by
John Stevenson
We
are often told by pundits, immigration advocates, and the news media that
immigrants use our welfare system less that native-born Americans and that they
are, as a group, a net contribution rather than a drain on the nation’s
resources. Are these assertions true?
The
Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) has published an extensive report called
“Welfare Use by Immigrant and Native Households.” The report relies on data from the Census
Bureau’s Survey of Income and Program Participation.
The
report compares households headed by an immigrant (legal or illegal) with those
headed by native-born. The report uses
the terms immigrant and foreign-born synonymously, and explains that
foreign-born includes all who were not U.S. citizens at birth, including
naturalized citizens, green card holders, illegal immigrants, and those on
long-term visas such as foreign students.
The report includes as welfare: cash, food, and housing programs and
Medicaid. Most of the data are for the
year 2012.
CIS says
it is “an independent, non-partisan, non-profit, research organization.” Its mission is “providing immigration
policymakers, the academic community, news media, and concerned citizens with
reliable information about the social, economic, security, and fiscal
consequences of legal and illegal immigration…”
You can find CIS and the report at cis.org.
The
report includes extensive use of statistics in chart and table formats. Here, in abbreviated form, are some of the
highlights of the data.
In 2012, 51 percent of immigrant-headed
households used at least one welfare program compared with 30 percent for
native-born.
Welfare use is high for both new
arrivals and well-established immigrants.
Of those who had been in the U.S. for more than two decades, 48 percent
still accessed welfare.
Welfare use varies by immigration
source. Those with the highest welfare
use came from Mexico and Central America (73 percent), the Caribbean (51
percent), and Africa (48 percent). Only
those from Europe (26 percent) and the Indian sub-continent (17 percent) had
lower use than native-born (30 percent).
Many immigrants struggle to support
their children, but even immigrant households without children have
significantly higher welfare use (30 percent) than native households without
children (20 percent).
In 2012, 76 percent of households headed
by an immigrant who had not graduated from high school accessed welfare, as did
63 percent of those with only a high school education.
Of immigrant households, 24 percent are
headed by someone who has not completed high school, compared to 8 percent of households
headed by native-born.
The high rates of immigrant welfare use
are not entirely explained by their lower education levels. Households headed by a college-educated
immigrant had much higher (26 percent) welfare use than those headed by college
educated native-born (13 percent).
In addition to having higher welfare
use, immigrant households pay less in taxes to the federal government on
average than do native-born households.
For every dollar that native households pay in income and payroll taxes,
immigrant households pay 89 cents.
We
also are often told that immigrants, especially illegals, are legally barred
from accessing the welfare systems. The
report deals extensively with that issue.
Here’s a brief summary: Most new legal immigrants are barred from
welfare programs when they first arrive, as are illegal immigrants. But the ban does not apply to all programs;
most legal immigrants have been in the U.S. long enough to qualify for at least
some programs, and the bar often does not apply to children; States often independently
provide welfare to new immigrants; naturalizing makes immigrants eligible for
all programs; and, most important, immigrants (including illegals) can receive
benefits on behalf of their U.S.-born children.
And,
the report adds, some provisions restricting immigrant use of welfare are
entirely unenforced.
It is
important to recognize that the report addresses only immigrants’ use of
welfare programs. It does not address
whether or to what extent welfare programs play a role as an immigration
magnet. It does not deal at all with
other important issues such as immigrant versus native-born crime rates, immigration’s
financial and social effects on our public schools, or the overall cultural and
societal impacts of immigration.
The
report, which is based on Census Bureau data, only answers the immigrant-use-of-welfare
issue---and convincingly. And it
bolsters the case for immigration reform and a merit-based system.