Fact Check: Immigrants are getting more welfare than citizens

Immigrants Are Getting More Welfare Than Citizens: A Fact-Check

Introduction

The claim that "immigrants are getting more welfare than citizens" has been a contentious topic in public discourse, often used to argue against immigration policies. This assertion raises questions about the actual welfare usage rates among immigrants compared to native-born citizens. The following article examines various sources to provide a comprehensive overview of the evidence surrounding this claim without reaching a definitive conclusion.

What We Know

1. Welfare Usage Among Illegal Immigrants: According to a report by the U.S. House Committee on the Budget, illegal immigrants are described as a "net fiscal drain," receiving more in government services than they contribute in taxes. The report cites that 59% of households headed by illegal immigrants use one or more major welfare programs, compared to 39% of U.S.-born households 12.

2. Supplemental Security Income (SSI) for Noncitizens: The Social Security Administration (SSA) states that noncitizens may be eligible for SSI benefits if they meet specific legal requirements. This indicates that some immigrants can access welfare programs, but eligibility criteria are strict 3.

3. Contradictory Evidence on Welfare Usage: Various studies present a different perspective, suggesting that immigrants use less welfare than native-born citizens. For example, a report from the Cato Institute claims that immigrants consumed 21% less welfare and entitlement benefits than native-born Americans on a per capita basis in 2022 89. Similarly, a study highlighted by Newsweek indicated that immigrants claimed 54% less in benefits from the federal government than their native-born counterparts 10.

4. Economic Context: The Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) argues that welfare use is a significant issue, particularly among illegal immigrants, while other sources, like the Economic Policy Institute, emphasize that immigrants contribute positively to the economy and often work in lower-paying jobs that do not provide benefits 57.

Analysis

The evidence surrounding the claim that immigrants receive more welfare than citizens is mixed and often contradictory.

• Source Reliability: The U.S. House Committee on the Budget is a governmental body, which lends some credibility to its findings. However, it is essential to consider the potential political biases of such committees, especially if they are aligned with specific policy agendas. The CIS, while often cited in discussions about immigration, has been criticized for its methodology and potential bias against immigration 5. In contrast, the Cato Institute is known for its libertarian stance, which may influence its interpretation of welfare data 89.

• Methodological Concerns: The studies that report lower welfare usage among immigrants often rely on different definitions of what constitutes "welfare." For instance, the inclusion of programs like the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) can skew results, as it requires recipients to have earned income, which may not apply to all immigrants 5. Additionally, the timeframe and demographic focus of these studies can affect the outcomes.

• Conflicting Data: The disparity in reported welfare usage rates raises questions about the reliability of the data. For example, the claim that 59% of illegal immigrant households use welfare contrasts sharply with the assertion that immigrants overall use less welfare than citizens. This discrepancy suggests that the context—whether discussing illegal immigrants specifically or immigrants in general—can significantly alter the interpretation of the data.

Conclusion

Verdict: Partially True

The claim that immigrants are getting more welfare than citizens is partially true, as the evidence presents a nuanced picture. On one hand, reports indicate that a significant percentage of illegal immigrant households utilize welfare programs at higher rates than native-born households. Conversely, other studies suggest that, overall, immigrants may use less welfare than their native-born counterparts on a per capita basis.

This mixed evidence highlights the importance of context, as the distinction between illegal immigrants and legal immigrants can significantly influence the interpretation of welfare usage. Additionally, the methodologies employed in various studies can lead to differing conclusions, which complicates the overall understanding of the issue.

It is important to acknowledge the limitations in the available evidence, including potential biases in the sources and the varying definitions of welfare across studies. As such, readers are encouraged to critically evaluate information and consider multiple perspectives when forming conclusions about this complex topic.