Yin and Yang of immigration
The thing is... we can quibble over a decimal point or whether there exists some uber-hidden new wave of undocumented immigrants in town... but no matter how far you want to push it, the scale of recent immigration into Pennsylvania, especially into Western Pennsylvania, is several orders of magnitude smaller than whatever is going on in Arizona. I would argue that the proportion of the local population that is foreign born currently is about as low as it has ever been since the day George Washington showed up on the banks of the Mon.
I'm too lazy to redo this, or update it a bit, but I did this chart some years ago which pretty much tells the tale.
What I don't quite get is that the politicians from areas with the very lowest rate of recent immigration propose some of the most anti-immigrant policies. Maybe that makes sense in a counterintuitive sort of way. I am not just talking about Rep. Metcalf, whose district is about as immigrant-free as it gets, but remember the even more bizarre case of Altoona which even made the NYTimes for it's curious efforts to bar it's nonexistant immigrants from ever coming there. (as a sidebar, anyone notice the PG appears to have hired Sean H. the longtime local NYTimes stringer in town.).
I honestly get a call or two a month from someone (journalists near and far mostly, but sometimes other folks) on immigration in Pittsburgh.... or the lack thereof. The best question I ever had when I explained how low international immigration has been here in recent decades was a NY based journalist who asked quite seriously "Who drives the taxis?". I just keep on file a stack of references on local immigration stats, commentary and analysis to feed out. The basic truth is that we are way off the chart in terms of recent immigration compared to just about anywhere else in the nation. All of the ethnic diversity that we are usually proud of here in Pittsburgh mostly reflects a spike in immigration that is now literally a century in the past. Yes, a whole century!! I have a scan of the 1910 census page for the city of Pittsburgh and it shows 40% of the city's population being of "foreign stock" which would include the foreign born and their minor children even if the children had been born here I think. But 40%!! That number is today a decimal place, and a small decimal at that, in most of the region.
So I do get it... the fact that the most immigrant-free areas spawn the most anti-immigrant rhetoric probably makes a certain bit of sense. But still...............