“Mexican immigrants were said to be holding down wages and taking jobs that could go to honest Americans. The poorest natives were supposed to be suffering most grievously. “We cannot afford to disregard it,” intoned the president. “We do not condone it.” The immigrants were soon sent home and not allowed to return.
All that happened in the early 1960s. The president was John F. Kennedy; the Mexicans were participating in the braceroprogramme, which allowed almost half a million people a year to take seasonal work on America’s farms. But the parallels with the present are plain. Donald Trump has also complained that immigrants are keeping Americans from good jobs and has promised to do something about it (another parallel: not since Kennedy has America seen such an astonishing presidential coiffure). So it is a good moment for a bracing new assessment of the braceroscheme and its demise.
Michael Clemens and Hannah Postel of the Centre for Global Development, and Ethan Lewis of Dartmouth College, have used archived records of American agricultural jobs and wages to test whether Kennedy was right. Did ending the bracero scheme in 1964 in fact lead to higher wages and more work for Americans in the fields?”
keep reading:
“
Mexican Repatriations* “ didn’t work to fix the economy in the Great Depression either.
Jongkwan Lee, Giovanni Peri, Vasil Yasenov write in “
The Employment Effects of Mexican Repatriations: Evidence from the 1930’s
“
During the period 1929-34 a campaign forcing the repatriation of Mexicans and Mexican Americans was carried out in the U.S. by states and local authorities. The claim of politicians at the time was that repatriations would reduce local unemployment and give jobs to Americans, alleviating the local effects of the Great Depression. This paper uses this episode to examine the consequences of Mexican repatriations on labor market outcomes of natives. Analyzing 893 cities using full count decennial Census data in the period 1930-40, we find that repatriation of Mexicans was associated with small decreases in native employment and increases in native unemployment. These results are robust to the inclusion of many controls. We then apply an instrumental variable strategy based on the differential size of Mexican communities in 1930, as well as a matching method, to estimate a causal “average treatment effect.” Confirming the OLS regressions, the causal estimates do not support the claim that repatriations had any expansionary effects on native employment, but suggest instead that they had no effect on, or possibly depressed, their employment and wages.
Published
backup from Tumblr 