Pew Hispanic Research released a report in August of 2006 that seems to refute some of the claims made by anti-immigration folks, namely that "non-native" immigrants are taking away jobs from "native" Americans. What seems to be true is that non-natives are filling jobs in areas where fewer natives live and are generally not affecting employment of natives where the majority of US population lives.
Among the major findings:
• Eight states had above-average growth in the foreign-born population from 1990-2000 and below-average employment rates for native-born workers in 2000. Those states, where immigration may have had a negative impact, include North Carolina, Tennessee and Arizona and accounted for 15% of all native-born workers.
• Fourteen states had above-average growth in the foreign-born population and above-average employment rates for native-born workers in 2000. Those states, where rapid immigration appears to have not harmed native-born workers, include Texas, Nevada and Georgia and accounted for 24% of all native-born workers.
• The growth in the foreign-born population from 1990-2000 was below average in 16 states with above-average employment rates for native-born workers in 2000. Those states, in which the native born may have benefited from the slow pace of growth in the foreign-born workforce, include Illinois, Michigan and Virginia and represented 23% of the native-born workforce.
• The growth in the foreign-born population was below average in 12 states and the District of Columbia, with below-average employment rates for native workers in 2000. Those states, in which the slow growth in the foreign-born workforce may not have benefited native workers, include California, New York, New Jersey and Florida and represented 38% of the native-born workforce.
• Between 2000 and 2004, there was a positive correlation between the increase in the foreign-born population and the employment of native-born workers in 27 states and the District of Columbia Together, they accounted for 67% of all native-born workers and include all the major destination states for immigrants. In the remaining 23 states there was a negative correlation between the growth of the foreign-born population and the employment of native-born workers. Those states accounted for 33% of the native-born workforce in 2004.
• The share of foreign-born workers in the workforce of a state was not related to the employment rate for native-born workers in either 2000 or 2004.
• Many immigrant workers lack a college education and are relatively young, but the analysis found no evidence that they had an impact on the employment outcomes of those native-born workers who also have low levels of education and are ages 25-34.