Right Data

IMMIGRANT groups are lobbying vigorously to undo welfare reform—and understandably: foreign-born residents are nearly 50 per cent more likely to receive welfare than are native Americans. Economists George Borjas and Lynette Hilton found that 20 per cent of immigrant households received some form of welfare in the early 1990s, compared to 14.1 per cent of native households.

Earlier studies, focusing on cash benefits only, had shown a much smaller gap. But the traditional cash program—AFDC—isn’t nearly as popular, or as expensive, as noncash transfers such as Medicaid, food stamps, and rent subsidies—which are also far more frequently received by immigrants.

ER

About the Author

Ed Rubenstein

Featured Tags

IMMIGRANT groups are lobbying vigorously to undo welfare reform—and understandably: foreign-born residents are nearly 50 per cent more likely to receive welfare than are native Americans. Economists George Borjas and Lynette Hilton found that 20 per cent of immigrant households received some form of welfare in the early 1990s, compared to 14.1 per cent of native households.

Earlier studies, focusing on cash benefits only, had shown a much smaller gap. But the traditional cash program—AFDC—isn’t nearly as popular, or as expensive, as noncash transfers such as Medicaid, food stamps, and rent subsidies—which are also far more frequently received by immigrants.