Steven Camarota of the Center for Immigration Studies released a new report on how immigration has changed the U.S. electorate.
Camarota has used data from the Census Bureau to demonstrate this emerging demographic shift.
Effectively, mass migration, which includes adult immigrants and their adult U.S.-born progeny, has made significant changes to the American electorate since 2000. Such changes have largely been concentrated in a few states such as Georgia, Maryland, New Jersey, North Carolina, Texas, and Virginia. In these states, larger shares of the electorate are made up of immigrants or their children.
In this analysis, eligible voters consist of all citizens, both naturalized or American born, who are 18 years or older. The CIS study looked at the share of eligible voters who are naturalized citizens or those born in America with at least one immigrant parent.
Camarota provided a brief overview of what the immigration numbers look like:
- As a share of eligible voters, between 2000 and 2020 adult immigrants and their adult U.S.-born children increased the most in New Jersey, from 23 percent to 36 percent; Texas, from 14 percent to 25 percent; Maryland, from 12 percent to 23 percent; California, from 33 percent to 43 percent; Georgia, from 4 percent to 13 percent; Virginia, from 7 percent to 16 percent; and in North Carolina, from 4 percent to 12 percent.
- Proportionally, immigration has had the most transformational impact on the electorate in states of the South. The share of potential voters who are immigrants or their children increased more than three-fold in North Carolina and Georgia. It doubled in Virginia and Kentucky, and it nearly doubled in South Carolina and Maryland.
- The growth in numbers between 2000 and 2020 in North Carolina and Georgia is by far the most striking. In North Carolina, the number of eligible voters who are immigrants or their children increased by 355 percent — while the rest of the potential electorate grew by just 22 percent. In Georgia, the number increased by 337 percent — while the rest of the potential electorate grew by only 17 percent.
- Nationally, the number of voting-age citizens who are immigrants or their children increased by 71 percent, while the rest of the potential electorate grew by just 15 percent between 2000 and 2020. As a share of eligible voters, immigrants and their children increased their share from 14 percent to 20 percent.
- While the general trend has been for the number of immigrants and their children to increase rapidly, this has not been the case everywhere. In New Hampshire, Kansas, South Dakota, Montana, and North Dakota the number of voting-age citizens who are immigrants or their children fell between 2000 and 2020.
- Reflecting the uneven growth throughout the country, there remain 12 states where immigrants and their children are less than 6 percent of potential voters.
- Nationally, in 2020 about half (48 percent) of the voting-age people of what the Census Bureau used to call “foreign stock” are immigrants and the rest are U.S.-born children with at least one immigrant parent. All of those we identify as naturalized U.S. citizens are assumed to be legally present in the United States. However, some share of naturalized citizens are former illegal immigrants who were awarded citizenship in 1986 as part of the IRCA amnesty or subsequent amnesties. Others are former illegal immigrants who received green cards over the years as part of the “normal” legal immigration process.
Migrants tend to vote Democrat by substantial numbers and do pose a threat to the GOP’s ability to win elections in the long-term. Some Hispanics are beginning to break free from the Democrat’s identity politics spell and pull the lever for Republicans. Many South Texas Hispanics recognize that Mexico is a failed state and want nothing to do with open borders policies that could potentially destabilize their localities. Hence, their support for Trump.
Regardless, immigration restriction should still be a key point of any serious nationalist movement. Democrats should be denied a voting base and the current crop of migrants should be allowed to assimilate the same way their late 19th century predecessors did after the U.S passed immigration restriction in the 1920s.
The GOP should not run away from this issue.
Tom Cotton: Biden DHS Pick Alejandro Mayorkas Disqualified for Cheap Labor Visa Corruption
Will this derail Mayorkas?
Arkansas Republican Senator Tom Cotton confirmed he would vote against Joe Biden’s pick for the Department of Homeland Security in the event Biden is inaugurated, citing Alejandro Mayorkas’s track record of delivering cheap labor visas to elite Democrat donors and business interests as the Director of US Citizenship and Immigration Services. Mayorkas served as USCIS Director in the Obama administration.
Cotton explained his rationale on opposing a tentative Mayorkas nomination in a tweet thread over the weekend. Cotton cited a report from DHS’s Inspector General who indicated Mayorkas consistently approved visa applications for workers that would be employed by politically-connected and influential Democrats for American jobs.
His favored pick to lead DHS, Alejandro Mayorkas, is a former DHS official who gave out green cards as political favors.
In 2014, the DHS Inspector General—appointed by Obama—heard from whistleblowers about Mayorkas intervening in immigration cases to help powerful Democrats. pic.twitter.com/9WruYSSV5S
— Tom Cotton (@TomCottonAR) November 25, 2020
Mayorkas had provided free visa workers to companies owned by Democrats such as former Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe and Nevada arch-Democrat Senator Harry Reid. The 2014 DHS IG’s report on Mayorkas’s corporate welfarism indicated that the Democrat-affiliated bureaucrat had expressed annoyance at inquiries from USCIS employees on improving counter-fraud efforts, instead demanding that they focus on approving as many migrant visas as possible. The IG’s report had accused him of “an appearance of favoritism and special access” through his political use of visa programs.
Jessica Vaughn of the Center for Immigration Studies pointed to Mayorkas’s migration corporate welfarism in a statement provided to Breitbart News after news of his shadow nomination. (Biden hasn’t even secured the presidency yet, as final results in contested states await litigation.)
“He is the exact kind of nominee that people didn’t want to see — someone in favor of corporate interests on immigration, of looking the other way on fraud, of rubber-stamping every [migration] application.”
Mayorkas has cited his connection to refugee resettlement in the United States, and would be likely to massively increase refugee admissions as well as approve as many visa applications as possible as Secretary of DHS. If Biden ends up being inaugurated, his confirmation vote could prove a key indicator of which Republican Senators plan to fight for the interests of Americans on immigration policy, and which intend to look the other way in favor of corporate and billionaire special interests.
Culture3 days ago
March Study Points to Pervasive Mental Illness Among White American Liberals
States3 days ago
COVER-UP: Whitmer Admin Says ‘Records Do Not Exist’ Pertaining to $25 Million Dominion Contract Set Up by Democrat Official
States3 days ago
Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel Threatens Election Fraud Whistleblowers with Prosecution
Culture3 days ago
BASED: University Professor Placed on Leave After Exposing ‘Satanic, Globalist Elite’ in Explosive Letter
Violent Left4 days ago
White House Submits to Fake Biden Transition After Left-Wing Terror Campaign Against GSA Chief
Big League Wellness2 days ago
Doctors Urge the CDC to Make the Public Aware of Painful Side Effects of Experimental COVID-19 Vaccines
Opinion2 days ago
President Trump Must Consider Annihilating the GOP to Reverse Electoral Impropriety
Congress3 days ago
Democrat Black Farmers Bill Would Give Away $8 Billion of Land Yearly in Reparations Program