Politics aside, Americans still feel positive about immigrants

Americans are deeply split along partisan lines when it comes to policy. But much of the public holds positive opinions about immigrants themselves.

Gary Cameron/Reuters
A woman holds a program at a naturalization ceremony for new US citizens at the Word War II Memorial in Washington, D.C.

This electoral cycle, nativism has migrated from the tea party margins of the GOP and into the mainstream of conservative discourse, with presidential candidate Donald Trump as its icon.

But even as debates over immigration intermingle with anxieties about security and terrorism, public opinion toward immigrants themselves remains broadly favorable. That may underscore two seemingly contradictory realities in US politics: Americans’ growing acceptance of the foreign-born and an increasingly vocal opposition to unauthorized immigration.

A new national survey of Americans from the Pew Center conducted from Aug. 9 to Aug. 16 and published on Thursday, found that more than three-fourths of respondents agreed that "undocumented immigrants are as hard-working and honest as U.S. citizens", while 67 percent said they were "no more likely than citizens to commit serious crimes." Seventy-one percent of Americans responded that undocumented immigrants in the US mostly fill jobs that citizens do not want.

Those findings reflect warming attitudes toward immigrants as a whole over the decades. In April, the Pew Center found that 59 percent of Americans agreed that immigrants strengthened the country, compared to 33 percent who said they were a burden.

That marked a "dramatic" shift since 1994, the first year the Pew Center carried out that survey, when it found that the public's beliefs were practically a mirror image of what they are today: Sixty-three percent of Americans that year said immigrants were a burden, compared to just 31 percent who said they strengthened the country.

"You see a longer-term, basic trend toward a greater feeling of acceptance toward immigrants themselves," says Roberto Suro, a professor of public policy and journalism at the University of Southern California.

In the 1970s, with the population's percentage of foreign-born reaching historical lows (4.7 percent in 1970), Americans began to turn restrictionist, even as public policy grew more liberal. Since then, the percentage of foreign-born has risen to more than 12 percent, thanks to large-scale immigration from Latin America and Asia.

Part of the reason why much of the public now sees immigrants in a positive light, Mr. Suro tells The Christian Science Monitor, is that Americans in much of the country have grown accustomed to living with them.

"I think it's partially familiarity," he says. "We've just gotten a lot more used to it. The world didn't come to an end."

So what might explain the resurgence of nativism? Some studies have linked it to economic downturns, a theory that might seem to be borne out by surveys showing that supporters of Donald Trump tend to hail from communities with ailing economies.

But partisanship itself may also be behind such feeling. Americans may tend to feel positively toward immigrants, but on points of immigration policy, their opinions diverge sharply according to party identification.

"The loudest voices in both parties have tended to espouse very much opposed views of immigration policies," says Suro. Those who listen to those political leaders often find media framing around immigration posed in terms that echo their grievances. "We know that highly partisan people tend to go to news sources that are echo chambers for certain views, and the partisan media on the question of immigration is highly polarized."

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Politics aside, Americans still feel positive about immigrants
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today