The United States is a country of immigrants – even more so if they are counted successfully in the current 2010 Census. Extra efforts have been made to reach previously undercounted populations, including those arriving as migrants.

One reason that recent immigrants are less likely to participate may be lack of information about the Census, held only once each decade, and that it is a process that has not have taken place in their country of origin. Others, particularly those who are irregular and without paperwork, may fear that any personal information they submit will not remain confidential.

Yesterday the Pew Hispanic Center distributed the results of a telephone survey showing that messaging about the Census had reached many Hispanics across the country. Interestingly, 78% of those who were US-born said they planned to return the Census form, as opposed to 91% of who were born overseas. Does this show any differences about levels of suspicion, such that those in the country longer become less trustful of the government? Or by this measure, should immigrants be considered more interested in being engaged citizens?

Two weeks ago, nationwide rallies for immigration reform demonstrated a continuing interest in and need to address undocumented persons living in the United States. The Census attempts to tally their presence. The next year or two will show whether they will become more than just a number.

It can be tough to be a migrant – but even worse should one be persecuted by the local population.

By moving to a new place economic migrants – and displaced persons – leave behind well-known surroundings, and often other family members too. They may not speak the language at their new location, might have to accept a job that does not fit their educational level or skill set, and can be without legal documents, making them vulnerable to exploitation. Generally they look past these negative factors, seeking a better life and seeing a more positive future. With time, difficulties can be overcome.

South Africa has traditionally served as a receptor country for migrants and those displaced from neighboring countries. This includes thousands of Zimbabweans, who fled deteriorating conditions in their country, which suffered under an absurdly high hyperinflation rate (printing a 100 trillion dollar note as prices doubled every day), and the dictatorship of Robert Mugabe (who grudgingly accepted a power-sharing agreement with Morgan Tsvangirai, that began in February 2009, and remains unsteady).

In May 2008, however, widespread xenophobia and violence led to the deaths of more than 62 people in South Africa. Immigrants faced blame, whether based on claims that they took jobs away from locals, or presented a threat to public safety.

A New York Times article describes more recent attacks on Zimbabwean immigrants after the death of a local man. Like with many events, there are two sides to the story. Zimbabweans in South Africa do not deserve the blame for all negative economic conditions. Likewise, not all South Africans are intolerant of outsiders – the article recounts how a local teenager guided a Zimbabwean friend to her home, where he received shelter and protection.

The global economic recession has had mixed effects on migration. In some cases it led to clear decreases in remittance-sending, while many migrants also lost their jobs. In the United States, for example, a large number of immigrants worked in low-skilled industries such as construction, where available jobs dropped precipitously after the collapse of the housing industry. The unemployment rate for Central Americans and Mexicans, who make up the majority of immigrants in the US, is a few points worse than the national average. (October 2009 unemployment rates: 9.5% for native-born; 11.5% for Mexicans and Central Americans)

Interestingly, however, rather than causing a mass outflow of migrants from developed nations to countries of origin, a recent study by Migration Information Source found that most migrants are remaining where they are. This may be due to a number of factors, some of which are:

• Migrants may have moved with the intention of their new residence being a permanent home.
• It might be prohibitively expensive for migrants to return to their country of origin (not to mention difficult to once again re-enter the destination country).
• Economic conditions in the source country may be no better – and instead, actually worse – than where migrants currently live.

Perhaps we could also interpret the migrants’ decision to remain where they are as a positive and bullish outlook on their long-term prospects in their new country. Those without jobs believe that once the economy picks up they will be back to work. This is no doubt a desire shared by many, whatever their immigration status.

Migration Information Source’s report, providing the basis for the statistics above, can be found on their website.

Somalia does not often benefit from positive stories in the press. At present it is probably best known for its ongoing civil war - which has lasted for nearly two decades - pirates operating along its coasts, and recently, reporting on the return of young Somalis from Minnesota to fight for the Shabaab, a group of Islamic militants with ties to Al Qaeda.

Readers, however, might overlook another outcome of this conflict – the displacement of Somalis throughout the globe, and the creation of a wide-ranging diaspora. All one needs to do is search “Somali” and “community” on the web to get an idea of the global spread of Somalis.

A 2009 UNDP report provides a summary of the Somali diaspora. It found that approximately one in every seven Somalis now live overseas, totaling more than one million persons. Top locations, outside of Kenya and Yemen, in Europe (rank order) are the UK, “Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Denmark and Italy.” In North America large communities reside in the Minneapolis region, Columbus, Ohio, and Toronto, Canada.

Collectively, these overseas Somalis act as a powerful financial force by sending back remittances. This strong tradition of giving uses hawala, an informal system for transferring funds, and monies may be used to support family members, or also as business investments. The aforementioned UNDP report states that the diaspora sends $1 billion, or even as much as $1.6 billion annually back to Somalia. This appears to be an impressive amount, particularly when compared to the $214 million in aid pledge by foreign donors earlier this year.

As with any change in life, growing older can present its challenges. Beyond relatively incipient social-networking programs like Twitter and Facebook, or newfangled cell phones to deal with, there is the transition from the workforce to retirement, and adjustments as some friends or spouses pass away. New routines must be established.

How is this time of transition for older immigrants in the United States? They are a population often overlooked within current debates on teaching English to immigrants in schools, or competition posed by migrants entering the labor pool.

Last weekend a New York Times article provided further description of the lives of immigrants over 65 years of age in the United States.

For many, there is a shift away from a familiar culture of reverence for elders that may be more common in their country of origin. A total of “seventy percent of recent older immigrants speak little or no English” and foreign-born elderly are one-third more likely to live in poverty. As a result, their ability to assimilate and to care for themselves is more delicate than that of younger populations.

At the same time, this population continues to grow in size. As a nifty graphic attached to the article describes, “since 1970, the number of United States residents 65 and older who were born in Europe dropped by nearly half, while those born in Asia and Latin America increased tenfold”. It is these “elderly, [who] now make up America’s fastest growing immigrant group”.

A witty comment from Judith Treas, who teaches sociology and studies populations at the University of Califorinia, Irvine:

“They never win spelling bees . . . they do not join criminal gangs. And nobody worries about Americans losing jobs to Korean grandmothers.”

In the end, this vulnerable immigrant population would benefit from greater attention. Hopefully this NYT article will increase efforts to bring this about.

A recent Boston Globe article discussed the dramatic impact of the large-scale migration of workers from the Philippines, and the remittances that they send back home. Two major points are worth noting here:

1. Over 10 million Filipinos workers have migrated overseas, representing an astounding 11% of the country’s population. What does this mean for those left behind? Results are mixed. Economic progress exists in the form of newly constructed houses and private school tuitions. In the meantime, communities often lose their best-trained professionals, while children live without their birth parents.

Widespread migration is not uncommon in some Latin American countries. An estimated one in 10 Ecuadorians and one of every 3 or 4 Salvadorans now live abroad.

2. The global economic downturn has led to job losses for hundreds of thousands of Filipino migrant workers. Still, they have not only maintained, but actually increased the amount of money sent to their home islands. Remittances were up 2.9% during January through June 2009, totaling $8.5 billion. (And yet they are down 11% among Salvadorans during this same time period.) How have migrant workers managed to do this? They are likely working even harder, with multiple jobs, longer hours, or both.

Economic difficulties can increase the vulnerability of migrant workers. Desperate for employment, they may accept lower wages and more dangerous jobs. Despite facing increasing financial limitations, they send remittances due to an even greater concern about the economic situation in their home country.

At the same time, sending this money may cause some migrants to limit opportunities for advancement, since it is not used directly for education, work or other investments in their own lives. (On the other hand, new houses and better-educated students in the country of origin can be a worthwhile future investment should they one day return there.)

The situation described above is likely to persist as global migration remains significant in the 21^st century. The International Organization for Migration (IOM) estimates that in 2002 there were 175 million migrants (people living in a country where they were not born). By 2050 this figure will increase to 230 million migrants. In each case this represents approximately 3% of the world’s population.

FPA is proud to present one of its newest bloggers, David D. Sussman, who writes for  FPA’s Venezuela Blog. Below is a post by David on some movies dealing with Migration and Latin America. I encourage readers to check out FPA’s Venezuela Blog frequently. Enjoy!

On August 24th HBO will present a new documentary titled “Which Way Home”. This film follows a number of children, as young as 9-years old, on their perilous journey from Central America into the United States. While seeking to enter the US illegally, they dream of building better lives.

The documentary was presented at the prestigious Tribeca film festival. See more at: http://www.tribecafilm.com/filmguide/41263932.html..

An article in today’s New York Times gives further description on how the director, Rebecca Cammisa, shot the film.

Regardless of where one stands on the issue of illegal migration, “Which Way Home” provides an opportunity for audiences to hear the voices of underage migrants, who make up approximately 5% of migrants passing northwards through Mexico. It reveals the personal stories of young migrants that can become lost within the polarizing public debate over immigration to the United States.

While Hollywood seems to focus on selling glitz or scoring big at the box office (how could “Transformers 2” earn over $200 million in five days?), it is nice to see movies that spread awareness of key social issues to a wider public audience. A few other flics touching on the theme of migration also come to mind:

“Tears of the Sun” (2003): Please don’t laugh. This Hollywood action movie starring Bruce Willis may not describe the complexities of refugee situations, but it does place the issue of displaced persons squarely within the film’s plot.

“Maria Full of Grace” (2004): Portrays the use of women as “mulas” (mules) to transport cocaine, ingested in latex balloons, on flights into the United States. Actress Catalina Sandino Moreno was nominated for an Oscar for her leading role.

“Human Trafficking” (2005): A TV movie revealing the exploitation of women forced into prostitution in other countries (although it could have also shown with greater depth that men and economic migrants are also at risk of being trafficked).

David D. Sussman also writes about Venezuela on FPA blogs. You can find further commentary and analysis at: venezuela.foreignpolicyblogs.com