|
August 19, 2003
Immigrant Welfare Scandal Continues
One trumpeted goal of the
1996 welfare reform: reducing the
scandal of immigrant welfare dependency. Didn’t
work.
Immigrants who entered the U.S.
after August 22, 1996 were prohibited from receiving
most types of public assistance. (But the ban is lifted
when the immigrant becomes an American citizen—remember
that next July 4 when you read the usual
dewy-eyed accounts of
mass swearing-in ceremonies).
Nevertheless, the 2000 Census shows that immigrants
continue to receive every major welfare program at
higher rates than native-born Americans. (And remember:
the native-born rate is boosted by
troubled subgroups like blacks and Hispanics—the
native-born white welfare dependency rate is
significantly lower.)
 | Nearly one in five (18.6%) immigrant households
receive
Medicaid, compared to nearly one in eight (13.1%)
households headed by a U.S. native. |
| Children in immigrant households are two and a
half times more likely to get subsidized school lunch
benefits (15.5%) than children in native households
(5.8%) |
| Immigrant households are more than quarter more
likely to receive
food stamps than native-born households (6.7%
immigrant households v. 5.3%) |
| Immigrants are a third more likely to be on
SSI (Supplemental Security Income) than the
native-born (5.3% v. 3.9%) |
The
most immigrant-subsidizing benefit of all was not even
addressed by the 1996 welfare reform. The Earned Income
Tax Credit (EITC) is not a welfare program, but part of
the
tax code. It provides cash refunds to low-income
workers with children. Technically only immigrants with
legal work status are eligible for EITC. But in fact
the IRS, with its
celebrated kind-heartedness, allows immigrants to
claim EITC benefits retroactively for up to three years
prior to obtaining legal work status. This, in effect,
gives refunds to people for work they performed while
here illegally, on which they very well may not have
paid taxes.
| Immigrants receive EITC at nearly twice the rate of
natives—25.5% of immigrant households versus 13.2% of
native households. |
| Amazingly, nearly half (49.2%) Mexican immigrants
receive EITC - a significantly higher recipiency rate
than other immigrant nationalities. |
EITC
is the nation’s most expensive means tested program for
working families. Over $32 billion was distributed in
2002. Taken together, means-tested social programs cost
U.S. taxpayers more than $300 billion annually. More
than one-fifth of that amount going to immigrant
households - although they make up only just over a
tenth (11%) of total households.
There’s a real question why immigrants get
welfare at all. Aren’t we supposed to be importing
people who will
improve us?
But current policy is importing immigrants whose
welfare dependency is actually
worse than ours.
And American taxpayers are continuing to finance
their own dispossession.
Welfare Program Recipiency Rates:
Immigrants v. Natives, 2000
|
Program |
Percent Receiving
Benefits: |
Immigrant Usage as Multiple of Native |
|
Immigrants |
Natives |
|
EITC |
25.5% |
13.1% |
1.9-times |
|
Medicaid |
18.6 |
12.1 |
1.5 |
|
School Lunch |
15.5 |
5.8 |
2.7 |
|
Food Stamps |
6.7 |
5.3 |
1.3 |
|
SSI |
5.3 |
3.9 |
1.4 |
|
UN
Compensation |
5.0 |
4.7 |
1.1 |
|
Public Housing |
4.9 |
4.2 |
1.2 |
|
General Assistance |
3.2 |
2.1 |
1.5 |
Source: Center for Immigration Studies,
“Immigration from Mexico: Assessing the Impact on the
United States,” July 2001. Figure 12, page
36.
Edwin S. Rubenstein (email
him) is President of
ESR Research
Economic Consultants in Indianapolis. |
