Study Shows Sharp Decline in Use of Public Benefits by Immigrants

IMMIGRANTS & PUBLIC BENEFITS

Research on
Immigrant Health and Welfare

Study shows sharp decline in use of public benefits by immigrants
Immigrants' Rights Update, Vol. 13, No. 2, April 30, 1999

The Urban Institute has released a study showing that from 1994 to 1997, declines in the use of public benefits by non–U.S. citizen and refugee households far outpaced decreases in usage rates for citizen households. During the three-year period, which encompasses welfare reform’s enactment and early implementation, welfare use by noncitizen households fell by 35 percent, as compared to a 15 percent decline for citizen households. And although immigrants made up less than 10 percent of households receiving welfare in 1994, by 1997 they accounted for nearly a quarter of the overall decline in welfare caseloads.

These findings were released in Trends in Noncitizens’ and Citizens’ Use of Public Benefits Following Welfare Reform, 1994–97, which relies on the Census Bureau’s Current Population Survey to document national trends in immigrants’ use of public benefits in the wake of welfare reform. The study builds on research the Urban Institute conducted last year in Los Angeles County that showed a 71 percent decrease in approved applications for health and welfare benefits by noncitizens legally in the U.S., despite the fact that their eligibility for such programs remains largely unchanged.

The study also found similar comparative rates of decline in the use of food stamps and Medicaid by noncitizens and citizens. And despite specific protections for refugees incorporated into welfare reform, the study found that their use of public benefits also fell sharply.

According to the study’s authors, declines in welfare participation in immigrant and refugee communities are attributable less to actual changes in eligibility than they are to the chilling effects of recent policy changes. "These effects originate," they wrote, ". . . in confusion on the part of immigrants and providers about who is eligible for benefits and in fears relating to the application of the public charge doctrine."

The study also shows that while low-income noncitizen households (i.e., those with incomes below 200 percent of the federal poverty level) were no more likely than low-income citizen households to receive welfare in 1994, three years later the former group was less likely to use welfare than the latter group. Among poor households with children, the study found lower rates of usage by those with noncitizen adults than those with citizen adults, both before and after welfare reform. In fact, following welfare reform, welfare use by noncitizen households with children fell to nearly half the usage rate of citizen households with children. And among naturalized citizens, the study found that few of them received public benefits, either before or after welfare reform— suggesting that comparatively few immigrants were becoming citizens in order to retain their benefits. There also appeared to be no change in the rate of welfare usage among elderly immigrants during the study’s test period.

Despite the declines, the overall rate of participation in welfare programs by noncitizens remains higher than that for citizens, largely because noncitizen households are more likely to include children and to be poor. However, as the study’s authors noted, "Noncitizens clearly make up a disproportionate share of the overall decline in welfare caseloads."

The study was written by Urban Institute researchers Michael Fix and Jeffrey Passel and can be downloaded from the Institute’s web site at www.urban.org. Or printed copies of the report can be ordered by contacting the Urban Institute at (202) 261-5283.