70% of TX illegal immigrant families receive welfare

[peejay 327]

April 06, 2011

Study: 70% of Texas' illegal immigrant families receive welfare

Thirteen years after Congress overhauled the American welfare system, 57 percent of immigrants with children — those in the country legally or not — use at least one government, welfare program according to a report released Tuesday by the Center for Immigration Studies.

In comparison, 39 percent of native-born Americans with children are signed up for welfare, the report found.

In Texas, 54 percent of legal immigrants and 70 percent of illegal immigrants receive welfare assistance, with illegal immigrants generally receiving benefits on behalf of their U.S.-born children, according to the study, written by a think tank that favors reducing immigration into the U.S.

Overall, Texas tied with California and New York for the second highest immigrant welfare rates behind Arizona.

We should note that the study takes an expansive view of what constitutes a government welfare program, so programs such as reduced-price school lunches for low-income students are classified as welfare, according to CIS' methodology.

Texas showed 61 percent of households headed by an immigrant utilizing at least one program compared to the 42 percent of Texas natives on welfare.

"This is partly due to the large share of immigrants with low levels of education and their resulting low incomes — not their legal status or an unwillingness to work," Steve Camorata, Director of Research at CIS, said.

Past CIS studies have been criticized by immigration-rights groups as flawed methodologically and biased politically.

According to the report, immigrant households with children are more likely to have at least one worker than native households. However, one-third of immigrant households headed by someone who has not graduated high school, compared to the one-tenth of natives. This large share of immigrants with lower education results in their lower income and need for welfare assistance.

Camarota said the misconception that immigrants are barred from the programs is misleading, and the system much more complicated . Eligibility is determined by length of stay and citizenship, but some states do not go with the bar, and some use welfare programs directly and indirectly.

The welfare programs analyzed include Supplemental Security Income for low income elderly and disabled, Temporary Assistance to Needy Families, Women, Infants and Children food program, free/reduced school lunch, food stamps, Medicaid, public housing and rent subsidies. In fiscal year 2008, these programs totaled $517 billion. But these programs are also partially funded by individual state governments, especially Medicaid.

Illegal immigrants with children primarily use food assistance programs and Medicaid, with little or no cash or housing assistance. In contrast, legal immigrants have high usage rates for every type of program.

From a policy standpoint, barring immigrants from the welfare system, especially the non-cash programs, is administratively, historically, politically and practically hard to do, Camarota said.

"Say the name, (for example) 'Women, Infants and Children food program,' are politicians really going to cut this?" Camarota said.

He further questioned if schools were really going to not feed hungry children of immigrants through the reduced-lunch programs. Likewise Camarota highlighted it also means hospitals will be treating more uninsured people. The report showed illegal immigrants primarily use food assistance and Medicaid with little cash or housing assistance, contrasting legal immigrants who use every program at high rates.

Camarota said changing the high immigrant usage would require changing immigration qualifications from residency of family members to an emphasis on education and skills, because the study noted higher education equates to less program assistance. The other solution would be in allowing less immigrants into the country, which correlates to less immigrant use of welfare.

http://blogs.chron.com/txpotomac/2011/04/study_immigrants_with_children.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+houstonchronicle/txpotomac+(Texas+on+the+Potomac

[Ban Hammer 13,530]

not surprising.

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

Great...financially supporting the illegals with tax payer's money.

[Jenn! 918]

So what does all that average out to...say, 45%+ of people with kids (immigrant or not) on welfare? Isn't that the more alarming statistic?

Edited April 7, 2011 by Jenn!

[peejay 327]

So what does all that average out to...say, 45%+ of people with kids (immigrant or not) on welfare? Isn't that the more alarming statistic?

Ah...buying votes with taxpayer funded programs always is...alarming.

Ever wonder why the Dems are so hot for mass illegal alien amnesty with a pathway to a Dem voter card? It would be a crying shame to dole out all that welfare and not get any votes for it. Can't let all them illegals go to waste...can we?

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

They pay little to no taxes on money earned 'under the table', get welfare and free health care?

I don't want any special treatment......... just treat me like an illegal alien.

[Danno 1,228]

[Zero Sum 305]

Nice figures. What they tell a rational reader is that 'natives' have better financial opportunities that immigrants.

[Nina~ 431]

Nice figures. What they tell a rational reader is that 'natives' have better financial opportunities that immigrants.

I doubt any of those figures are real since the source is Center for Immigration Studies. And it is also weird that "USSR" is listed as one of the counties.

[mawilson 2,133]

And it is also weird that "USSR" is listed as one of the counties.

In 2009!

[mawilson 2,133]

Though I'm happy to see that UK households are not mooching welfare off the government.

The other solution would be in allowing less immigrants into the country, which correlates to less immigrant use of welfare.

No shіt, Sherlock!

[Zero Sum 305]

I doubt any of those figures are real since the source is Center for Immigration Studies. And it is also weird that "USSR" is listed as one of the counties.

Perhaps the way the numbers were tallied are bogus to the service of a particular agenda that makes an uneven comparison to a 'native' population already seated in the opportunities it enjoys. Of course, speaking in that kind of generalities lends itself to supporting racist agendas, but its always better to have those sharing such data explain their intentions clearly.

[Danno 1,228]

Perhaps the way the numbers were tallied are bogus to the service of a particular agenda that makes an uneven comparison to a 'native' population already seated in the opportunities it enjoys. Of course, speaking in that kind of generalities lends itself to supporting racist agendas, but its always better to have those sharing such data explain their intentions clearly.

Or, instead of flapping your chubby fingers on the keyboard, you could just post stats you deem reliable.

[Zero Sum 305]

Or, instead of flapping your chubby fingers on the keyboard, you could just post stats you deem reliable.

Notice I did not refute the 'stats.' My chubby fingers are now typing for you to either read better or adjust that as yet undefined position that was previously requested.

[rika60607 215]