RESIDENTS’ ATTITUDES TOWARDS HISPANIC IMMIGRATION IN A CENTRAL ILLINOIS COMMUNITY

Caiti R. Kopp

Department of Anthropology at Illinois State University

Senior Thesis 382

May 10, 2012

A special thank you to Gina Hunter and my peers in Senior Thesis: ANT 382 for reading the many drafts of this thesis paper and helping me to create something I am genuinely proud of.

53

RESIDENTS’ ATTITUDES TOWARDS HISPANIC IMMIGRATION IN A CENTRAL ILLINOIS COMMUNITY

Abstract

In this thesis, I examine the opinions and attitudes of native born Americans in Bloomington-Normal, Illinois, toward recent immigration of people from Latin America. Data came from interviews with six long-term residents who interact with Latin American immigrants and from letters to the editor in the local Pantagraph newspaper. I looked at both sets of data ethnographically, in that I paid attention to how people make sense of the world and how they organize their perceptions and prioritize their interests. Overall I found that the different definitions people had about what it means to be American effected their views on Hispanic immigrants. In the letters and interviews that expressed pro-immigrant sentiments, people believed hard work was the main characteristic of being American. In the anti-immigrant sentiments letters, citizenship, hard work, speaking English and expressing loyalty to America were requirements for being considered American and to have the privilege to be in the U.S. There are no conclusive findings from the data collected but this study is able to represent the impact a minority or immigrant group has on the majority culture.

Introduction

Immigration from Latin America currently provokes intense political, economic and cultural debate in the United States. Anti-immigrant sentiments are often based on three perceptions on the nature of Latin American immigration: first, that Latin Americans come to America to take advantage of welfare programs; second, that Latino immigrants drain public resources such as education and government services; and lastly, that Latino immigrants take jobs away from U.S. citizens (Gonzalez 2011:217-218). Those who defend Latin American immigration argue that the percentage of Latin American immigrants working or actively seeking a job is far higher than for native-born Americans; secondly, that many studies demonstrate that immigrants in this country make enormous contributions to U.S. society in taxes and Social Security. The problem is that these contributions are unevenly distributed between federal and local governments (Gonzalez 2011:216-217). And lastly to contend with the fear that Latin Americans take away jobs from Americans many studies have shown that Latino immigrants, especially those here illegally, have improved local economies for whites because they are willing to work for lower wages and this then has rejuvenated the profitability of ailing industries and then prevented further job loss for white Americans (Gonzalez 2011:218). In regions of the United States where Latin American immigration is relatively new, and where unemployment and poverty are comparatively low, how is this debate framed? Is the debate localized and based on local realities or based on outside sources?

This study examines attitudes towards Latin American immigrants in Bloomington-Normal, Illinois. Bloomington-Normal is a city of about 129 thousand people that overall enjoys a low rate of unemployment of 5.1 percent in Bloomington-Normal compared to 6.7 percent nation-wide in 2008 during an era of economic recovery. Bloomington-Normal also has many programs to help those who are underprivileged. Mid-sized communities like Bloomington-Normal, rather than large metropolitan areas, have recently become primary destinations for immigrants (Chapa 2004:104). However the exact reason why or the factors that Latin Americans are experiencing that has caused this new migration have not been sufficiently researched (Lichter 2009:500). Do people in Bloomington-Normal have the many fears expressed by other Americans in regards to Latin immigrants taking away jobs or burdening the welfare system? What influences perceptions on immigrants—is it the demographic characteristic of the population in question? For example, the literature suggests that communities with more middle and upper class, well educated people have less fear or animosity towards Latin American immigration than less educated and lower or working class populations would. Or, is it how much personal experience and contact a native resident has with the newcomers? Immigrants to Bloomington-Normal are residentially dispersed and work in a variety of areas outside the stereotypical gardener and maid. How does media coverage influence residents’ perceptions? These are the questions I examine through interviews and newspaper archives.

The social science literature presents two major theories that predict attitudes toward immigrants, Group Threat Theory and Contact Theory. Which theory best describes the feelings of those in Bloomington-Normal towards the new influx of Hispanic immigrants? How are these feelings justified? What influences residents’ perceptions the most--media, personal experiences and/or residents’ education, socioeconomic class, or racial background? To answer these questions I interviewed six native-born non-Hispanic Bloomington-Normal residents who have had community or work-relation interactions with Hispanic immigrants in Bloomington-Normal. In addition, I examined 17 years of articles in Bloomington-Normal’s The Pantagraph newspaper regarding Hispanic Americans to examine how immigration issues and debates have been framed in the local community.

For the Many Become One

Immigration has always been a characteristic of the United States and recently immigration has increased to the volume not seen since the late 19th and early 20th centuries (Bretell 2002:277-289). This new immigration mainly consists of people from Latin America, which includes Mexico, Central and South America. These immigrants usually come to the United States and go to metropolitan areas such as Chicago, Miami and New York (Chapa 2004:23-24). However, Latin American immigrants have begun to migrate to new destination areas in non-metropolitan cities (Chapa 2004:39-43) such as Bloomington-Normal. This new wave of immigration has caused immigration policies and acceptance of immigrants in different communities to be a major debate across the country. What also makes this wave of immigration very different and cause such a big debate is that it includes in it a large sector of illegal immigrants and Hispanics have become the largest minority group in the United States (Ennis 2011:2).

Anthropologists have only recently begun to be interested in immigration in the United States (Foner 1999:1268). One of the reasons for this change of interest is due to globalization. The world has become smaller and communities and cultures untouched by the outside world have begun to be harder to find. Most anthropological research, on immigration, however, focuses on the culture of the immigrants. One example is a research study done on Jamaican immigrants and how they have succeeded in keeping their culture intact while being in the United States (Foner 1999:1268). Anthropologists most often study the impact of migration on those who migrate, the changes to the families and communities that those who migrate leave behind, and the phenomenon of transnationalism (Foner 1999:1268). My research examines the other side to this situation, the receiving community. While understanding the cultures of those who migrate across borders is important, I think anthropologists have ignored the other side of this immigration topic; how the individuals, the community, and the culture that the immigrants move into are affected. How do established residents, in non-metropolitan areas, perceive those who immigrate? What influences perceptions towards immigration, specifically Hispanic immigrants; residents’, demographic characteristics or their use of media sources?

This is an important study because the United States is experiencing a “Latinization (Gonzalez 2011:xv).” The Census Bureau, for instance, estimates the country’s Hispanic population will tripled by 2050 to 132 million and will comprise almost one third of the entire U.S. population (Gonzalez 2011:xv). Therefore whites, of European descent, will cease to be the majority, even though they will most likely hold most of the power positions in the U.S. And for the first time, a majority of the United States will trace its ethnic heritage to Latin America, not Europe (Gonzalez 2011:xvi). It is important for us as Americans then to find out and see how we view these incoming Hispanic immigrants. How do we create these perceptions and how do we justify them?

How we perceive and justify these sentiments toward Hispanic immigrants is important because broader American attitudes toward immigrants have a major influence on which laws are passed concerning national security, education, and employment (Berg 2010:278-279). There are several implications of this research for those concerned with immigrants’ welfare. First, if pro-immigrant groups are to succeed, they must realize the differences of opinions that may exist among the people in the same region (Berg 2010:297). Second, these groups must understand the fear and dislike of immigrants, or xenophobia, and work to change these attitudes if immigrants are to have a comfortable place to settle and gain trust in the community. This trust will then ease tensions and break stereotypes between the host community and those arriving (Yakushko 2009:50).

Literature Review

Anthropology and its perspective on Immigration

Immigration is nothing new for the United States yet the Hispanic immigration of the 20th and 21st centuries has become one of the biggest issues of our time. Why is that? How can anthropology help to answer or find out why this immigration has set off major feelings of both pro- and anti-immigrant sentiments? According to a study by Caroline Bretell (2002) immigration today has reached levels unmatched since the early nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Another factor is that the immigration of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries created ethnic enclaves and immigrants were staying together and staying in large metropolitan cities. This new immigration, mainly constituted by Hispanic immigrants, has created a new “immigrant geography” (Bretell 2002:285). Instead of ethnic enclaves and places like “little Italy” immigrants are moving into middles-class suburban areas through powerful kinship networks and ethnic entrepreneurship (Bretell 2002:285). An example that Bretell (2002) gives is that Manhattan once had 57 percent of New York City’s immigrants and eight years later only had 18 percent due to the phenomenon of suburban settlement by Latin Americans.

A book by Leo Chavez, Covering Immigration (2001), is one of the first studies in anthropology to look at immigration from the perspective of the reception of immigrants in a community. Chavez looked at magazine covers from 1970 to the mid 1990’s and categorized them as neutral, affirmative or alarmist based on their texts and images. He is able to link representations of immigrants to periods of prosperity or recession and to the broad patterns and flow of immigration overall. He found that alarmist covers increased in intensity in years preceding the 1986 immigration reform law IRCA (Immigration Reform and Control Act) which granted amnesty to many illegal immigrants in the U.S., and that during most of the year magazines have more alarmist ideals except around the fourth of July. Most importantly what Chavez found was that the attitude of the United States toward immigration is greatly conflicted. Chavez shows that studies cannot provide the public with a uniform and monolithic view of immigrants. The range of perceptions that the magazine covers had, from affirmative to alarmist perceptions of Hispanic immigrants, greatly reflects how people in America are conflicted in their perceptions of Hispanic immigrants as well.

This finding by Leo Chavez is extremely important. While many studies may look at attitudes and sentiments of native born Americans toward Hispanics there is no way to develop a generalized answer to what the people of the United States feel exactly about Hispanic immigrants. However in my study I am concerned with local issues, how Hispanic immigrants have affected the community and are perceived by the people of Bloomington-Normal. I want to know and discover how the people of Bloomington-Normal define themselves within middle or working class, how they use race or ethnicity throughout their daily lives by how do they interact with Hispanic immigrants during a workday or at home in their neighborhoods? By allowing people to define these categories themselves and delve into their attitudes toward Hispanic immigration I will not get a generalized consensus but I will gather real experiences and stories of people in this community dealing with the reality. The reality that I am looking at is of people of European descent, or the white majority coming to an end, and the reality of the United States demographics not changing in large metropolitan areas but in the suburbs, in small farming communities and in non-metropolitan cities, that until this recent immigration, did not have much of a racial spectrum.

Opposing Theories

There is much debate about the immigration policies we have today. The United States has been known historically as a nation of immigrants, but the United States also has a long history of xenophobia and intolerance of immigrants (Yakushko 2009:40). There are those who believe that the United States should close and protect our borders from immigrants while others see these newcomers as enriching the American culture. These opposing viewpoints can be described by two contradictory theories. One is the group threat theory which entails that residents fear loss of economic, social and political resources due to perceived or actual population increase of immigrants (Berg 2010:282). The other is the contact theory. The contact theory presumes that when residents are confronted with immigrants and get to know the immigrants, they will form friendships. Having more opportunities to interact with immigrants causes them to develop warm or pro-immigration attitudes (Berg 2010:282). These theories see the immigrant population increase in two very different lights and causing very opposite situations.

A study done by Justin Berg (2010) was an intersectional approach, using race, gender, social space and class, that uses data from the 2004 General Social Survey and the 2000 Census to predict attitudes toward immigrants. In this study Berg not only finds support for the group threat theory referenced above, but also for the contact theory. Berg found that overall; the residents of the U.S. have a pro-immigrant attitude (Berg 2009:286). Berg’s research shows that 41 percent of respondents believe that immigrants are good for the economy as well as 41 percent disagree with the idea that immigrants increase crime rate, 30 percent disagree with the idea that immigrants take jobs away from native born citizens, and 35 percent of native born residents believe immigration should even increase or stay the same (Berg 2009:286). Berg also found that the contact theory is mostly in effect when persons have a higher level of education and are therefore higher up in their socioeconomic class (Berg 2009:280). As stated by these percentages, when non Hispanic whites move up in social class by gaining more levels of education, they then experience a change of opinion toward immigrants due to their loss of economic fears (Berg 2009:287). Since education and socioeconomic class, for the most part, go hand in hand it was important when interviewing to allow my correspondents to classify themselves as working or middle class. Based on their classification, it should correlate to a more anti-immigrant status if they believe to be more part of the working class or have a more pro-immigrant status is they believe to be a part of the middle class.