and some, such as Japan, Germany, and Spain, are
actually experiencing population decreases.

The continent of Africa, however, is not following this pattern. Now home to 1.2 billion (up from just 477
million in 1980), Africa is projected by the United Nations Population Division to see a slight acceleration
of annual population growth in the immediate future.

In the past year the population of the African continent grew by 30 million. By the year 2050, annual
increases will exceed 42 million people per year and total population will have doubled to 2.4 billion,
according to the UN. This comes to 3.5 million more people per month, or 80 additional people per
minute. At that point, African population growth would be able to re-fill an empty London five times a
year.

From any big-picture perspective, these population dynamics will have an influence on global
demography in the 21st century. Of the 2.37 billion increase in population expected worldwide by 2050,
PreAP Demographic Reading Guide
Africa alone will contribute 54%. By 2100, Africa will contribute 82% of total growth: 3.2 billion of the
overall increase of 3.8 billion people. Under some projections, Nigeria will add more people to the
world’s population by 2050 than any other country.

The dynamics at play are straightforward. Since the middle of the last century, improvements in public
health have led to a inspiring decrease in infant and child mortality rates. Overall life expectancy has also
risen. The 12 million Africans born in 1955 could expect to live only until the age of 37. Encouragingly,
the 42 million Africans born this year can expect to live to the age of 60.

Meanwhile, another key demographic variable – the number of children the average African woman is
likely to have in her lifetime, or total fertility rate – remains elevated compared to global rates. The total
fertility rate of Africa is 88% higher than the world standard (2.5 children per woman globally, 4.7
children per woman in Africa).

In Niger, where GDP per capita is less than $1 per day, the average number of children a woman is likely
to have in her life is more than seven. Accordingly, the country’s current population of 20 million is
projected to grow by 800,000 people over the next 12 months. By mid-century, the population may have
expanded to 72 million people and will still be growing by 800,000 people – every 18 weeks. By the year
2100, the country could have more than 209 million people and still be expanding rapidly. This
projectionis based on an assumption that Niger’s fertility will gradually fall to 2.5 children over the
course of the century. If fertility does not fall at all – and it has not budged in the last 60 years – the
country’s population projection for 2100 veers towards 960 million people.

As recently as 2004, the United Nations’ expected Africa to grow only to 2.2 billion people by 2100. That
number now looks very out of date.

What has caught demographers off-guard – and has required such dramatic revisions – is that African
fertility has not fallen as expected. Precipitous declines in fertility in Asia and Latin America, from five
children per woman in the 1970s to around 2.5 today, led many to believe Africa would follow a similar
course.

Strong national family planning programmes in various parts of the world jump-started a virtuous circle:
fertility declines allowed more educational and other resources to be deployed per capita than
otherwise would have been possible. In turn, relatively more educated girls and women were able to
increase their economic value and societal status – allowing for even greater agency to access and use
contraception.

Unfortunately, since the early 1990s, family planning programmes in Africa have not had the same
attention, resulting in slow, sometimes negligible, fertility declines. In a handful of countries, previous
declines have stalled altogether and are reversing. Beyond unreliable supplies of contraceptives in many
countries the greater obstacles to lower fertility are often male opposition to contraception, religious
teachings, social norms, or misinformation about contraceptive options and their side-effects.

These dynamics create the opposite of a virtuous circle. Rapid population growth helps overstrain
educational systems and local economies and can be a challenge to any government. Many areas of
Australia and England, both fast-growing countries, are contending with overcrowded schools,
congested highways and stratospheric housing costs. The reality is that as the size of any populace
expands, governments must construct infrastructure apace.
PreAP Demographic Reading Guide
Failure to do so results in per capita declines in living standards. In already economically strained
nations, physical goods such as roads, bridges, water supplies, sewers and electricity systems are crucial,
but scaling-up educational, public health and security systems are also required. Unemployment,
instability and entrenched poverty follow suit. Uneducated girls and women are less likely to overcome
social barriers to contraceptive use, such as domineering paternalistic cultures or religious prohibition.
Fertility remains high and human suffering builds steam.

A few heroic efforts, such as Family Planning 2020, are attempting to stimulate family planning
programmes across the continent, and there are some signs of success. Recent figures from Kenya and
Zambia show substantial strengthening of contraceptive use among married women. In Kenya, 58% of
married women now use modern contraception, and in Zambia this measure has risen from 33% to 45%
in the last three years.

In both cases, the catalysts for improvements were government commitment and commensurate
budget financing. The virtuous circle may not be completely out of reach, but many more African
governments must make haste and make substantial investments in contraceptive information and
access for their people.

Article 5: There’s No Solution in Sight to the Migrant Crisis in the


European Union
Article Link >>

By Jeffrey T. Fowler, Ph.D.


Faculty Member, School of Security and Global Studies at American Military University

The nations of the European Union and the United States are justifiably concerned about Islamic
extremism. At the heart of this dilemma is what has been called a clash of civilizations. While there are
certainly many millions of peaceful Muslims in the world, there is also a radical element that seeks to
destabilize the EU and ultimately to replace it with a caliphate.

The stated intent of this radical and increasingly powerful minority is the destruction of Western culture
in Europe. The causes of the current crisis are rooted in colonial and post-colonial immigration from
former colonies into Europe due to war and the continuing instability in the Middle East since 9/11.

The European Great Powers and Colonialism


One could easily write a large book on European colonialism and its effects. This has been done
numerous times. Suffice it to say that in 1914, the European Great Powers ruled a very large part of the
world. The colonization of Africa in the 19th and early part of the 20th century was indicative of that
trend.

Under that system, the European powers took raw materials from the underdeveloped parts of the
world and sold them finished goods. This clearly rapacious system harmed many emerging nations and
discouraged immigration from these colonies to Europe.

This system continued until the end of World War II when it crumbled as more and more colonial
entities began to choose independence from their European masters. Once countries in Asia, Africa and
PreAP Demographic Reading Guide
other parts of the world were free, immigration to Europe increased as emigrants left poverty and
corrupt governments in hopes of finding a better life abroad.

Unfortunately, many immigrants to Europe seeking advancement and a better life lacked the skills
necessary to ensure their success in a highly industrialized society. The socialist states of Europe
provided the immigrants with the basic life necessities, which only encouraged more immigration. The
civil war in Syria and the rise of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) spurred the most recent wave of
immigrants to the EU.

Assimilation or Deliberate Separation?


The main topic of debate on refugee immigration to Europe today is the question of assimilation or
deliberate separation? Historically, in both the U.S. and Europe, immigrants sought to assimilate into the
host culture while maintaining their cultural and language heritage. Maintaining one’s heritage and
assimilation into a host culture are not opposing goals.

The threat to Western societies comes from those who immigrate to the EU with no intention of
assimilating, those who wish to enforce a deliberate separation from the host culture. This immigrant
population (small in number, but ruthless and increasingly powerful) seeks to overthrow the existing
host culture and replace it with its own views on ethics, religion and justice that are far removed from
Western norms. This is a problem with militant migrants today particularly in the UK, Belgium, France,
the Netherlands, and Sweden.

With the exception of Switzerland and Hungary, few European countries have taken truly decisive
action to quell migrant extremism.

The Great Debate between Left and Right


What to do about mass migration and radicalization of some immigrants living in the EU has been
debated for years. The Pew Foundation broke down European views on the refugee crisis into a series of
five charts.

The Left claims that globalism and cultural relativism teach us that societies must embrace all people.
This perspective, as well as the opposing mainly isolationist view, have been extensively debated in
Europe. Some Europeans who wish to keep immigration at a high level, even though there are many
problems, have been labeled as apologists. German Chancellor Angela Merkel has been accused of this
position.

Others have been labelled right-wing extremists for taking the opposing view. Some might consider the
Polish EU Member of Parliament Janusz Korwin-Mikke, a rightwing extremist. Then there are those who
changed their minds on the issue due to events such as British Prime Minister Theresa May. At first she
was quite supportive of the Muslim population in Britain. However, the Manchester bombing and the
London Bridge attack seem to have changed her mind somewhat. Having been roundly defeated in last
week’s snap election, we don’t know what her next steps will be, if she manages to retain power.

Are There Any Viable Solutions?


Recent research by the Pew Research Center suggests that much of the European body politic is not
pleased with how the EU has managed the refugee crisis. But there are no easy solutions. There are
PreAP Demographic Reading Guide
three primary perspectives on how to solve the problem. As noted above, there is the view of the liberal
left, the view of the conservative right, and those who hold to a more moderate stance.

One of the disturbing issues is that the terms “nationalism” and “populism” are seen as negatives in the
immigration debate. While Europe has a very long history of nation-state conflicts, there is certainly
nothing wrong in love of one’s country and culture, and wishing to preserve them. Populism is also
necessary at times.

In the U.S., the recent presidential election highlighted that perhaps a sizable portion of American voters
were simply tired of what they saw as cultural elitist stances by both the Republican and Democratic
parties. Populism can disturb the status quo, as we’ve seen in Senator Bernie Sander’s 2016 populist
campaign in the U.S. presidential election and the recent victorious campaign by President Emmanuel
Macron in France.

Indeed, populism can lead to positive changes either by replacing traditional parties or causing those
parties to modify their positions for the public good. Only time will tell how the immigration crisis in the
EU will be decided. But if history is any indicator, there will be an end to it one day.

Article 6: Some fight, others flee over Texas immigration crackdown


Article Link >>

AUSTIN, Texas -- Abril Gallardo rode 15 hours in a van to urge fellow Hispanics living in the Texas capital
of Austin to fight back against a new state law targeting "sanctuary cities," an immigration crackdown
reminiscent of one her home state of Arizona enacted a few years ago.

"Fear motivated me to get involved," said Gallardo, a 26-year-old Mexican native who entered the U.S.
illegally at age 12.

Gallardo was among dozens of activists from around the country who canvassed over Memorial Day
weekend in Austin. They informed anxious immigrants about rights they retain despite the law, urged
grassroots resistance against it and were joining local organizers for an all-day Monday rally on the
grounds of the Texas Capitol.

Under Arizona's 2010 "show your papers" measure, which was eventually struck down in court, police
were allowed to inquire about a person's immigration status during routine interactions such as traffic
stops. One positive effect of what Gallardo views as an odious law was that it emboldened immigrants
to "come together to fight for their families."

Under the Texas measure, which Gov. Greg Abbott signed this month, local police chiefs and sheriffs
would be required -- under the threat of jail and removal from office -- to comply with federal requests
to hold criminal suspects for possible deportation. Police officers would also have the option to ask the
immigration status of anyone they stop. The bill was viewed as a crackdown on Austin and other
"sanctuary cities," a term that has no legal meaning but describes parts of the country where police are
not tasked with helping enforce federal immigration law.

CBS Austin reports that hundreds of protesters filled the Texas Capitol to speak out against the law
banning "sanctuary cities" on Monday afternoon. Raven Ambers, of CBS Austin, posted images of the
protest to Twitter.
PreAP Demographic Reading Guide
Protesters wearing red "lucha" or "fight" T-shirts chanted their opposition to the new law, forcing the
Texas House to interrupt its floor session.

About 40 minutes into the proceedings on the final day of the legislative session, protesters began
cheering and chanting from the gallery: "Here to stay!" and "Hey, hey, ho, ho SB4 has got to go!"

Some waved banners reading "See you in court!"

The House leadership stopped the session and asked state troopers to clear the gallery. The
demonstration continued for several minutes as officers led people out of the chamber peacefully in
small groups.

The resistance in Texas is coming too late for a small portion of foreign-born residents who have begun
evacuating the state, fearing policies that could make their ordinary lives more difficult.

Their ranks are still too small to quantify, but a larger exodus -- similar to that what occurred in Arizona
-- could have a profound effect on the Texas economy. The state has more than 1 million immigrants
illegally in the country, according to the Migration Policy Institute.

Some are abandoning Texas for more liberal states, where they feel safer -- even if it means
relinquishing lives they've spent years building.

Jose, a 43-year-old Mexican living in the U.S. illegally since 2001, and his wife Holly left Austin for Seattle
in January in anticipation of Texas' immigration crackdown. That meant parting with Jose's grown son,
their community of friends and their beloved home of eight years.

"I felt like we ripped our roots up and threw ourselves across the country," said Holly, a 40-year-old
Kentucky native who wanted to protect her husband.

Holly said as soon as President Trump was elected president, she and her husband began preparing to
move. They expected Texas would "follow Trump's agenda trying to force local law enforcement to do
immigration's job." And when they heard Texas had approved a crackdown on "sanctuary cities" she said
they "finalized the decision."

"I was living in constant fear in Texas," said Holly, who works as an immigration paralegal and has been
married to Jose for 11 years. "Now I know my husband is safe, and I don't have to worry every day about
whether he's going to come home."

Others are doing the same. Miriam, a 34-year-old Mexican house cleaner who has spent the past 10
years in Austin, plans to move with her husband and two U.S.-citizen children to Oklahoma in
September, when Texas' law goes into effect. Like Jose, Holly and others who were interviewed, she
asked that her full name not be used to prevent possible deportation.

"We can't even go out to get food or to go to work," she said of the law. "A police officer can find you in
any place."

Texas cities and immigrant rights' groups have challenged the legality of the law, hopeful for a legal
victory like the one in Arizona, but that could take months to have any effect.
PreAP Demographic Reading Guide
Abbott defended the measure, arguing after he signed it that the U.S. is "nation of laws and Texas is
doing it parts to keep it that way."

Austin immigration attorney Kate Lincoln-Goldfinch, who conducts know-your-rights workshops, said
she has heard far more confusion about Texas' new law than plans to leave - at least for now.

"Most people are totally freaked out, but don't understand what the law means or what they should
do," Lincoln-Goldfinch said.

Gallardo said immigrants can help "dismantle" the Texas law, like civil rights groups' legal challenges did
to Arizona's.

"My family had two choices: One was to hide or leave the state, and the other was to join a grassroots
organization and start taking to the streets," said Gallardo, who has since qualified for the Deferred
Action for Childhood Arrivals program, shielding her from deportation - after the Arizona law had been
passed and overturned. "More than ever people now should stay in Texas."

Article 7: Trends in Migration to the US


Article Link >>

Under the motto e pluribus unum (from many, one), U.S. presidents frequently remind Americans that
they share the immigrant experience of beginning anew in the land of opportunity.1 Immigration is
widely considered to be in the national interest, since it permits individuals to better themselves as it
strengthens the United States.

For its first 100 years, the United States facilitated immigration, welcoming foreigners to settle a vast
country. Beginning in the 1880s, an era of qualitative immigration restrictions began as certain types of
immigrants were barred: prostitutes, workers with contracts that tied them to a particular employer for
several years, and Chinese. In the 1920s, quantitative restrictions or quotas set a ceiling on the number
of immigrants accepted each year.2

Immigration law changed in 1965. Qualitative and quantitative restrictions were maintained, but
national origin preferences that favored the entry of Europeans were dropped. U.S. immigration policy
began to favor the entry of foreigners who had U.S. relatives and foreigners requested by U.S.
employers. During the 1970s, the origins of most immigrants changed from Europe to Latin America and
Asia: Between 2000 and 2009 over three-fourths of the 10 million immigrants admitted were from Latin
America and Asia.

U.S. immigration has occurred in waves, with peaks followed by troughs (see figure). The first wave of
immigrants, mostly English-speakers from the British Isles, arrived before records were kept beginning in
1820. The second wave, dominated by Irish and German Catholics in the 1840s and 1850s, challenged
the dominance of the Protestant church and led to a backlash against Catholics, defused only when the
Civil War practically stopped immigration in the 1860s.
PreAP Demographic Reading Guide
The third wave, between 1880 and 1914, brought over 20 million European immigrants to the United
States, an average of 650,000 a year at a time when the United States had 75 million residents. Most
southern and eastern European immigrants arriving via New York’s Ellis Island found factory jobs in
Northeastern and Midwestern cities. Third-wave European immigration was slowed first by World War I
and then by numerical quotas in the 1920s.

Between the 1920s and 1960s, immigration paused. Immigration was low during the Depression of the
1930s, and in some years more people left the United States than arrived. Immigration rose after World
War II ended, as veterans returned with European spouses and Europeans migrated. The fourth wave
began after 1965, and has been marked by rising numbers of immigrants from Latin America and Asia.
The United States admitted an average 250,000 immigrants a year in the 1950s, 330,000 in the 1960s,
450,000 in the 1970s, 735,000 in the 1980s, and over 1 million a year since the 1990s.

Almost 110,000 foreigners enter the United States on a typical day. Three major entry doors exist: a
front door for immigrants, a side door for temporary visitors, and a back door for the unauthorized.
Almost 3,100 foreigners a day receive immigrant visas or green cards that allow them to live, work, and
become naturalized U.S. citizens after five years. Over 105,000 tourist, business, and student visitors
arrive; some stay only a few days, while others stay for several years. Finally, over 1,500 unauthorized
foreigners a day were settling in the United States until the 2008 recession reduced their number
sharply. Half of the unauthorized eluded apprehension at the Mexico-U.S. border, while the others
entered legally through the side door but violated the terms of their visitor visas by working or not
departing.3

During the 1990s, contentious debates arose about the relationship of immigrants and their children to
the U.S. educational, welfare, and political systems; and more broadly, whether the immigration system
served U.S. national interests. Since then, the immigration debate has centered on preventing the entry
of terrorists, controlling unauthorized migration, and dealing with U.S. employers who request
foreigners to fill jobs.

Today, unauthorized migration is the main policy concern. The number of unauthorized foreigners
peaked at 12.2 million in 2007, fell by almost 1 million during the recent recession, and may have
increased again with economic recovery. Debates over how to prevent unauthorized migration and deal
with the unauthorized already living in the United States are polarized. Many Republicans, especially in
the House of Representatives, prefer an enforcement-first approach—more agents and fences on the
Mexico-U.S. border and a requirement that U.S. employers submit data on newly hired employees to
prevent unauthorized workers from getting jobs. President Obama and many Democrats prefer
“comprehensive immigration reform” that includes more border and interior enforcement to discourage
entry and employment, but also a path to legal immigrant status.
PreAP Demographic Reading Guide
In 2006 and 2013, the U.S. Senate approved comprehensive immigration reform bills that included a
path to legalization. The Senate’s Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration
Modernization Act of 2013 would:

● Step up enforcement to deter illegal migration.


● Provide a 13-year path to U.S. citizenship for unauthorized foreigners who arrived in the United
States before Dec. 31, 2011, and remained continuously since their arrival.
● Create new guest worker programs for low-skilled farm and nonfarm workers.
● Increase the number of temporary work visas available to foreigners with college degrees
coming to the United States to fill jobs.

The House approved an enforcement-first bill in 2005 and has opted for a piecemeal approach to
immigration reform in 2013, with bills that increase border and interior enforcement and expand guest
worker programs for farm and information technology (IT) workers.

REFERENCES
1. Exceptions are Native Americans, slaves, and those who became U.S. citizens by purchase or
conquest, such as French nationals who became Americans with the Louisiana Purchase,
Mexicans who became Americans with the end of the Mexican War, and Puerto Ricans who
became U.S. citizens after the American victory over Spain in 1898.
2. Susan Martin, ​A Nation of Immigrants​ (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010).
3. U.S. immigration statistics distinguish between Entries Without Inspection (EWIs) and
overstayers, those who entered legally and violated the terms of their entry or did not depart.
About 55 percent of the 11 million unauthorized foreigners in 2012 were EWIs.

Вам также может понравиться