5)

6)

7)

8)

9)

Fernando M. Reimers el; a].

largely came from agricultural backgrounds; they tended to work
for their ethnic kinsmen. _
The “profound shift” in immigrant population patterns after the
1965 immigration law ended the quota system that had barred most
immigrants since the 19205. In 1970, 18.2 percent of the city’s pop-
ulation was foreign born; by 2005, 36.6 percent of it was.

In 1970, the leading countries of origin for the city’s foreign born
were Italy, Poland, the Soviet Union, Germany, Ireland, Cuba, the
Dominican Republic, the United Kingdom, Australia, and Jamaica.
By 2000, those leading countries were the Dominican Republic,
China, Jamaica, Mexico, Guyana, Ecuador, Haiti, Trinidad and
Tobago, India, and Colombia.

The composition within racial groups has also changed significant—
ly. In 1970, two—thirds of the city’s Hispanic population was Puerto
Rican; in 2005, Puerto Ricans represented about 35 percent of the
Hispanic population, and Dominicans, about 24 percent.

The foreign—born population in New York City is most concen—
trated in its two most populous boroughs: 36.2 percent of the city’s
foreign born live in Queens, and 31.4 percent live in Brooklyn,
compared with 14.7 percent in Manhattan, 14.4 percent in the
Bronx, and 3.3 percent on Staten Island.

In Manhattan, the only concentrations of immigrants are in Lower
Manhattan (Chinatown area) and in Washington Heights, where an
estimated ninety thousand to one hundred thousand Hispanics—
mostly Dominicans—are clustered.

10) Even on Staten Island, where there is hardly a concentration of im—

migrations, neighborhoods have been transformed over short peri—
ods of time. In the 19908, the North Shore of the island lost about
twelve thousand non—Hispanic whites and gained about ten thou—
sand black and Latino residents.

11) Today, native—born whites with native—born parents represent less

than one in five residents of New York City, but only 30 percent of
voters are immigrants.

296