Come for the Love, Stay for the Free Stuff from American Suckers!
You know how advocates of open borders and amnesty always tell us that we should support amnesty and the myth of birthright citizenship, not only because we don’t want to be “mean” and “racist,” but also because it’s good for our economy? They say it will help us reduce our national debt by creating economic growth, stimulate demand for all businesses, and eliminate tooth decay and gingivitis in all demographic groups.
OK, I made that last one up, but that’s only a slight exaggeration of all the many benefits they claim will result.
As it turns out, these immigrants don’t come here out of “love,” or at least not for love only. Suggested bumper sticker: come for the love, stay for the free stuff.
The Center for Immigration Studies has published a very interesting study, comparing the rate of welfare use by households headed by immigrants (legal and illegal) and natives. Among its findings:
- In 2012, 51 percent of households headed by an immigrant (legal or illegal) reported that they used at least one welfare program during the year, compared to 30 percent of native households. Welfare in this study includes Medicaid and cash, food, and housing programs.
- Welfare use is high for both new arrivals and well-established immigrants. Of households headed by im- migrants who have been in the country for more than two decades, 48 percent access welfare.th
- No single program explains immigrants’ higher overall welfare use. For example, not counting subsidized school lunch, welfare use is still 46 percent for immigrants and 28 percent for natives. Not counting Med- icaid, welfare use is 44 percent for immigrants and 26 percent for natives.
- Immigrant households have much higher use of food programs (40 percent vs. 22 percent for natives) and Medicaid (42 percent vs. 23 percent). Immigrant use of cash programs is somewhat higher than na- tives (12 percent vs. 10 percent) and use of housing programs is similar to natives.
- Welfare use varies among immigrant groups. Households headed by immigrants from Central America and Mexico (73 percent), the Caribbean (51 percent), and Africa (48 percent) have the highest overall welfare use. Those from East Asia (32 percent), Europe (26 percent), and South Asia (17 percent) have the lowest.
- Many immigrants struggle to support their children, and a large share of welfare is received on behalf of U.S.-born children. However, even immigrant households without children have significantly higher welfare use than native households without children — 30 percent vs. 20 percent.
- The welfare system is designed to help low-income workers, especially those with children, and this de- scribes many immigrant households. In 2012, 51 percent of immigrant households with one or more workers accessed one or more welfare programs, as did 28 percent of working native households.
- The large share of immigrants with low levels of education and resulting low incomes partly explains their high use rates. In 2012, 76 percent of households headed by an immigrant who had not graduated high school used one or more welfare programs, as did 63 percent of households headed by an immigrant with only a high school education.
Read the whole thing, and then please comment. I hope that someone brings up these numbers at the CNN GOP debate scheduled for 2 weeks from today. Care to comment, Jeb? Carly Fiorina, you said we would have to amend the Constitution to eliminate so-called birthright citizenship. I know you aren’t a lawyer, so let me school you. You are wrong. So are you Gov. John Kasich, and if you get the guest worker program you want, and don’t include a statute making clear that the 14th amendment does not and never did grant so-called “birthright citizenship,” don’t we just end up with more anchor babies, enabling their households to suck up benefits from American taxpayers? And you’re ok with that?
Are you getting fed up yet?